Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week. I'm Carol Masser and I'm
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stanibek. We're here every day bringing
Speaker 1: you the latest news from the world of business and finance,
Speaker 1: plus technology, politics, economics, all furnessing the power of Business
Speaker 1: Week reporters and editors, not to mention our journalists and
Speaker 1: analyst in more than one twenty countries. You can download
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Business Week and iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot Com.
Speaker 1: You can also listen to our radio show at two
Speaker 1: pm Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio, or watch us on
Speaker 1: YouTube search Bloomberg Global News Opening Day, major League Baseball
Speaker 1: being rolled back, uh certainly here in New York with
Speaker 1: the mats because of COVID nineteen protocols. New York Cities
Speaker 1: Health Commissioner a warning residents to take precautions during the
Speaker 1: Eastern passover holidays as the city's COVID nineteen cases remained
Speaker 1: stubbornly high and more contagious variants or past them. And
Speaker 1: then we talked about Fiser and Biontechs COVID nineteen vaccine
Speaker 1: remaining more than effective after six months, according to some
Speaker 1: data from a final stage trial released Uh. Today, We've
Speaker 1: got a perfect voice to talk about it. Dr Amish Adalga.
Speaker 1: He is an infectious disease physician Senior scholar at Johns
Speaker 1: Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of
Speaker 1: Public Health, of course, supported by Michael R. Bloomberg, Founder,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Philanthropies. Dr Dolga on the phone
Speaker 1: from Pittsburgh. Dr Dalging, Nice to have you here with
Speaker 1: Tim and myself. So much to talk about, but let's
Speaker 1: start with Fiser and finding that six months out it
Speaker 1: still seems to be working and keeping individuals safe. When
Speaker 1: it comes to COVID nineteen, this feels pretty big. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it is. It's good news, and I think
Speaker 1: it's something that we all expected to see because most
Speaker 1: vaccines do have durability that last, you know, a year,
Speaker 1: or even more than a year if you think about
Speaker 1: some some vaccines, like our Tetanish vaccines. It's just that
Speaker 1: when you're doing all of this in the midst of
Speaker 1: a pandemic, you're you don't have time to do the
Speaker 1: natural history studies ahead of time to know when immunity
Speaker 1: may wayne, when you might need a booster. So what's
Speaker 1: going on now? Or these natural history studies, and I
Speaker 1: suspect that nine months, will will hear that it works
Speaker 1: well at nine months, and we'll hear that it works
Speaker 1: well at twelve months. Uh, And I think that's that's
Speaker 1: to be expected, and it makes it a lot. It
Speaker 1: gives people a lot more certainty, especially as guidance starts
Speaker 1: to change for what vaccinatee of people can do. So
Speaker 1: Dr R dodges that changed the way you're thinking about
Speaker 1: a potential booster, that people who get this vaccine might
Speaker 1: need a booster at some point in the future. Yes,
Speaker 1: I think it's too early to say when we might
Speaker 1: need a booster. And remember we have different boosters for
Speaker 1: different vaccines. So a technic shot you get your booster
Speaker 1: every ten years, and there are other vaccines where you
Speaker 1: might get a booster in a shorter period of time. So,
Speaker 1: for example, you get one dose of the Beasels monshrou
Speaker 1: Bella vaccine around twelve or fifteen months, and you get
Speaker 1: another one around five years of age and then you're done.
Speaker 1: So it's it's different, and it's really based on doing
Speaker 1: those studies, watching antibodies, watching t cells, looking to see
Speaker 1: do people get reinfected, and then you make a decision
Speaker 1: on when a booster might be needed, but I think
Speaker 1: we're likely not going to need a booster for at
Speaker 1: least a year, and probably more than that. There's a
Speaker 1: separate issue about variant updating the vaccine, which is a
Speaker 1: different issue that sometimes gets conflated with the whole booster issue.
Speaker 1: But I think it's too early to say. Hopefully it
Speaker 1: won't be something that's an annual thing. Maybe it's biennial,
Speaker 1: maybe every three years, every two years. We'll see. Well,
Speaker 1: the Fiser bound tech vaccine is one of two m
Speaker 1: R and A vaccines that has emergency use authorization here
Speaker 1: in the United States. The other one comes from MODERNA.
Speaker 1: It does feel like we're getting more data from Fiser
Speaker 1: at this point. Are you seeing Maderna data out there
Speaker 1: or should we think about this being a similar result
Speaker 1: that we'd see from MODERNA. I mean, can we think
Speaker 1: that way? I do think you can largely extrapolate what's
Speaker 1: happening with the Fiser vaccine to the Maderna vaccine because
Speaker 1: they are very similar to their identical technologies, was very
Speaker 1: similar ingredients, So most things are going to apply to
Speaker 1: both of them. But obviously we want to see the
Speaker 1: modernity data as well, because these are two separate products
Speaker 1: and there will be two separate recommendations that that could
Speaker 1: could result if there are any discrepancies. But I don't
Speaker 1: expect to have any kind of surprises with the MODERNA
Speaker 1: data after we've seen the fiser TAVA or DAJA. You know,
Speaker 1: for someone like me who watches FINA to markets and
Speaker 1: economic cycles and have for many years, you know there's
Speaker 1: are there are ups and downs, and there are cycles
Speaker 1: that are shorter longer. When you look at the virus
Speaker 1: and COVID nineteen cycle, where do you think we are?
