WEBVTT - Coinbase Posts $667 Million Loss, Revenue Declines 20%

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:10.520
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News. This is Bloomberg business

0:00:10.520 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>Week Daily reporting from the magazine that helps global leaders

0:00:14.440 --> 0:00:18.360
<v Speaker 1>stay ahead with insight on the people, companies, and trends

0:00:18.360 --> 0:00:23.360
<v Speaker 1>shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business finance and tech

0:00:23.440 --> 0:00:27.320
<v Speaker 1>news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:31.720
<v Speaker 1>with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebek on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:35.200
<v Speaker 2>I'm looking at shares of Coinbase in the after hours.

0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:37.240
<v Speaker 2>They're taking a leg lower, and like you said, Carol,

0:00:37.280 --> 0:00:40.160
<v Speaker 2>this stock was under pressure but still down one point

0:00:40.240 --> 0:00:43.640
<v Speaker 2>seven two percent, bouncing around but in the red as

0:00:43.680 --> 0:00:46.080
<v Speaker 2>we speak. In terms of fourth quarter total revenue that

0:00:46.200 --> 0:00:49.240
<v Speaker 2>missed estimates, the company expects headcount to grow slightly higher

0:00:49.560 --> 0:00:52.519
<v Speaker 2>than in Q four. Fourth quarter adjusted IBADA came in

0:00:52.560 --> 0:00:56.040
<v Speaker 2>below estimates. Fourth quarter adjusted EPs came in at sixty

0:00:56.080 --> 0:00:57.160
<v Speaker 2>six cents below estimates.

0:00:57.160 --> 0:00:58.880
<v Speaker 3>What are you saying, I'm looking at the release looking

0:00:58.920 --> 0:01:01.520
<v Speaker 3>forward to twenty twenty six. We continue to be optimistic

0:01:01.560 --> 0:01:05.480
<v Speaker 3>about the long term trajectory of the crypto industry. And

0:01:05.520 --> 0:01:08.960
<v Speaker 3>they also said it was a strong year in twenty

0:01:09.000 --> 0:01:14.440
<v Speaker 3>twenty five for Coinbase, both operationally and financially, and so yeah,

0:01:14.560 --> 0:01:17.800
<v Speaker 3>they say, as regulatory clarity emergence, we believe crypto will

0:01:17.880 --> 0:01:21.240
<v Speaker 3>update all financial services and Coinbase as well positioned to

0:01:21.280 --> 0:01:26.520
<v Speaker 3>capitalize on that transition. So, you know, but connect Start underperformed.

0:01:26.520 --> 0:01:28.440
<v Speaker 2>It was down nine percent in twenty twenty five. So

0:01:28.480 --> 0:01:30.440
<v Speaker 2>even if it was a good year financially for the company,

0:01:30.600 --> 0:01:31.800
<v Speaker 2>investors didn't reward it.

0:01:31.959 --> 0:01:32.800
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, let's see what.

0:01:32.720 --> 0:01:35.520
<v Speaker 3>Monique Malema has to say. She's Bloomberg News equities reporter.

0:01:35.600 --> 0:01:39.360
<v Speaker 3>She's in Toronto, follows this name. Was twenty twenty five

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:43.440
<v Speaker 3>a strong year for coinbase and does twenty twenty six

0:01:44.080 --> 0:01:47.039
<v Speaker 3>should they be Coinbase optimistic about the year and the

0:01:47.040 --> 0:01:50.360
<v Speaker 3>long term trajectory of the crypto industry at this point

0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:50.840
<v Speaker 3>in time.

0:01:52.760 --> 0:01:55.040
<v Speaker 5>So twenty twenty five was a mixed year for Coinbase.

0:01:55.080 --> 0:01:57.720
<v Speaker 5>We saw at the start of the year there was

0:01:57.800 --> 0:02:00.560
<v Speaker 5>a lot of momentum as the Trump administry came in

0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 5>was really embracing crypto, and we saw a huge wave

0:02:04.360 --> 0:02:09.119
<v Speaker 5>of investment into cryptocurrencies, which benefited Coinbase on their transactions

0:02:09.120 --> 0:02:12.160
<v Speaker 5>and trading. But as we've seen crypto prices pullbacks and

0:02:12.840 --> 0:02:15.600
<v Speaker 5>that record high they hid in October, we've seen that

0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:18.200
<v Speaker 5>way on coinbas as, shares and We've also seen it

0:02:18.240 --> 0:02:21.040
<v Speaker 5>way on their revenue as less people are trading on

0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:25.160
<v Speaker 5>the platforms, which means less transaction revenue and also less volumes.

0:02:25.360 --> 0:02:28.000
<v Speaker 3>Monique, what is their bal what does their balance sheet

0:02:28.000 --> 0:02:29.640
<v Speaker 3>look like? I'm just looking at it, says In January

0:02:29.680 --> 0:02:32.960
<v Speaker 3>twenty twenty six, we know this. Our board expanded our

0:02:33.040 --> 0:02:36.120
<v Speaker 3>share and long term debt repurchase authorization by an addicitial two

0:02:36.200 --> 0:02:40.960
<v Speaker 3>billion dollars. We were mindful of reducing our overall dilution opportunistically.

0:02:41.280 --> 0:02:42.639
<v Speaker 4>We are deliberately well.

0:02:42.480 --> 0:02:45.960
<v Speaker 3>Capitalized with eleven point three billion in cash and cash equivalents,

0:02:46.240 --> 0:02:49.280
<v Speaker 3>to weather these cycles and continue to invest in the

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:50.560
<v Speaker 3>future of finance.

0:02:50.840 --> 0:02:52.480
<v Speaker 4>Is their balance sheet solid?

0:02:54.440 --> 0:02:56.919
<v Speaker 5>So analysts do think that their balance sheet is still solid.

0:02:56.960 --> 0:03:00.240
<v Speaker 5>You know, Coinbase, they are the largest cryptocurrency exchange in

0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:04.040
<v Speaker 5>the US. There are on much solid fitting compared to

0:03:04.440 --> 0:03:06.960
<v Speaker 5>some of the smaller crypto firms that are out there.

0:03:07.200 --> 0:03:10.200
<v Speaker 5>But you know, analysts are also expecting that cryptocurrency is

0:03:10.200 --> 0:03:12.640
<v Speaker 5>going to continue to kind of see a downturn going

0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:15.079
<v Speaker 5>through this year. So that's going to continue to weigh

0:03:15.120 --> 0:03:17.560
<v Speaker 5>on coin Base, even if they can weather it for now.

0:03:17.560 --> 0:03:19.919
<v Speaker 5>And we've seen some analysts already pull back their price

0:03:20.320 --> 0:03:24.120
<v Speaker 5>targets and their estimates for coinbasis earnings for this year

0:03:24.160 --> 0:03:24.839
<v Speaker 5>and next year.

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:27.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, how do you explain the analyst community has just

0:03:27.520 --> 0:03:31.400
<v Speaker 2>been a brutal to this company over the past few weeks.

0:03:31.760 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 2>You had a great article. It was kind of an

0:03:33.919 --> 0:03:36.960
<v Speaker 2>earning's preview, but also much more than that because it

0:03:37.000 --> 0:03:39.560
<v Speaker 2>gave the context for what all these analysts are saying

0:03:39.560 --> 0:03:43.080
<v Speaker 2>about the company recent double downgrade to the company as well.

0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:46.320
<v Speaker 2>Why are analysts so bearish?

0:03:46.600 --> 0:03:49.360
<v Speaker 5>So anamals are really beverish because of the downturn we've

0:03:49.400 --> 0:03:52.680
<v Speaker 5>seen in crypto markets. Bitcoin is down over forty percent

0:03:52.760 --> 0:03:55.880
<v Speaker 5>from the higatt hidden October, and that's really weighing across

0:03:55.880 --> 0:03:59.880
<v Speaker 5>the whole crypto ecosystem. We had an analyst at Lonesse,

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:02.560
<v Speaker 5>crispian Heart, say today that they felt that they were

0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:05.120
<v Speaker 5>foolish for thinking that crypto markets were going to be

0:04:05.160 --> 0:04:07.920
<v Speaker 5>recovering more quickly than they are, and they're the ones

0:04:07.920 --> 0:04:10.640
<v Speaker 5>that did the double downgrade on Coinbase. We've seen six

0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:14.320
<v Speaker 5>analysts cut their price targets on Coinbase this month alone,

0:04:14.440 --> 0:04:17.920
<v Speaker 5>so they're really realizing that this downturn we're seeing in

0:04:17.920 --> 0:04:20.560
<v Speaker 5>crypto people are thinking is not going to be changing

0:04:20.640 --> 0:04:23.000
<v Speaker 5>anytime soon. They think prices are going to continue to

0:04:23.040 --> 0:04:26.560
<v Speaker 5>be depressed, and with so much of Coinbase's business at

0:04:26.560 --> 0:04:30.560
<v Speaker 5>this point being focused on cryptocurrency, they think that's really

0:04:30.560 --> 0:04:31.960
<v Speaker 5>going to weigh on the company's shares.

0:04:32.080 --> 0:04:33.320
<v Speaker 3>What do you think they're going to be kind of

0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:36.279
<v Speaker 3>hammered on on the call with investors and analysts. I mean,

0:04:36.320 --> 0:04:38.600
<v Speaker 3>the stock it is still down, but it's pairing some

0:04:38.680 --> 0:04:42.159
<v Speaker 3>of its deeper losses after it reported earnings. It's still

0:04:42.200 --> 0:04:44.680
<v Speaker 3>down though, about two point two percent.

0:04:44.760 --> 0:04:45.039
<v Speaker 4>Here.

0:04:46.880 --> 0:04:48.680
<v Speaker 5>A lot of the focus for analysts has been how

0:04:48.800 --> 0:04:52.280
<v Speaker 5>was this company going to expand its revenue base. We've

0:04:52.320 --> 0:04:54.280
<v Speaker 5>seen that coinbas announce last year that they're going to

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:58.719
<v Speaker 5>be venturing more into prediction markets, into equities trading, and

0:04:58.760 --> 0:05:02.400
<v Speaker 5>all these other products that are hoping to diversify the

0:05:02.440 --> 0:05:06.240
<v Speaker 5>company from being so concentrated in the crypto industry. And

0:05:06.279 --> 0:05:09.120
<v Speaker 5>that's something analysts think can help kind of balance out

0:05:09.160 --> 0:05:11.400
<v Speaker 5>some of these declines that are happening in the crypto space.

0:05:11.440 --> 0:05:14.160
<v Speaker 5>But they really want to see more gains in those areas,

0:05:14.200 --> 0:05:17.600
<v Speaker 5>particularly in prediction markets, which has become such a massive market,

0:05:18.120 --> 0:05:21.640
<v Speaker 5>to really see that there is more longevity and more

0:05:21.640 --> 0:05:25.320
<v Speaker 5>sustainability outside of this downturn that's in crypto right now,

0:05:25.520 --> 0:05:25.840
<v Speaker 5>what I.

0:05:25.800 --> 0:05:26.360
<v Speaker 6>Don't I mean?

0:05:27.000 --> 0:05:31.640
<v Speaker 2>Correct, help me understand this this monique. If stock prices

0:05:31.680 --> 0:05:37.279
<v Speaker 2>go down to exchanges that have stock suffer because they're

0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:40.520
<v Speaker 2>still buying and they're still selling. Is the crypto industry

0:05:40.560 --> 0:05:44.279
<v Speaker 2>different in that the exchanges only do well when the

0:05:44.279 --> 0:05:45.240
<v Speaker 2>prices go up.

0:05:47.680 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 5>So redactions are transactions, Yeah, transactions are transactions, But for crypto,

0:05:54.600 --> 0:05:58.200
<v Speaker 5>the difference is that a lot of crypto is sentiment driven.

0:05:58.520 --> 0:06:01.719
<v Speaker 5>So when crypto prices are depressed, that means that a

0:06:01.720 --> 0:06:04.039
<v Speaker 5>lot of people in the crypto industry start pulling out.

0:06:04.120 --> 0:06:06.640
<v Speaker 5>We've seen that that there's been mass liquidations in crypto

0:06:07.040 --> 0:06:09.720
<v Speaker 5>that we've seen people go to other markets like prediction markets,

0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:11.960
<v Speaker 5>or to the stock market, or just sitting back when

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:15.400
<v Speaker 5>prices become depressed. So it's not just about the fact

0:06:15.560 --> 0:06:18.280
<v Speaker 5>that the crypto prices are lower. It's that then that

0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:21.920
<v Speaker 5>also leads to lower volumes, which isn't necessarily the same

0:06:21.960 --> 0:06:24.360
<v Speaker 5>in stock markets, even when the stock markets down, people

0:06:24.400 --> 0:06:27.559
<v Speaker 5>might be switching to other areas of the stock market,

0:06:27.720 --> 0:06:30.039
<v Speaker 5>versus in cryptos, some people are just choosing to lead.

0:06:30.800 --> 0:06:32.720
<v Speaker 3>You know, I'm looking at ogu caref for the write

0:06:32.720 --> 0:06:37.400
<v Speaker 3>through on Coinbase here in the aftermarket, and she reminds

0:06:37.480 --> 0:06:40.800
<v Speaker 3>us about rival exchange Gemini space Station, saying this week

0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:42.440
<v Speaker 3>that it plans to cut up to twenty five percent

0:06:42.480 --> 0:06:46.080
<v Speaker 3>of its workforce and scale back international operations, so underscoring

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:51.840
<v Speaker 3>how these rapidly weaker markets can basically translate into operational pressure.

0:06:52.520 --> 0:06:55.320
<v Speaker 3>Is there any operational pressure on Coinbase that we know of?

0:06:57.880 --> 0:07:00.520
<v Speaker 5>Not that I'm aware of. In terms of the operation pressure,

0:07:00.680 --> 0:07:04.000
<v Speaker 5>like I'd mentioned, they're really focusing right now on expanding

0:07:04.000 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 5>their products so that there's not going to be so

0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:09.920
<v Speaker 5>much concentration in crypto, and so there will be a

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:13.120
<v Speaker 5>focus on the prediction markets, on the equities trading, on options.