Speaker 1: I think we're in an interesting situation. So we're basically
Speaker 1: in a in a race between vaccines and this virus,
Speaker 1: and we've done a very good job at getting vaccine
Speaker 1: into high risk individuals, nursing home residents, high risk community
Speaker 1: dwelling people, and that's sort of change the way we
Speaker 1: have to think about this virus. That we still have
Speaker 1: a large proportion of the population it's not vaccinated, but
Speaker 1: we have removed the ability of the virus to really
Speaker 1: compromise hospitals because of the way we rolled out our vaccines.
Speaker 1: So if you're vaccinated now, you're unlikely to be hospitalized,
Speaker 1: and we gave the vaccine to those people who were
Speaker 1: most likely to be hospitalized. So what I see as
Speaker 1: a decoupling of cases from hospital hospital capacity concerns, and
Speaker 1: I think that's going to take some time to get
Speaker 1: getting used to. And I think people see these cases
Speaker 1: surging and they expect to see us get back in
Speaker 1: the same same predicament we were in in the winter,
Speaker 1: but that's not going to happen because of where the
Speaker 1: vaccine went, and that's that's where we are now. The
Speaker 1: goal is really just to get more vaccine into those
Speaker 1: lower priority groups so that we see some decrease in spread.
Speaker 1: But we're not going to get to COVID zero. We're
Speaker 1: going to kind of get to some some spot where
Speaker 1: where this is not a public health emergency anymore, where
Speaker 1: it's a much more manageable respiratory disease. And I don't
Speaker 1: know where that spot is, but when hospitals are not
Speaker 1: in crisis, I for one don't have the same worry
Speaker 1: as as I would looking at this number of cases.
Speaker 1: It just got like thirty thirty seconds here and then
Speaker 1: we're gonna take a break and come back and talk
Speaker 1: some more. So we're never going to get to COVID zero. No,
Speaker 1: it's very difficult to eradicate the disease. There's only ever
Speaker 1: been one disease that eradicated from the planet, smallpox in
Speaker 1: COVID nineteen or starrs. COVIE two is an efficiently spreading
Speaker 1: respiratory virus with an unknown animal host that's already spread
Speaker 1: into other animals like minx and cats. It's justn't something
Speaker 1: that goes away. It's going to become an endemic respiratory virus,
Speaker 1: one that we deal with every year, but one that
Speaker 1: never has the ability to threaten us the way it
Speaker 1: can now because of the vaccine dr Adulga. We were
Speaker 1: talking and we'll be talking later to our colleague Sarah Fryer, who,
Speaker 1: along with our other colleagues Sarah Copitt, has a new
Speaker 1: Business Week story all about anti vaxtors and how Facebook
Speaker 1: is really allowing that information to flourish on the platform.
Speaker 1: There's this fascinating quote in here from Karen Cornblue, director
Speaker 1: of the think tank at the German Marshall Fund of
Speaker 1: the United States Digital Innovation and Democracy Initiative. She says, quote,
Speaker 1: the folks who are supporting the science have to get
Speaker 1: better at telling the story, and that's in response to
Speaker 1: the way that the scientists have been responding to anti
Speaker 1: vaxers and the misinformation out there. What's the best way
Speaker 1: for doctors to actually get the message out about the
Speaker 1: safety around this vaccine. I think it's to really talk
Speaker 1: to each person, at each patient that's in front of you,
Speaker 1: and see exactly what their safety concerns are, and then
Speaker 1: provide them with that data. I think one of the
Speaker 1: one of the benefits of our all of Operation Warp
Speaker 1: Speed and all these vaccine trials is that we have
Speaker 1: so much data available so you can basically address any
Speaker 1: person's safety concerns. All of this data is freely available,
Speaker 1: and there are a lot of resources for doctors to
Speaker 1: be able to talk to their patients. But I also think,
Speaker 1: you know, even when you're talking to the public, when
Speaker 1: you're in the press, it's really important just to stress
Speaker 1: that when you look at the safety data, it's really
Speaker 1: remarkable how safe this is. And it's not just the
Speaker 1: clinical trials, it's what's going on in the real world
Speaker 1: with the hundreds of millions of doses that have been
Speaker 1: distributed around the world in the basic absence of any
Speaker 1: major safety signal. That that that's concerning, and I think
Speaker 1: that's that's all you can do is really be as
Speaker 1: proactive about this and try and address concerns as best
Speaker 1: as you can and not be in a reactionary stance
Speaker 1: where you're waiting for the anti vaccine movement to come
Speaker 1: up with the latest conspiracy theory and then you're stuck
Speaker 1: rebutting it. I think if we present a positive case
Speaker 1: for this vaccine, you know that the data is the
Speaker 1: best is the best salesperson for it. But having you know,
Speaker 1: medical people in my family, like every once in a
Speaker 1: while we're having conversation and they get into medical speak
Speaker 1: and it's like, I'm sorry, I'm not stupid, but I
Speaker 1: don't understand what you're saying. And I think the messaging
Speaker 1: can sometimes be on a on a different plane that
Speaker 1: doesn't reach people. So like, you've got this incredible audience
Speaker 1: right now, and I know you often do on Bloomberg
Speaker 1: and on Quick Take, like what's what's the thing that
Speaker 1: you think you can say about the vaccines that are
Speaker 1: out there to kind of give confidence to people who
Speaker 1: maybe are holding off on getting the vaccine because they're scared.
Speaker 1: What I would say is that I've been taking care
Speaker 1: of COVID nineteen patients since the beginning of this pandemic,
Speaker 1: and I can see the benefit of this vaccine with
Speaker 1: my eyes. When I walked through the hospital. I worked
Speaker 1: at the hospital on Monday and Tuesday. I could walk
Speaker 1: around and I could see that it was a whole
Speaker 1: different place than than it was just back in December
Speaker 1: when we were in on data with COVID nineteen. And
Speaker 1: what changed. The cases are still high. It's actually the
Speaker 1: fact that our vulnerable populations got vaccinated and that vaccine
Speaker 1: has removed the ability of the virus to cause severe
Speaker 1: disease and death. I can also say that I have
Speaker 1: not seen any person present to the hospital with any
Speaker 1: kind of side effect or concerned that put them, that
Speaker 1: that landed them in the hospital from the vaccine. I've
Speaker 1: poured over the data I've I've had to answer so
Speaker 1: many questions about so many different side effects that people
Speaker 1: may or may not have had, or anecdotes, and and
Speaker 1: nothing has really panned out. And I think it's it's
Speaker 1: extraordinary how safe these vaccines are. And I think that
Speaker 1: even though we don't have long term data, even though
Speaker 1: we don't have long term data, Yes, even though we
Speaker 1: don't have long term data. I think it's important to
Speaker 1: remember that any time of vaccine has approved, we still
Speaker 1: continue to study the vaccine. After approval. They do what
Speaker 1: are called phase four post marketing studies. They're still doing
Speaker 1: no studies for things like the HPV vaccine guard it self.
Speaker 1: That's very normal and and the thing is we're in
Speaker 1: the middle of a pandemic where over five thousand people died.
Speaker 1: I don't think that there was any option of waiting
Speaker 1: six years down the road to say, let's have six
Speaker 1: years of safety data before we release this vaccine. But
Speaker 1: then there would be people said, well, we need seven
Speaker 1: year safety data. We need eight Your safety data agreed.
Speaker 1: I'm just playing Devil's Advocate. Already already got I've already
Speaker 1: gotten one, and I'm waiting. I'm glad they waiting for
Speaker 1: that second one, and I'm set to get it this weekend.
Speaker 1: So I'm pretty excited about it. Dr Adulge, we do
Speaker 1: still see despite everything that you're saying, despite what the
Speaker 1: scientists and doctors are saying, we do still see hesitancy
Speaker 1: among some Americans. You mentioned her immunity and that we
Speaker 1: need to get to hurt immunity what happens though, if
Speaker 1: we don't get to hurt immunity through the vaccine, well,
Speaker 1: I think if we don't get to hurt immunity through
Speaker 1: the vaccine, you will still have a higher level of
Speaker 1: cases than anybody wants, probably in the tens of thousands
Speaker 1: range for some time until the population reaches herd immunity
Speaker 1: with a combination of the vaccine and natural immunity. To me,
Speaker 1: herd immunity is an important milestone, but I've always been
Speaker 1: very focused on hospital capacity, like I said before, So
Speaker 1: if we can get our vulnerbal populations all vaccinated and
Speaker 1: this isn't something lands people in the hospital or kills them,
Speaker 1: it becomes much more manageful even if we don't hit
Speaker 1: her immunity through the vaccine, especially if that if the
Speaker 1: people that are vaccine hesitant are not the highest christ individuals.
Speaker 1: I worry about that the vaccine hesitancy kind of clustering
Speaker 1: in a group of people that that might be at
Speaker 1: high risk for hospitalization. But I do think that the
Speaker 1: more vaccine we get into people, the more people that
Speaker 1: are accepting of this vaccine, the faster track we we
Speaker 1: are on to ending the pandemic and making COVID nineteen
Speaker 1: something that is more like respiratory viruses that we deal
Speaker 1: with year in and year out. So it's going to
Speaker 1: be a major challenge when we've become less supply constraint
Speaker 1: and more demand constrained. One well, so smart and so
Speaker 1: spot on in terms of the conversations I know I'm
Speaker 1: having out in public and certainly around the newsroom and elsewhere.
Speaker 1: Dr Amish Adaga, thank you so much. Infectious Disease Physicians,
Speaker 1: Senior Scholar at John's Hopkins Center for Health Security at
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg School of Public Health, supported by Michael R. Bloomberg,
Speaker 1: founder of Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Philanthropy. Is great conversation.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Quick takes Tim Stinovich from Bloomberg Radio. So makes you wonder, Tim,
Speaker 1: if anything is changing when it comes to social media.
Speaker 1: This next story kind of plays into that. It's about
Speaker 1: how Facebook is letting anti vax ER's scare women from
Speaker 1: COVID shots. It's real, and I gotta say I know
Speaker 1: this firsthand based on the conversations I've been having. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of women, especially those who maybe haven't had
Speaker 1: children or are waiting to have their kids, and they're
Speaker 1: worried about getting vaccines. Look, this is something that's new
Speaker 1: to everybody right now. The science is playing out in
Speaker 1: real time as we talk about all the time. Joel
Speaker 1: Webber is editor at Bloomberg Business Week, joining us on
Speaker 1: the remote from Brooklyn on the access line. Sarah Fryer
Speaker 1: is technology reporter at Bloomberg News and she's the author
Speaker 1: of No Filter, The Inside Story of Instagram. Joining us
Speaker 1: now on the phone from San Francisco. U, Joel, this
Speaker 1: is a very concerning piece from Sarah Fryar and and
Speaker 1: and Sarah copit because Facebook, it seems, would have the
Speaker 1: power to stop the spread of this type of misinformation
Speaker 1: and the indeed change the way that they're thinking about it,
Speaker 1: but it's still flourishing on the platform. Well, and it
Speaker 1: it just speaks to a kind of the bigger Facebook
Speaker 1: story that UM, Sarah has has been all over for
Speaker 1: for years now about just misinformation on the platform and
Speaker 1: the you know, the main metric of success for Facebook
Speaker 1: is engagement and UM, even when things are outright lies, UM,
Speaker 1: if people engage with them, it tends to be something
Speaker 1: that that Facebook uh struggles to figure out how to
Speaker 1: police and moderate and you know, they they've kind of
Speaker 1: said one thing and have necessarily not always done that
Speaker 1: in this particular instance. And I do think it's a
Speaker 1: really fascinating sort of case study because here we are,
Speaker 1: in the middle of the pandemic. People are getting shots
Speaker 1: and or considering getting vaccinated in a rapid clip now,
Speaker 1: and yet we've actually seen and what what serves reporting
Speaker 1: shows is that women on social media and particularly on
Speaker 1: Facebook have and basically targeted by anti vaxers as and
Speaker 1: that has become really a devastating um um impact. So
Speaker 1: so Sarah talked to us a little bit more about
Speaker 1: what you found and why it's so troubling. Well, this
Speaker 1: anti vax movement has been brewing for for years for
Speaker 1: other kinds of vaccines um and with the pandemic, it's
Speaker 1: different because the first people eligible for these COVID shops
Speaker 1: are adults. So the normal rhetoric that they target young
Speaker 1: mothers with telling their telling them not to get their
Speaker 1: kids vascinated, they are targeting that same group but saying
Speaker 1: that of the vaccine is going to cause fertility issues.