0:07:13.120 --> 0:07:16.240
<v Speaker 3>But the production markets have their problems too, right, I mean,

0:07:17.000 --> 0:07:19.920
<v Speaker 3>especially when so much as sports right and sports gambling

0:07:20.240 --> 0:07:23.480
<v Speaker 3>or gaming if you will, I mean, the gambling guys

0:07:23.480 --> 0:07:27.240
<v Speaker 3>and the gambling platforms who are highly regulated have got

0:07:27.240 --> 0:07:29.200
<v Speaker 3>to be looking and say, well, wait a minute, you know,

0:07:29.360 --> 0:07:31.320
<v Speaker 3>there's got to be some regulation that's going to come

0:07:31.320 --> 0:07:33.440
<v Speaker 3>in to these prediction markets.

0:07:35.360 --> 0:07:38.400
<v Speaker 5>Yes, definitely. It's not an area without its own issues.

0:07:38.760 --> 0:07:40.840
<v Speaker 5>We know the CFTC had said that they are looking

0:07:40.920 --> 0:07:45.000
<v Speaker 5>at creating some types of rules or frameworks around prediction

0:07:45.080 --> 0:07:49.400
<v Speaker 5>markets when it comes to things like sports. But for

0:07:49.600 --> 0:07:53.080
<v Speaker 5>people who are in this space, the idea of something

0:07:53.440 --> 0:07:56.920
<v Speaker 5>being a little volatile of operating, you know, somewhat in

0:07:56.920 --> 0:08:00.600
<v Speaker 5>a bit of an area that hasn't been fully regulated,

0:08:00.600 --> 0:08:03.480
<v Speaker 5>it isn't out of the ordinary. For crypto you know,

0:08:03.600 --> 0:08:05.600
<v Speaker 5>this is something they are used to. They're used to

0:08:05.640 --> 0:08:07.880
<v Speaker 5>the fact that, you know, even for crypto markets, we're

0:08:07.960 --> 0:08:11.960
<v Speaker 5>still seeing legislation being debated. So for them, it's not

0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:15.200
<v Speaker 5>as much of a fear of going into prediction markets

0:08:15.240 --> 0:08:18.400
<v Speaker 5>with that uncertainty because they've already been for so long

0:08:18.480 --> 0:08:19.960
<v Speaker 5>having to operate in uncertainty.

0:08:20.160 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 2>Hey, speaking of prediction markets, we're getting DraftKings results. Crossing

0:08:24.320 --> 0:08:26.920
<v Speaker 2>shares fell as much as fourteen percent in the immediate

0:08:26.960 --> 0:08:29.360
<v Speaker 2>aftermath of these, now down about nine and a half percent.

0:08:29.600 --> 0:08:31.760
<v Speaker 2>The company sees twenty twenty six revenue six and a

0:08:31.800 --> 0:08:34.800
<v Speaker 2>half to six point nine billion dollars that came in

0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:37.600
<v Speaker 2>below estimates of seven point three to two billion dollars.

0:08:37.640 --> 0:08:40.360
<v Speaker 2>The twenty twenty sixth revenue outlook miss is what is

0:08:40.360 --> 0:08:43.480
<v Speaker 2>pushing the stock lower. Fourth quarter revenue did meet estimates,

0:08:43.480 --> 0:08:47.280
<v Speaker 2>fourth quarter adjusted Ibada did come in above estimates. Fourth

0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 2>quarter earnings per share coming in above estimates too.

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:52.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and I think it's interesting fourth quarter looking back

0:08:52.320 --> 0:08:54.960
<v Speaker 3>at the quarter that was monthly unique payers four point

0:08:54.960 --> 0:08:57.319
<v Speaker 3>eight million. The estimate was five point forty three million,

0:08:57.360 --> 0:08:57.520
<v Speaker 3>so a.

0:08:57.520 --> 0:08:59.480
<v Speaker 4>Little bit below as well as you look.

0:08:59.520 --> 0:09:03.000
<v Speaker 3>But that out look as certainly what Scott investors a

0:09:03.000 --> 0:09:05.079
<v Speaker 3>little bit, a little bit nervous. The stock, by the way,

0:09:05.200 --> 0:09:08.200
<v Speaker 3>is down twenty seven percent already in twenty twenty six.

0:09:08.280 --> 0:09:10.360
<v Speaker 2>Monique Malima, we are going to let you go. She's

0:09:10.400 --> 0:09:13.199
<v Speaker 2>Equity's reporter for Bloomberg News. She joins us from Toronto.

0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:16.439
<v Speaker 2>She covers coinbase. She covers the entire crypto industry. Check

0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:19.240
<v Speaker 2>out her reporting and more on the Bloomberg terminal and

0:09:19.400 --> 0:09:22.640
<v Speaker 2>at Bloomberg dot Com. Stay with us more from Bloomberg

0:09:22.720 --> 0:09:24.760
<v Speaker 2>business Week Daily coming up after this.

0:09:28.720 --> 0:09:32.560
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch

0:09:32.640 --> 0:09:35.360
<v Speaker 1>us live weekday afternoons from two to five e's during

0:09:35.520 --> 0:09:39.480
<v Speaker 1>Listen on Applecarplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app,

0:09:39.640 --> 0:09:42.400
<v Speaker 1>or watch us live on YouTube.

0:09:43.440 --> 0:09:45.480
<v Speaker 2>Eric Wiener, he walked into our studio.

0:09:45.520 --> 0:09:49.520
<v Speaker 7>He's like, what okay, and like you could almost say

0:09:49.520 --> 0:09:52.000
<v Speaker 7>that every day, but there are days where it's like,

0:09:52.320 --> 0:09:54.600
<v Speaker 7>oh my god, right, why do you say that though

0:09:54.600 --> 0:09:59.160
<v Speaker 7>specifically because it's not like everything was down today, No,

0:09:59.240 --> 0:09:59.959
<v Speaker 7>not at all.

0:10:00.559 --> 0:10:03.480
<v Speaker 8>It was a weird day. See we've been having a

0:10:03.480 --> 0:10:07.480
<v Speaker 8>lot of weird days. Is that it is the AI

0:10:07.600 --> 0:10:12.160
<v Speaker 8>scare and and it's you have this roving AI worry

0:10:12.320 --> 0:10:16.920
<v Speaker 8>that's just taking out entire industries at once, sort of

0:10:16.920 --> 0:10:20.280
<v Speaker 8>a cell now and then see what happens later. So

0:10:20.400 --> 0:10:24.360
<v Speaker 8>today we saw like logistics stocks get hammered because the

0:10:24.400 --> 0:10:28.000
<v Speaker 8>company that was the singing machine company and made karaoke

0:10:29.200 --> 0:10:32.520
<v Speaker 8>equipment now has an AI bot that does logistics and

0:10:32.559 --> 0:10:36.079
<v Speaker 8>they're taking out you know, billions of dollars in market cap.