Speaker 1: You don't know what the adverse site effects are going
Speaker 1: to be and it's simply not true. The problem is
Speaker 1: on Facebook, and we've talked about this over and over
Speaker 1: on this show as well. This stuff that spreads is
Speaker 1: that which sparks emotion, It's that which causes surprise. I
Speaker 1: is in commentary. And although Facebook has done all these things,
Speaker 1: like you know, banning the worst offenders and trying to
Speaker 1: put up good vaccine information, they're up against their own systems,
Speaker 1: their own their own design that rewards that kind of
Speaker 1: behavior on their apps and on Instagram. It's it's very
Speaker 1: pervasive too. And I would even say a little bit worth. Um.
Speaker 1: The lead character of our stories, as woman Police Williams,
Speaker 1: who was always a little skeptical, became more skeptical, i
Speaker 1: should say, of the medical establishment after going through camps
Speaker 1: between it and when she joined Instagram, she got really
Speaker 1: into alternative health and natural wellness and through that went
Speaker 1: down the rabbit hole into learning this false information about
Speaker 1: how vaccines could cause adverse side effects. Um that simply
Speaker 1: wasn't based in reality. And on Instagram you have the
Speaker 1: effects of the people that are are saying that are
Speaker 1: famal teneously trying to sell alternatives supplement plans workouts, whatever
Speaker 1: they can do as an alternative to what the government
Speaker 1: is is selling UM via vaccine. So I really think
Speaker 1: that it's it's not a reliable source of good health information. Sarah,
Speaker 1: I'm glad you brought that up because that's something I
Speaker 1: wanted to talk more about, and that was one of
Speaker 1: my takeaways that there is actually this like anti vax
Speaker 1: or industrial complex out there that stands to financially benefit
Speaker 1: from from people uh not believing the science, right. I
Speaker 1: think that that again, it's it's preying on the fear.
Speaker 1: And on Instagram, people have built their profiles, influencers who
Speaker 1: are in wellness have built their profiles around giving you
Speaker 1: this idyllic path for your life, saying you know, if
Speaker 1: you just do my Juce cleanse or do my workouts,
Speaker 1: like trust me, I know what do and you can
Speaker 1: look like me and you can have a life like me.
Speaker 1: And those personal stories again, just like on Facebook and
Speaker 1: Facebook groups, personal stories resonate people trust people who who
Speaker 1: are intimate and emotional and and letting them into their
Speaker 1: lives and will buy things from those people, whether it's
Speaker 1: UM buy into the antexots they're spreading or UM by
Speaker 1: what they're selling in terms of wellness, retreats and supplements.
Speaker 1: So I think that that it's important for people to
Speaker 1: understand that as we shift from this discussion about vaccine supply,
Speaker 1: like you know, who's eligible, when is it going to
Speaker 1: be distributed to us, a discussion about vaccines demand. Um,
Speaker 1: once more people have access to the shot, this is
Speaker 1: going to be a huge factor. So Sarah like, who's
Speaker 1: the fault? I mean, I feel like Facebook, you know,
Speaker 1: we learned a lot leading up to the November election
Speaker 1: about misinformation on the platform. So do you fall Facebook
Speaker 1: for not policing it more? Or do people fall uh
Speaker 1: Facebook now you know, for policing it not more? Or
Speaker 1: what about the science community and medical community for coming
Speaker 1: out with smarter messaging? Well, the medical community, it's it's
Speaker 1: difficult because inherently doctors are not going to tell you
Speaker 1: things and absolutes. There's there's a lot of nuance there,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of technical background that needs to be
Speaker 1: to be told in on Facebook all they have done
Speaker 1: a lot to try to improve their reaction to the problems,
Speaker 1: but they haven't done anything to solve They're solving the
Speaker 1: symptom and not the disease um. The symptoms being the
Speaker 1: information that spreads the people that have gotten saneus. The
Speaker 1: worst is the worst, Um, the disease being just the
Speaker 1: very structure of the app, how it actually works, Um,
Speaker 1: the way things are personalized. The woman I was speaking
Speaker 1: of earlier UM said, you know the great thing about
Speaker 1: Instagram is once you find some people who are you know,
Speaker 1: in the world she wants to sell her essential oil
Speaker 1: to Instagram just serves up more people like those people.
Speaker 1: It's all about the personalization. It's all about bringing people
Speaker 1: deeper into the communities that they want to interact with
Speaker 1: online because, like Joel said, it's all about engagement and
Speaker 1: that is the fundamental problem. I love that aspect of it,
Speaker 1: where you got into groups and the meaningful conversations and
Speaker 1: how that just provided so much more momentum um to
Speaker 1: these conversations inaccurate ones and others. Uh Sarah. It's a
Speaker 1: great read. It is so full of information, smart information
Speaker 1: and understanding how this all works. So I highly recommend
Speaker 1: that everybody check it out. It's going to be featured,
Speaker 1: by the way, in the upcoming issue of Bloomberg Business
Speaker 1: Week magazine. You can read it now though on the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Terminal and also at Bloomberg dot Com, Slash business Week.
Speaker 1: Sarah Fryer, thank you, Thank you, Technology report at Bloomberg News,
Speaker 1: author of No Filter, the inside story of Instagram. Great
Speaker 1: weekend reading. I'm just going to point that out with us.
Speaker 1: From San Francisco. Joel Weber, editor a Bloomberg Business Week.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol and Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Quick Takes. Tim Stinovy from Bloomberg Radio. You are listening
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg Business Week. It is Thursday. It is the
Speaker 1: monthly jobs report. Eve and back with us as an
Speaker 1: insider and informed, an insightful voice when it comes to
Speaker 1: all things Washington and politics and policy. Chris lou is
Speaker 1: back with us. He's former Deputy Secretary of Labor under
Speaker 1: the Obama administration, worked up on Capitol Hill. He's actually
Speaker 1: worked in each of the three branches of the U. S. Government.
Speaker 1: He was also executive director of Barack Obama's two thousand
Speaker 1: eight transition team, member of President Biden's transition team, and
Speaker 1: he is senior Fellow at the University of Virginia Miller Center.
Speaker 1: He joins us on the phone in Charlottesville, Virginia, Chris,
Speaker 1: so nice to have you here. How are you? I'm
Speaker 1: a great boy that we have to shortenight. I was
Speaker 1: gonna say, sorry, we've run out of time. You have
Speaker 1: to stop being, you know, doing all these notable things. Um,
Speaker 1: let's talk jobs. How do you see it right now
Speaker 1: in terms of we knew the pandemic shut us down,
Speaker 1: we lost all these jobs were coming back, but we're
Speaker 1: a long way from being there. We are a long way.
Speaker 1: You know. The consensus estimate for tomorrow is around six
Speaker 1: hundred to seven hundred thousand compared to last month, which
Speaker 1: was three hundred and seventy nine thousand, and I think
Speaker 1: that's about right. I think when you look at the
Speaker 1: pace of vaccinations as well as reopenings around the country,
Speaker 1: people are starting to travel more, go out to restaurants.
Speaker 1: I think things are picking up. But it's important to
Speaker 1: understand what a big hole we are in. Let's let's
Speaker 1: say we get you know, six hundred thousand jobs created. Uh,
Speaker 1: we'd still be down about nine million from where we
Speaker 1: were before the pandemic, and that's still far worse than
Speaker 1: we ever were at the height of the Great Recession.
Speaker 1: So we're in a really big hole. And we're kind
Speaker 1: of slowly crawling back out. Obviously, the economic relief package,
Speaker 1: the one point nine trilling is important, Infrastructure is important.
Speaker 1: But we're not out of the woods yet. I mean
Speaker 1: we we could now are starting to see COVID cases
Speaker 1: rise back up in the Northeast and Midwest, UM, some states,
Speaker 1: I would argue our opening too fast, and so it's
Speaker 1: kind of a race against time right now. Can we
Speaker 1: get out of the woods, Chris without another recovery package? Well, look,
Speaker 1: it sort of depends on what you think get out
Speaker 1: of the woods means. I mean, you know, what UM
Speaker 1: President Biden has talked about is building back better, which
Speaker 1: is the goal is not just to get back to
Speaker 1: where we were in February, but to really try to
Speaker 1: address some of the broader economic inequalities, not only just
Speaker 1: at the individual level, but obviously the continued under investment
Speaker 1: in infrastructure over the years, and that's across all administrations.
Speaker 1: So you know, look, I think we can get employment
Speaker 1: back to where it was eventually. But I do think
Speaker 1: the lesson we learned from the Great Recession is that
Speaker 1: unless we go big, the recovery takes much longer. People
Speaker 1: will suffer far longer, and I think that's the underlying
Speaker 1: theory about why the President and Democrats in Congress feel
Speaker 1: like infrastructure needs to happen. That's a great point, Like, listen,
Speaker 1: this is not the same crisis as the financial crisis, right, Chris.
Speaker 1: But we did commit a lot of money right after
Speaker 1: the financial crisis to bring things back. But if but
Speaker 1: we let's not forget how kind of low and slow
Speaker 1: it was going, uh, in terms of that recovery. Here
Speaker 1: we are, and we have an opportunity to kind of
Speaker 1: really make a difference for the current economy, but even
Speaker 1: more importantly for the longer term growth of the US
Speaker 1: economy exactly. And you know, I I think about the
Speaker 1: Recovery Act that was passed in two thousand nine when
Speaker 1: I worked for President Obama. That seemed really big at
Speaker 1: the time. And now you consider that just over the
Speaker 1: past year plus, we've done about five to six trillion
Speaker 1: of economic relief up just to get us out of COVID,
Speaker 1: and then potentially now another two trillion in this first
Speaker 1: round of infrastructure. So we're not looking at, you know,
Speaker 1: eight nine times bigger than where we went were in
Speaker 1: two thousand nine. And I think history has taught us
Speaker 1: that If we really want to get the economy up
Speaker 1: back up and running, but more importantly, create jobs, bring
Speaker 1: manufacturing back, and stay competitive with China, we need to
Speaker 1: do a lot more. And that's why there's so much
Speaker 1: in this infrastructure package and so many things. Frankly that again,
Speaker 1: if we could divorce politics from this, and that's obviously
Speaker 1: impossible to do, you'd find a lot of bipartisan support
Speaker 1: for not just roads and bridges, but broadband and school construction.