0:10:35.920 --> 0:10:38.520
<v Speaker 9>From logistic is a real thing. It's a real thing. Okay,

0:10:38.880 --> 0:10:46.480
<v Speaker 9>well yeah, like what is that? Well it's really strange.

0:10:46.559 --> 0:10:50.600
<v Speaker 9>So what you have is the idea. You have two

0:10:50.640 --> 0:10:53.480
<v Speaker 9>ideas that are filtering through the market right now, both

0:10:53.520 --> 0:10:57.200
<v Speaker 9>related to AI, that seem to be at conflict with

0:10:57.240 --> 0:11:00.480
<v Speaker 9>each other. You have on one level, big company spending

0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:04.080
<v Speaker 9>a ton to develop AI, and the market saying, you know, when.

0:11:03.920 --> 0:11:05.720
<v Speaker 8>Are we going to start seeing some returns from this?

0:11:06.320 --> 0:11:08.680
<v Speaker 8>And are you spending too much and is this throwing

0:11:08.720 --> 0:11:12.000
<v Speaker 8>good money after bat? So they get hit. Then you

0:11:12.120 --> 0:11:15.080
<v Speaker 8>start seeing some little obscure company that used to make

0:11:15.160 --> 0:11:18.480
<v Speaker 8>karaoke machines saying we've got an AI bot that is

0:11:18.520 --> 0:11:21.880
<v Speaker 8>going to fix logistics, and all of a sudden they

0:11:21.880 --> 0:11:26.640
<v Speaker 8>sell off logistics companies. Now, I don't necessarily know that

0:11:27.080 --> 0:11:30.760
<v Speaker 8>the market knows exactly how this is going to play out.

0:11:30.960 --> 0:11:33.600
<v Speaker 8>They're just thinking that right now, sentiment is so soft

0:11:34.040 --> 0:11:36.720
<v Speaker 8>that you just get get out, well you can, and

0:11:36.760 --> 0:11:38.920
<v Speaker 8>then buy back in twenty five percent later.

0:11:39.520 --> 0:11:41.400
<v Speaker 2>I want to bring in Bloomberg News senior editor and

0:11:41.400 --> 0:11:43.800
<v Speaker 2>author of the Everything Risk newsletter, Ed Harrison. He joins

0:11:43.880 --> 0:11:48.480
<v Speaker 2>us from our Washington dcbureau, and I want to bring

0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:52.560
<v Speaker 2>you in because you write about risk the Everything Risk newsletter,

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:56.120
<v Speaker 2>and it seems like the risk right now is that

0:11:56.200 --> 0:11:58.439
<v Speaker 2>there's going to be you know that old commercial from Apple,

0:11:58.480 --> 0:12:00.760
<v Speaker 2>there's an app for that. Well, as soon as there's

0:12:00.840 --> 0:12:04.840
<v Speaker 2>an AI for that, whatever sector that is sells off.

0:12:05.000 --> 0:12:05.600
<v Speaker 2>What's going on?

0:12:07.240 --> 0:12:10.199
<v Speaker 10>Yeah? Hey, Tim, So remember we were talking a few

0:12:10.280 --> 0:12:13.440
<v Speaker 10>days ago. I was saying that there was people were

0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:17.640
<v Speaker 10>de risking ahead of time and that this was building.

0:12:17.720 --> 0:12:20.280
<v Speaker 10>But we're at an inflection point where we really don't

0:12:20.360 --> 0:12:23.200
<v Speaker 10>know how that's going to work out. I think Eric

0:12:23.320 --> 0:12:26.160
<v Speaker 10>is hitting the nail on the head that people are,

0:12:27.040 --> 0:12:30.800
<v Speaker 10>you know, selling a bit and asking questions later. But

0:12:30.920 --> 0:12:34.720
<v Speaker 10>obviously if the if the economy holds up, then you

0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:37.600
<v Speaker 10>know they can re risk. You know, from where I

0:12:37.720 --> 0:12:44.079
<v Speaker 10>sit today, this has an algo selling momentum driven.

0:12:44.600 --> 0:12:45.320
<v Speaker 6>Feel to it.

0:12:45.640 --> 0:12:48.199
<v Speaker 10>When you look at like the mag seven as an example,

0:12:48.400 --> 0:12:54.520
<v Speaker 10>apples down the most there. There wasn't really any news

0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:57.760
<v Speaker 10>flow on this, so this is really just the algos,

0:12:58.280 --> 0:13:01.920
<v Speaker 10>you know, taking the moment some of this trade into

0:13:01.960 --> 0:13:04.880
<v Speaker 10>small caps, the rotation, et cetera, and then we just

0:13:04.880 --> 0:13:07.360
<v Speaker 10>have to see, you know, does this have legs as

0:13:07.400 --> 0:13:08.520
<v Speaker 10>a results of the economy.

0:13:08.679 --> 0:13:12.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I'm looking at the VIX too, and we did

0:13:12.200 --> 0:13:15.080
<v Speaker 3>go a little bit above twenty one today, but we

0:13:15.160 --> 0:13:18.240
<v Speaker 3>closed just at twenty or just below twenty one. Is

0:13:18.280 --> 0:13:19.360
<v Speaker 3>that significant, Eric?

0:13:19.679 --> 0:13:20.120
<v Speaker 9>Yes?

0:13:20.280 --> 0:13:23.959
<v Speaker 8>Yes, I mean that will to feed into what's going

0:13:24.040 --> 0:13:27.880
<v Speaker 8>on in the equity markets. When you get these selling pressures,

0:13:28.200 --> 0:13:30.760
<v Speaker 8>you often see the VIX bomp of over twenty. If

0:13:30.800 --> 0:13:33.360
<v Speaker 8>it holds there, yeah, then it means that there's real

0:13:33.360 --> 0:13:36.400
<v Speaker 8>sustained fear. But today was one of those days where

0:13:36.440 --> 0:13:40.280
<v Speaker 8>you know, we had a pretty significant downdraft, so it

0:13:40.400 --> 0:13:44.800
<v Speaker 8>jumping over twenty twenty isn't and not necessarily holding there

0:13:45.000 --> 0:13:47.200
<v Speaker 8>isn't exactly you know, a fear gauge.

0:13:47.280 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 4>Is this just a case though things just feeling jittery?

0:13:50.080 --> 0:13:53.120
<v Speaker 3>Yes, And then it doesn't take much for people to

0:13:53.200 --> 0:13:56.760
<v Speaker 3>be like, Okay, maybe logically or fundamentally this doesn't make sense, but.

0:13:56.800 --> 0:14:00.000
<v Speaker 8>I'm out that well, that's it. So if you look

0:14:00.000 --> 0:14:05.240
<v Speaker 8>look at what's going on with the real estate firms

0:14:05.320 --> 0:14:09.360
<v Speaker 8>or whatever that we're hit by THEAI selling, yeah, this

0:14:09.520 --> 0:14:12.280
<v Speaker 8>is actually going to help them, like it's not necessarily

0:14:12.360 --> 0:14:17.120
<v Speaker 8>going to help or financial services, you know, the wealth managers, right,

0:14:17.160 --> 0:14:20.840
<v Speaker 8>Schwab is going to do well with this. Employees that

0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:23.320
<v Speaker 8>Schwab may not do well with this because you're going

0:14:23.360 --> 0:14:25.640
<v Speaker 8>to lose some workers. You're going and your salaries are

0:14:25.680 --> 0:14:27.600
<v Speaker 8>going to go down, but the stock should do well.