Speaker 1: These are things that people have been talking about in
Speaker 1: Washington for years. We can't divorce politics from this, though,
Speaker 1: and and that's that's the issue, right, Everything is political.
Speaker 1: Given that the Biden administration wasn't able to get a
Speaker 1: single Republican vote for the one point nine trillion dollar
Speaker 1: relief package, how does the administration push through a two
Speaker 1: point to five billion trillion dollar infrastructure plan. I think
Speaker 1: they're going to first see if they can find some
Speaker 1: support in some common ground. And the White House Chief
Speaker 1: of Staff Ron Klain, did a talk today where you know,
Speaker 1: he didn't immediately say we're going to go down and
Speaker 1: do the budget reconciliation route, which takes votes, but he's
Speaker 1: going to try that. They're going to try to find
Speaker 1: bipartisan sport and that maybe not in Washington, but they're
Speaker 1: going to try at least make the case to the
Speaker 1: American people the way they did with the Economic Relief package.
Speaker 1: Why this is so important. It's one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why that bill pulls so well. But I think ultimately,
Speaker 1: if you were a betting person, you'd say it's unlikely
Speaker 1: Republicans would support this in light of the tax increases
Speaker 1: that are going to be part of this, which means
Speaker 1: you're going to have to go back and do that
Speaker 1: budget reconciliation process. Again, Chris just got about a minute
Speaker 1: and then we'll take a break and come back some more.
Speaker 1: But I do wonder how do you, from your experience
Speaker 1: of working in in in the Obama administration but also
Speaker 1: in Congress, like, how do you how does public sentiment
Speaker 1: play into this? I mean, I think you know, Americans
Speaker 1: get it when they get or whatever it isn't back
Speaker 1: in their pocket, right. Do they kind of relate with
Speaker 1: a big infrastructure spending bill that might give them better
Speaker 1: internet or cleaner water? Do we relate well? Do we
Speaker 1: think about that when we go to the polls? And again,
Speaker 1: just got about fifty seconds here, and it's hard because
Speaker 1: the evidence will show that it didn't translate to political
Speaker 1: sport in two thousand and ten. I think what will
Speaker 1: be important is how tangible some of these things are.
Speaker 1: People really do see the road, roads and bridges improved,
Speaker 1: really do see investments that affect their life immediately versus
Speaker 1: much much further down the road. The tough part is
Speaker 1: that stuff doesn't happen immediately though these are infrastructure projects
Speaker 1: we're talking about. No, but right right, Chris, it's a while, yeah,
Speaker 1: And I'm not sure, like if we say we're going
Speaker 1: to modernize our electrical grid, anybody can never notice that
Speaker 1: until we have a situation like Texas exactly. Hey, Chris,
Speaker 1: something I wanted to ask you, and I feel like
Speaker 1: this plays into President Biden's Infrastructure's plan and spending. Uh,
Speaker 1: is that when you look at a nation like China,
Speaker 1: and of course very different from the United States, certainly
Speaker 1: in terms of its run, but it is planning for
Speaker 1: the future and making some big investments. And we had
Speaker 1: a really smart story in the Bloomberg yesterday that talked
Speaker 1: about how China's COVID rebound edging it closer to overtaking
Speaker 1: the US economy. I mean, they are doing spending today
Speaker 1: that will give it economic momentum in the future when
Speaker 1: you look at US versus China. What do we as
Speaker 1: Americans need to think about when it comes to whether
Speaker 1: or not we are first or second um the global
Speaker 1: economic scale. Well, that's that's a big question about what
Speaker 1: I say that this Infrastructure Bill try to get at
Speaker 1: some of this. Now there's obviously not one answer, but
Speaker 1: you know, a big investment into UH school construction and
Speaker 1: broadband and job training in shorts that we have the
Speaker 1: workforce that we need for the twenty one century. You know,
Speaker 1: there's about a quarter trillion dollars in this bill that
Speaker 1: goes for R and D, including the beefing up our
Speaker 1: federal labs and the research facilities at universities so that
Speaker 1: we can start innovating again and building the kinds of
Speaker 1: products that should be UH that we've done, you know,
Speaker 1: for all of the twenty century. And then the roads
Speaker 1: and bridges really is a kind of a critical part.
Speaker 1: If we want to start to manufacture more things in
Speaker 1: the United States, we have to be able to transport
Speaker 1: that stuff efficiently around the country. And so there's not
Speaker 1: just one thing. It's a multiple things, and I think
Speaker 1: that's what this bill tries to do, as well as
Speaker 1: importantly making those investments into clean energy like solar and wind,
Speaker 1: which are areas that we are really in direct competition
Speaker 1: with China right now. Chris, the fact sheet from the
Speaker 1: White House that came out yesterday about the American Jobs Plan,
Speaker 1: it mentions China five times. Is this the right way
Speaker 1: to position it to try to get some bipartisan support
Speaker 1: for the plan? Positioning China as as as one of
Speaker 1: the reasons as to why Republicans should sign on along
Speaker 1: with Democrats exactly. And I do think that is oddly
Speaker 1: one of the areas of true bipartisanship is trying to
Speaker 1: kind of bass China, go head to head with China,
Speaker 1: however you want to characterize it. So I think that's
Speaker 1: obviously very deliberate. On the other hand, as we talked
Speaker 1: about in the previous segment, the fact that a lot
Speaker 1: of these investments will be paid for by rolling back
Speaker 1: the Trump tax cuts, I think will be so problematic
Speaker 1: for Republicans that even if there's a lot of things
Speaker 1: in here that would help make us more competitive, it
Speaker 1: won't overcome There are other objections, so is there a
Speaker 1: better way to position paying for this, because it's it's
Speaker 1: anathema to two Republicans raising raising corporate taxes. This is
Speaker 1: the problem. I mean, you know, it became things cost money,
Speaker 1: Thanks Cast exactly, things cost money. And this this became
Speaker 1: the running joke over the previous four years when we
Speaker 1: would have infrastructure every six months or so. And when
Speaker 1: it came down to it, the concept of infrastructure was good,
Speaker 1: but if you really you wanted to go big on
Speaker 1: the kinds of investments you need, you've got to come
Speaker 1: up with a way to pay for it. You know.
Speaker 1: I was struck by that annual survey that comes out
Speaker 1: every year about the it's I think it's the the
Speaker 1: the Association of Civil Engineers that evaluates our physical infrastructure.
Speaker 1: And this year, I believe we got to C minus,
Speaker 1: which I think was an improvement from where it had been,
Speaker 1: which is deep plus. For years and years and years
Speaker 1: and so there's been a constant under investment in democratic
Speaker 1: and Republican administrations, and inevitably the reason is is because
Speaker 1: nobody wants to pay for it. And I would argue,
Speaker 1: and I think most economists would tell you that we
Speaker 1: either pay for this on the front end, or we're
Speaker 1: going to pay for this on the back end in
Speaker 1: terms of UM, a workforce that's not well trained, roads
Speaker 1: and bridges that can't transport goods, less innovation in our country. Hey,
Speaker 1: we've just got about a minute or so UM left here, Chris.
Speaker 1: One thing that we wanted to ask you. UM. It
Speaker 1: just feels like the last year we have just seen
Speaker 1: segments of our population to get it, whether it's Black
Speaker 1: Americans and most recently we're seeing Asian Americans targeted. And
Speaker 1: I'm just curious what your thoughts are. Are you nervous
Speaker 1: as you move around society because of what we've seen
Speaker 1: as of late, the hate crimes that we're seeing against
Speaker 1: Asians in this country. It's incredibly troubling, and it's consistent
Speaker 1: with the rather grim history of Asians in America, where
Speaker 1: we have been treated as outsiders, people with dual loyalties,
Speaker 1: people who can't be trusted, really going all the way
Speaker 1: back to Chinese railroad workers in Japanese, American and tournament. Obviously,
Speaker 1: the political rhetoric around COVID over the past year has
Speaker 1: really exacerbated the problem. And frankly, the issue that we
Speaker 1: just mentioned China is going to continue to weigh on this.
Speaker 1: I would like to think that we can have a
Speaker 1: reason discussion about how the United States should be more
Speaker 1: competitive against China and actually confront them on intellectual property
Speaker 1: and their military aggression without the flip side of it
Speaker 1: being more attacks ostracism of Chinese Americans and more broadly
Speaker 1: Asian Americans. But unfortunately, the history in our country is that,
Speaker 1: you know, when that has not been the case. Yeah,
Speaker 1: history often trips us up on this in an unfair way,
Speaker 1: in in a wrong way. Chris, Thank you though, for
Speaker 1: weighing in on that and so much more. Chris lou
Speaker 1: uh Senior Fellow, University of Virginia, Miller Center, former Deputy
Speaker 1: Secretary of Labor under President Obama, joining us once again
Speaker 1: from Charlottesville, Virginia. Christy Safe brom the Journal. Yeah but
Speaker 1: you let me drive? Oh no, no, no, no, who's
Speaker 1: going home? Honey? Please, I'll do the right revels. I
Speaker 1: want to drive all just drive, baby, the questions trying.
Speaker 1: This is the drive to the Globe Commune. Thanks, we'll
Speaker 1: drive us to Dawn Boomberg Radio. All right, just got
Speaker 1: about ten minutes a little bit under, just about ten
Speaker 1: minutes left in today's trading session, getting ready to wrap
Speaker 1: up the holiday shortened equity I should say shortened equity
Speaker 1: trading on this holiday week. Let's get to John train Or.
Speaker 1: He's back with us, chief investment officer at People's United
Speaker 1: Advisors nine billion in assets under management, on the phone
Speaker 1: in Bridgeport, Connecticut. This on a day where we saw
Speaker 1: the S and P five breaking above four thousand, uh
Speaker 1: and we're really seeing the bullmarket barrel on. John, good
Speaker 1: to have you here. Four thousand. It's just a level,
Speaker 1: but it's just a reminder that stacks continue to move higher.
Speaker 1: Thank you for having me back. And you're correct, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, hitting that number. You know the numbers are
Speaker 1: you know, these psychological barriers, but it just shows you,
Speaker 1: you know, the confidence that investors are gaining in the market,
Speaker 1: in the economy and in the recovery. And you know,
Speaker 1: it's great to say, it's great to see and there's
Speaker 1: a lot of momentum behind that, behind that, that that
Speaker 1: that psychology, that confidence. Well, the confidence is there and
Speaker 1: that the reopening is happening, but how much higher can
Speaker 1: it go this year? Well, you know, one of the
Speaker 1: things that we're talking with clients about is you know,
Speaker 1: it's great to see the average is moving, but what
Speaker 1: we really want to see is a broadening of the market.