0:14:27.880 --> 0:14:30.680
<v Speaker 8>So exactly what the logic is behind this is hard

0:14:30.720 --> 0:14:34.880
<v Speaker 8>to say. It's really, you know, to paraphrase ad, it's

0:14:34.920 --> 0:14:38.080
<v Speaker 8>really you know, sell now and sort of wait. And

0:14:38.160 --> 0:14:40.400
<v Speaker 8>where you start seeing it pop up like in places

0:14:40.440 --> 0:14:44.160
<v Speaker 8>like in small caps, that's where you start thinking This

0:14:44.200 --> 0:14:46.560
<v Speaker 8>doesn't exactly make sense because they would normally be risk

0:14:46.640 --> 0:14:47.040
<v Speaker 8>off too.

0:14:47.640 --> 0:14:50.200
<v Speaker 2>So if we move past the sort of day to

0:14:50.240 --> 0:14:52.320
<v Speaker 2>day market swings here and look at the fundamentals of

0:14:52.360 --> 0:14:55.120
<v Speaker 2>the US economy, we're getting more data. We got more

0:14:55.160 --> 0:14:58.800
<v Speaker 2>data this week. We got a jobless report for last

0:14:58.840 --> 0:15:01.320
<v Speaker 2>month on Wednesday with was weird. We got initial job

0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:03.440
<v Speaker 2>list claims. Today you are getting a post on the

0:15:03.440 --> 0:15:07.400
<v Speaker 2>lifelog that together the shows a weakening employment picture. What

0:15:07.440 --> 0:15:08.120
<v Speaker 2>are you looking at?

0:15:09.520 --> 0:15:13.680
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, So what I'm thinking is is that generally we

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:16.880
<v Speaker 10>have a decent employment market, but it's weakening. And the

0:15:17.040 --> 0:15:21.400
<v Speaker 10>number that we saw on Wednesday wasn't reflective of the

0:15:21.440 --> 0:15:24.920
<v Speaker 10>weakness that we're seeing. Number one, we saw a lot

0:15:24.960 --> 0:15:29.480
<v Speaker 10>of layoff announcements. Number two, we also saw weather that

0:15:29.760 --> 0:15:34.040
<v Speaker 10>should be negative for jobs, at least in a temporary sense.

0:15:34.040 --> 0:15:39.120
<v Speaker 10>And then we've seen two consecutive upticks and initial claims,

0:15:39.120 --> 0:15:42.760
<v Speaker 10>and we saw continuing claims tick up this past week

0:15:42.800 --> 0:15:45.920
<v Speaker 10>as well. All of that speaks to when you look

0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:49.560
<v Speaker 10>at the BLS data, that these are things that weren't

0:15:49.600 --> 0:15:53.360
<v Speaker 10>in the actual numbers for January. In fact, on the

0:15:53.400 --> 0:15:57.400
<v Speaker 10>BLS website they say specifically, none of the weather was

0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:01.040
<v Speaker 10>in the you know, in our collection period. So the

0:16:01.360 --> 0:16:05.440
<v Speaker 10>February number is going to be worse, and so we're

0:16:05.480 --> 0:16:07.760
<v Speaker 10>seeing a little bit that will help in terms of

0:16:07.800 --> 0:16:13.720
<v Speaker 10>the jitters, unfortunately, help continue those jitters going forward. The

0:16:13.760 --> 0:16:17.880
<v Speaker 10>only positive I could say is that we're looking at

0:16:17.880 --> 0:16:22.400
<v Speaker 10>CPI potentially coming down that's going to be released tomorrow.

0:16:22.840 --> 0:16:26.880
<v Speaker 10>Two point five percent is demonstrably below three percent. That

0:16:26.920 --> 0:16:30.480
<v Speaker 10>would be a good number that would help perhaps stop

0:16:30.520 --> 0:16:32.080
<v Speaker 10>some of the jitters that we're seeing now.

0:16:32.200 --> 0:16:35.440
<v Speaker 3>To be fair, and everybody always reminds us, you know,

0:16:35.480 --> 0:16:37.600
<v Speaker 3>you got to look longer term. S and P was

0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:41.880
<v Speaker 3>up sixteen percent last year, twenty three percent twenty twenty four,

0:16:42.040 --> 0:16:45.000
<v Speaker 3>and up twenty four percent in twenty twenty three. Eric,

0:16:45.240 --> 0:16:48.680
<v Speaker 3>We've talked about these three consecutive years, a very strong gains.

0:16:48.840 --> 0:16:50.600
<v Speaker 3>I mean, at some point the market.

0:16:50.360 --> 0:16:51.560
<v Speaker 4>Takes a little bit of breather.

0:16:51.600 --> 0:16:54.080
<v Speaker 3>We've seen this where we'll get a ten percent correction

0:16:54.160 --> 0:16:55.920
<v Speaker 3>and then it moves to the upside again.

0:16:56.440 --> 0:17:00.840
<v Speaker 8>Well that's I mean, in the longer term scheme of things,

0:17:01.160 --> 0:17:05.000
<v Speaker 8>the market is okay. The concern would be that sentiment

0:17:05.040 --> 0:17:09.600
<v Speaker 8>has been pretty lousy since October really, so you're starting

0:17:09.640 --> 0:17:13.200
<v Speaker 8>to see real kind of pain come through when you're

0:17:13.200 --> 0:17:15.959
<v Speaker 8>talking about employment and you're seeing like what's going on

0:17:16.040 --> 0:17:18.879
<v Speaker 8>with crypto, You're what the concern there is is that

0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:24.400
<v Speaker 8>people aren't spending, people aren't investing, Individuals are stepping aside,

0:17:24.600 --> 0:17:28.040
<v Speaker 8>and that can bleed into a lot of different industries.

0:17:28.359 --> 0:17:30.920
<v Speaker 8>So the concern, you know, the idea that like you

0:17:30.960 --> 0:17:34.920
<v Speaker 8>would have a sluggish year isn't necessarily the problem. It's

0:17:35.000 --> 0:17:37.879
<v Speaker 8>the reasons behind it. And if we're not getting growth,

0:17:37.920 --> 0:17:40.720
<v Speaker 8>if jobs aren't there, then this can be more.

0:17:40.520 --> 0:17:42.800
<v Speaker 3>Sustained and economic growth.

0:17:43.440 --> 0:17:45.800
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, we do have economic growth right now, but the

0:17:46.480 --> 0:17:49.760
<v Speaker 8>question is what it's measuring, because it's that ky you know.

0:17:50.320 --> 0:17:54.800
<v Speaker 8>So if we're having economic growth but investors but individuals

0:17:54.840 --> 0:17:57.560
<v Speaker 8>aren't spending, then the question is how much can like

0:17:57.600 --> 0:18:00.439
<v Speaker 8>the top twenty percent keep the market of keep the

0:18:00.480 --> 0:18:02.160
<v Speaker 8>economy afloat two?