Speaker 1: You know, and you know, you know last year was
Speaker 1: really you know, if you didn't own the big five
Speaker 1: tech stocks, you didn't participate. Well, we think this year
Speaker 1: is going to be the story of the other four.
Speaker 1: So you could do well this year and you not
Speaker 1: see the averages go through the roof, but you could
Speaker 1: do well if you do. You know, you have that
Speaker 1: broadening of the market, a broadening of the portfolio. Listen,
Speaker 1: it's an economic recovery. I mean, whether we you know, right,
Speaker 1: this is what we're getting ready for, provided we don't
Speaker 1: see another you know, significant COVID outbreak that leads to
Speaker 1: a shutting down of the US economy. But I mean,
Speaker 1: I feel like John, everything is pointing to a very
Speaker 1: very strong second half. Having said that, how much of
Speaker 1: it do you think is already factored into the overall trade? Well,
Speaker 1: you're you hit the nail on the head. I do
Speaker 1: think a good amount of it is factored in. But
Speaker 1: you know, just think about you know, the recovery that
Speaker 1: we still need to see on Main Street. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, the restaurants one of the things we'll be
Speaker 1: watching for the unemployment number tomorrow is how many people
Speaker 1: get rehired in the hospitality and leisure area. You know,
Speaker 1: those are the waiters and waitresses. So there's a lot
Speaker 1: of recovery that still needs to take place. And consumers,
Speaker 1: you know, they need to get out, they need to
Speaker 1: get outside. They once they get get on you know,
Speaker 1: get back to main street. I think you'll see that
Speaker 1: flow into the market. So we still think we're going
Speaker 1: to see these these averages move higher. Hey, John, where
Speaker 1: where does the economic stimulus package? And I'm not talking
Speaker 1: about the one point nine trillion dollar when I'm talking
Speaker 1: about two point two five trillion dollar infrastructure plan that
Speaker 1: was announced yesterday. Where does that fit into this this picture.
Speaker 1: You know, we've taken a look at a couple of
Speaker 1: economic estimates and and again this is this is infrastructure spending.
Speaker 1: So this is spending that's going to be you know,
Speaker 1: for years to come. I mean, you know, the planning
Speaker 1: of rebuilding bridges and and all that infrastructure needs to
Speaker 1: be done. One of the things that that has has
Speaker 1: encouraged us about the infrastructure plan is that we were
Speaker 1: concerned that we would have this spurt with the one
Speaker 1: point nine trillion of spurting growth this year and then
Speaker 1: slow down pretty dramatically in the out years. The infrastructure package.
Speaker 1: It's not causing us to change our forecast for this year,
Speaker 1: but we're raising our two thousand, twenty three four numbers
Speaker 1: because of that package. So it's it's increasing our confidence
Speaker 1: in the out years. So what the risks here? What's
Speaker 1: the thing that we're not you know, beyond the arcticos
Speaker 1: or our k goos however you say it blow up
Speaker 1: which didn't really impact the overall trade, but as a
Speaker 1: reminder that things can happen, um, you know without our
Speaker 1: our you know, without us you know those black swans,
Speaker 1: they do happen, even little black swans, that's right. And
Speaker 1: it's it's really the leverage in the system. You know,
Speaker 1: when you when you've got free money for as long
Speaker 1: as we've had it, and that's basically what we've had
Speaker 1: from the Fed for quite a while now. You know,
Speaker 1: mistakes are made when you're when you're hurdle rate is zero.
Speaker 1: Everything looks good, So I wouldn't be surprised if we see,
Speaker 1: if we don't see some more of the heavy, heavily
Speaker 1: levered investors. The hedge funds primarily have problems going forward
Speaker 1: because there are a lot of leverage bets out there
Speaker 1: and I don't think we've seen the end of that.
Speaker 1: Um So the leverage in the system is is a
Speaker 1: is a concern, but you know that the bigger issue,
Speaker 1: um we and we haven't seen it. Investors in the
Speaker 1: bond market are basically still saying the Fed is going
Speaker 1: to do a good job and keep keep inflation under control.
Speaker 1: That to us, that's the big question. Mark Joe wis
Speaker 1: and though I don't have the note in front of me,
Speaker 1: but puts out a note every morning, but kind of
Speaker 1: the five things you need to know every morning. And
Speaker 1: one of the things he had a guest on recently
Speaker 1: that when you look at the activity, and forgive me,
Speaker 1: I'm not probably not going to do the best summary,
Speaker 1: but it's basically this whole idea that you know, back
Speaker 1: in January, things everything was falling apart. We were looking
Speaker 1: at rising virus cases, looking at another wave. We didn't
Speaker 1: have all the economic recovery packages in place, and it
Speaker 1: felt like everything was coming undone. And then here we get,
Speaker 1: you know, trillions back into the economy and we're now
Speaker 1: talking about crazy growth numbers for the second half, and
Speaker 1: the bond market is just reflecting that. And did it
Speaker 1: pretty quickly? Is that something you think about and just
Speaker 1: got about thirty seconds, actually about twenty seconds. No, No,
Speaker 1: And what we're looking at. Yes, we've seen introt frates
Speaker 1: go up, but we haven't really seen, you know, the
Speaker 1: real rate go through the roof. And we believe the
Speaker 1: bond market, even though rates are moving up, the bond
Speaker 1: market is still saying the Fed is in control and
Speaker 1: the good job. Hey, John, have a good weekend. Thanks
Speaker 1: for stopping by, John Train, our chief investment officer, People's
Speaker 1: United Advisors on the phone and Bridgeport, Connecticut. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: or Bloomberg dot com, and you can also listen to
Speaker 1: our radio show at two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio
Speaker 1: or watch us on YouTube search Bark Global News MHM