0:18:02.520 --> 0:18:06.960
<v Speaker 2>Eric's point ed Airbnb shares hire right now. They rose

0:18:07.280 --> 0:18:09.920
<v Speaker 2>four and a half percent and extended trading. The company's

0:18:09.960 --> 0:18:13.399
<v Speaker 2>first quarter revenue forecast exceeded the average annal assessment. Is

0:18:13.400 --> 0:18:16.520
<v Speaker 2>this that top twenty percent that Eric's talking about right here?

0:18:17.600 --> 0:18:21.920
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, that case shaped economy is really creating a lot

0:18:21.920 --> 0:18:26.440
<v Speaker 10>of uncertainty about what's happening. And I would also reiterate

0:18:26.480 --> 0:18:29.920
<v Speaker 10>what Eric said about the jitters beginning in October. I

0:18:29.920 --> 0:18:33.919
<v Speaker 10>thought it was interesting, you know, the vics actually bottomed

0:18:34.080 --> 0:18:38.879
<v Speaker 10>in the day before Christmas, and so you could the

0:18:38.960 --> 0:18:42.560
<v Speaker 10>jitters that we had during the shutdown were sort of

0:18:42.680 --> 0:18:47.600
<v Speaker 10>overtaken by year in a buying into the year end,

0:18:48.040 --> 0:18:51.080
<v Speaker 10>and then people took a week off between Christmas and

0:18:51.119 --> 0:18:54.440
<v Speaker 10>New Year's and then suddenly people came in with fresh eyes,

0:18:54.480 --> 0:18:57.640
<v Speaker 10>and those same sort of concerns that Eric was talking

0:18:57.640 --> 0:19:01.080
<v Speaker 10>about that people had during the shutdown October and November

0:19:01.280 --> 0:19:05.879
<v Speaker 10>have now come back. And then the question is can

0:19:05.960 --> 0:19:11.119
<v Speaker 10>the top twenty percent actually pull this market along. So

0:19:11.280 --> 0:19:14.040
<v Speaker 10>far they have, but that retail sales report that we had,

0:19:14.960 --> 0:19:17.240
<v Speaker 10>you know, causing the question whether that's actually the case.

0:19:17.480 --> 0:19:19.159
<v Speaker 3>I want to go back to some of the earnings

0:19:19.200 --> 0:19:21.960
<v Speaker 3>after the close. Applied materials out and we're seeing the

0:19:22.040 --> 0:19:25.159
<v Speaker 3>stock rally in a big way in the aftermarket, largest

0:19:25.240 --> 0:19:27.840
<v Speaker 3>US supplier of chip making equipment giving an upbeat sales

0:19:27.880 --> 0:19:31.800
<v Speaker 3>forecast for the current quarter, signaling that demand for artificial

0:19:31.800 --> 0:19:35.960
<v Speaker 3>intelligence and memorysetment conductors are fueling purchases. So ed there

0:19:36.040 --> 0:19:38.280
<v Speaker 3>is this kind of yin and yang, like we're watching consumers,

0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:41.359
<v Speaker 3>we're watching the economy. There's also that AI trade, which

0:19:41.359 --> 0:19:43.800
<v Speaker 3>in some ways there's the AI scare that is freaking

0:19:43.840 --> 0:19:46.639
<v Speaker 3>out some sectors, and then there's that spend in AI.

0:19:47.160 --> 0:19:49.119
<v Speaker 3>You know, when you've got something like this, it just

0:19:49.560 --> 0:19:52.320
<v Speaker 3>to some extent points to some cross currents in the market. Right,

0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:53.520
<v Speaker 3>there's some good, there's some bad.

0:19:55.200 --> 0:19:57.359
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, And what I would say is is that if

0:19:57.400 --> 0:19:59.840
<v Speaker 10>you look at it from a very very macro perspective,

0:20:00.119 --> 0:20:03.960
<v Speaker 10>we have six percent deficits, we have tax cuts coming,

0:20:04.280 --> 0:20:07.600
<v Speaker 10>and we have massive AI spend. As we've seen the

0:20:07.760 --> 0:20:11.639
<v Speaker 10>likes of Alphabet, you know, the likes of Amazon say

0:20:11.680 --> 0:20:14.879
<v Speaker 10>they're going to continue to spend more. They're taking on

0:20:15.040 --> 0:20:18.679
<v Speaker 10>debt to spend more. Those are tailwinds that are very

0:20:18.720 --> 0:20:24.560
<v Speaker 10>difficult for you know, barring some sort of macro shop

0:20:24.680 --> 0:20:29.560
<v Speaker 10>to overcome. So really, the economy might be slowing, but

0:20:29.680 --> 0:20:34.240
<v Speaker 10>it's not you know, slowing into anything that should have

0:20:35.520 --> 0:20:38.040
<v Speaker 10>a sustained negative impact in the near term.

0:20:38.320 --> 0:20:40.360
<v Speaker 3>A Matt shares up more than nine percent. Eric wreen

0:20:40.400 --> 0:20:43.119
<v Speaker 3>Or Bloomberg new Senior Editor, Equities Americas and Bloomberg new

0:20:43.200 --> 0:20:46.200
<v Speaker 3>Senior editor and author of the Everything Risk newsletter, Ed Harrison,

0:20:46.520 --> 0:20:47.240
<v Speaker 3>I thank you.

0:20:47.320 --> 0:20:50.200
<v Speaker 4>Stay with us. More from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming

0:20:50.280 --> 0:20:51.200
<v Speaker 4>up after this.

0:20:54.640 --> 0:20:58.080
<v Speaker 11>If you are listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily podcast,

0:20:58.320 --> 0:21:01.880
<v Speaker 11>catch us live weekday afternoon from two to five pm Eastern.

0:21:02.000 --> 0:21:05.040
<v Speaker 11>Listen on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg

0:21:05.119 --> 0:21:09.399
<v Speaker 11>Business apt or watch us Live on YouTube.

0:21:09.800 --> 0:21:11.680
<v Speaker 2>I said, we were going all in on the economy

0:21:11.680 --> 0:21:13.199
<v Speaker 2>this hour. We kind of do that every day, but

0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:15.400
<v Speaker 2>you know, that's kind of what we do, but we're

0:21:15.400 --> 0:21:18.159
<v Speaker 2>doing it from a few different angles on that. I

0:21:18.240 --> 0:21:21.000
<v Speaker 2>want to bring in Stuart Pauli's US and Canada economists

0:21:21.000 --> 0:21:23.600
<v Speaker 2>for Bloomberg Economics. He joins us here in the Bloomberg

0:21:23.600 --> 0:21:26.720
<v Speaker 2>Interactive Brokers studio. We want to broaden this out to

0:21:26.880 --> 0:21:31.280
<v Speaker 2>the entire world. The economic effect of potential conflicts. Bloomberg

0:21:31.320 --> 0:21:34.280
<v Speaker 2>Economics team is out with a special report about global

0:21:34.359 --> 0:21:38.560
<v Speaker 2>risk is called Flashpoint Counting the cost of potential conflicts

0:21:38.960 --> 0:21:41.320
<v Speaker 2>US China war over Taiwan, the cost of escalation on

0:21:41.359 --> 0:21:44.760
<v Speaker 2>the Korean Peninsula, war between Russia and Europe, kind of

0:21:44.800 --> 0:21:47.440
<v Speaker 2>modeling this stuff out. Venezuela is in there as well.

0:21:47.680 --> 0:21:49.880
<v Speaker 2>In addition to others. We should know the team does

0:21:50.000 --> 0:21:52.960
<v Speaker 2>right that the human cost of conflict is tragically high.

0:21:53.160 --> 0:21:56.240
<v Speaker 2>We recognize that each time we talk about a potential

0:21:56.240 --> 0:21:59.760
<v Speaker 2>conflict or a conflict, but the economic cost is also rising.

0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:03.000
<v Speaker 2>If we sit here in the United States, you're in

0:22:03.080 --> 0:22:07.120
<v Speaker 2>charge of US and Canada economics for Bloomberg economics. If

0:22:07.160 --> 0:22:09.240
<v Speaker 2>you look around the world, where do you see the

0:22:09.280 --> 0:22:09.920
<v Speaker 2>biggest risk?

0:22:10.400 --> 0:22:13.200
<v Speaker 12>Well, we can think about risk on two different dimensions.

0:22:13.200 --> 0:22:15.640
<v Speaker 12>We have the probability of risk and then the consequence

0:22:15.840 --> 0:22:18.840
<v Speaker 12>if something were to become let's say a hot war. Right,

0:22:19.320 --> 0:22:21.760
<v Speaker 12>So if we were to just think strictly about the

0:22:21.800 --> 0:22:26.280
<v Speaker 12>consequences of global conflict, really, any conflict that takes place

0:22:26.280 --> 0:22:28.919
<v Speaker 12>in the South China, see an attempt to control the

0:22:28.960 --> 0:22:32.960
<v Speaker 12>Taiwan straight on, attempt to control territorial Taiwan would be

0:22:33.080 --> 0:22:36.840
<v Speaker 12>the most consequential for the global economy. If we think

0:22:36.880 --> 0:22:42.240
<v Speaker 12>about semiconductor production, about sixty percent of global semiconductor production

0:22:42.359 --> 0:22:46.359
<v Speaker 12>takes place in Taiwan. These are the primary inputs to

0:22:46.920 --> 0:22:50.520
<v Speaker 12>about one fifth of These are the primary inputs to

0:22:50.560 --> 0:22:55.000
<v Speaker 12>about five percent excuse me of global GDP. Right, So

0:22:55.040 --> 0:22:58.520
<v Speaker 12>we're thinking about just how much GDP can get dented

0:22:58.560 --> 0:23:02.640
<v Speaker 12>by shutting down exports of semiconductors from Taiwan. And we're

0:23:02.680 --> 0:23:05.800
<v Speaker 12>really talking about five point three percentage points of global GDP,

0:23:06.240 --> 0:23:09.399
<v Speaker 12>trillions of dollars of economic activity. And if we think

0:23:09.400 --> 0:23:12.399
<v Speaker 12>about the amount of cargo that just flows through the

0:23:12.440 --> 0:23:16.080
<v Speaker 12>Taiwan straits, we're talking about a fifth of global shipments.

0:23:16.240 --> 0:23:20.080
<v Speaker 12>Another two and a half trillion dollars of goods that

0:23:20.119 --> 0:23:22.640
<v Speaker 12>are shipped through there every year. So again we're talking

0:23:22.680 --> 0:23:26.720
<v Speaker 12>about trillions of dollars of economic consequential activity that's flowing

0:23:26.840 --> 0:23:29.119
<v Speaker 12>through the region. And so of course it's going to

0:23:29.160 --> 0:23:32.880
<v Speaker 12>matter most if tensions heat up between the two largest

0:23:32.880 --> 0:23:34.840
<v Speaker 12>geopolitical rivals in the world.

0:23:35.000 --> 0:23:37.720
<v Speaker 3>I want to just if I can highlight that you say,

0:23:37.760 --> 0:23:40.320
<v Speaker 3>you guys say the damage would be global. Taiwan's economy

0:23:40.320 --> 0:23:44.040
<v Speaker 3>would be decimated, and that you folks estimate China's GDP

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:47.440
<v Speaker 3>would fall by eleven percent, the US is by six

0:23:47.440 --> 0:23:48.960
<v Speaker 3>point six percent in the first year.

0:23:48.960 --> 0:23:52.040
<v Speaker 4>In addition to the main actors, the EU.

0:23:51.760 --> 0:23:55.080
<v Speaker 3>European Union could have GDP drop by almost eleven percent,

0:23:55.200 --> 0:23:58.520
<v Speaker 3>India by eight percent, the UK buy more than six percent,

0:23:58.880 --> 0:24:01.040
<v Speaker 3>and then closer to the fighting, something like South Korea

0:24:01.119 --> 0:24:04.600
<v Speaker 3>could shave twenty three percent off GDP in Japan fourteen

0:24:04.640 --> 0:24:08.119
<v Speaker 3>point seven percent. I have to believe we talked about,

0:24:08.600 --> 0:24:11.200
<v Speaker 3>you know, during the build up of the nuclear arms race,

0:24:11.280 --> 0:24:13.480
<v Speaker 3>there was a nuclear deterrence. There has to be to

0:24:13.520 --> 0:24:17.359
<v Speaker 3>some extent in economic deterrence, that understanding that doing things

0:24:17.440 --> 0:24:20.480
<v Speaker 3>like this, it's not like you hurt one person, maybe

0:24:20.520 --> 0:24:23.639
<v Speaker 3>your original or initial foe. Everybody's going to feel it.

0:24:23.840 --> 0:24:25.960
<v Speaker 12>That's very true, and it's important that you bring it

0:24:26.040 --> 0:24:29.680
<v Speaker 12>up because an outright hot war is something that's incredibly

0:24:29.720 --> 0:24:33.520
<v Speaker 12>improbable because of the economic consequence. We're talking about denting

0:24:33.600 --> 0:24:35.840
<v Speaker 12>global GDP growth by about ten percent.

0:24:35.960 --> 0:24:36.840
<v Speaker 4>Nobody wins there.

0:24:36.920 --> 0:24:41.480
<v Speaker 12>Nobody wins there. So what happens along the gradient of outcomes.

0:24:41.560 --> 0:24:43.560
<v Speaker 12>Let's dial it back and say, okay, what if it's

0:24:43.560 --> 0:24:46.080
<v Speaker 12>not a hot war. What if China just imposes a

0:24:46.080 --> 0:24:50.240
<v Speaker 12>blockade on Taiwan and asserts its authority through the Taiwan

0:24:50.280 --> 0:24:54.200
<v Speaker 12>straight preventing cargo from flowing through. That's still dense global

0:24:54.200 --> 0:24:58.280
<v Speaker 12>growth by about five percent. Right, So it's the sort

0:24:58.280 --> 0:25:00.440
<v Speaker 12>of thing where now it becomes a little bit more

0:25:00.520 --> 0:25:04.359
<v Speaker 12>economically viable. The deterrence, now we're not talking about a

0:25:04.440 --> 0:25:10.560
<v Speaker 12>sort of nuclear type deterrence, a mutually assured economic destruction

0:25:11.119 --> 0:25:14.560
<v Speaker 12>like we were contemplating during the Cold War. Instead, we're

0:25:14.560 --> 0:25:18.520
<v Speaker 12>talking about more like regional skirmishes or something that's more

0:25:18.560 --> 0:25:21.200
<v Speaker 12>akin to a proxy war during the Cold War. Five

0:25:21.240 --> 0:25:25.480
<v Speaker 12>point three percent percentage points of global GDP is nothing

0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:28.439
<v Speaker 12>to sneeze at, but it's a little bit more of

0:25:28.480 --> 0:25:32.800
<v Speaker 12>a realistic expectation, and so it does put something alike

0:25:33.440 --> 0:25:36.080
<v Speaker 12>China asserting its authority in the South China. See, it

0:25:36.119 --> 0:25:37.320
<v Speaker 12>makes it a little bit more viable.

0:25:37.480 --> 0:25:39.280
<v Speaker 2>Hey, we want to kind of go around the world

0:25:39.280 --> 0:25:40.520
<v Speaker 2>in the time that we have left with you, and

0:25:40.520 --> 0:25:41.920
<v Speaker 2>you're going to hang out with us for a little

0:25:41.960 --> 0:25:44.760
<v Speaker 2>bit until the end of trading here. So we're looking

0:25:44.840 --> 0:25:48.800
<v Speaker 2>forward to that. But Stuart, the Middle East right now

0:25:49.000 --> 0:25:54.720
<v Speaker 2>and the build up of resources from the United States

0:25:54.800 --> 0:25:56.360
<v Speaker 2>in the Middle East. We talked about some of those

0:25:56.359 --> 0:26:00.160
<v Speaker 2>headlines earlier this week. There's a section in here called

0:26:00.200 --> 0:26:01.879
<v Speaker 2>the one hundred and eight dollars oil War. How the

0:26:01.920 --> 0:26:05.439
<v Speaker 2>Middle East could crash the world economy. How does that happen?

0:26:05.880 --> 0:26:08.800
<v Speaker 12>Well, it's so interesting because we think about North American

0:26:08.960 --> 0:26:12.439
<v Speaker 12>energy independence and we think that, okay, well, maybe the

0:26:12.440 --> 0:26:14.760
<v Speaker 12>Middle East doesn't play as much of a role as

0:26:14.800 --> 0:26:18.520
<v Speaker 12>it did in global economics let's say two decades ago.

0:26:18.880 --> 0:26:22.199
<v Speaker 12>But if we think about energy consumption and where the

0:26:22.320 --> 0:26:25.800
<v Speaker 12>energy is produced that ends up getting consumed globally, the

0:26:25.800 --> 0:26:28.960
<v Speaker 12>Middle East is still a major actor. Still about fifteen

0:26:29.000 --> 0:26:32.439
<v Speaker 12>percent of global energy production is initially sourced from the

0:26:32.440 --> 0:26:34.440
<v Speaker 12>Middle East. That's the same as what we saw in

0:26:34.480 --> 0:26:37.359
<v Speaker 12>the early seventies, right, So the Middle East still the

0:26:37.720 --> 0:26:40.800
<v Speaker 12>key player globally when it comes to energy production and

0:26:40.880 --> 0:26:41.600
<v Speaker 12>energy consumption.

0:26:41.760 --> 0:26:43.760
<v Speaker 2>Not the US US.

0:26:43.400 --> 0:26:47.720
<v Speaker 12>Matters a lot, and it and certainly for our standard

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:50.200
<v Speaker 12>of living, which was a phrase that mattered a lot

0:26:50.280 --> 0:26:52.479
<v Speaker 12>during the Bush Hour. For our standard of living here

0:26:52.480 --> 0:26:54.720
<v Speaker 12>in the United States, the Middle East is a little

0:26:54.720 --> 0:26:57.680
<v Speaker 12>bit less relevant. But globally, the Middle East is as

0:26:57.720 --> 0:27:00.960
<v Speaker 12>relevant today as it was even in the early nineteen seventies.

0:27:01.400 --> 0:27:06.680
<v Speaker 12>If we think about where conflict can arise, the places

0:27:06.720 --> 0:27:09.479
<v Speaker 12>that are in control of oil are the places that

0:27:09.520 --> 0:27:12.000
<v Speaker 12>matter most. So the conflict in Israel and Gaza didn't

0:27:12.000 --> 0:27:14.080
<v Speaker 12>matter as much as let's say, the US sending an

0:27:14.080 --> 0:27:17.320
<v Speaker 12>aircraft carrier toward the Strait of Horror moves for a

0:27:17.320 --> 0:27:18.679
<v Speaker 12>potential conflict with Iran.

0:27:19.320 --> 0:27:22.760
<v Speaker 2>Could what's happening in Venezuela change this equation. We just

0:27:22.800 --> 0:27:25.800
<v Speaker 2>heard from Chris Wright, the Energy Secretary. He was in

0:27:26.119 --> 0:27:28.560
<v Speaker 2>he's in Venezuela with an Marie hort Dern. They're talking

0:27:28.560 --> 0:27:30.920
<v Speaker 2>about the opportunity for US oil companies there. He said

0:27:30.960 --> 0:27:34.439
<v Speaker 2>he will not the US will not guarantee security. But

0:27:34.880 --> 0:27:38.440
<v Speaker 2>it seems like this the administration in Venezuela is receptive

0:27:38.480 --> 0:27:42.359
<v Speaker 2>to US company's increasing output there. Does that change the equation?

0:27:43.160 --> 0:27:46.360
<v Speaker 12>Well, so let's just put orders of magnitude on everything, okay, right,

0:27:46.440 --> 0:27:50.240
<v Speaker 12>So middle are big reserves, They are pretty big reserves.

0:27:50.320 --> 0:27:53.720
<v Speaker 12>But only about ramping up Venezuela production to where it was,

0:27:53.840 --> 0:27:57.119
<v Speaker 12>let's say before the Chaves era, would just add about

0:27:57.200 --> 0:28:01.119
<v Speaker 12>one and a half percentage points to global oil supply. Yeah, right,

0:28:01.160 --> 0:28:02.800
<v Speaker 12>So that's just one and a half percentage points we're

0:28:02.800 --> 0:28:05.199
<v Speaker 12>talking about fifteen percent. Coming from the.

0:28:05.200 --> 0:28:07.320
<v Speaker 3>Middle East doesn't move the needle in the same way.

0:28:07.280 --> 0:28:08.960
<v Speaker 12>Right, So it doesn't move the needle in the same

0:28:09.000 --> 0:28:12.919
<v Speaker 12>way when we think though about regional trade alliances. It

0:28:12.960 --> 0:28:17.280
<v Speaker 12>again creates a sort of hemispheric independence from the Middle East. Already,

0:28:17.320 --> 0:28:20.639
<v Speaker 12>the Western hemisphere is relatively insulated from the goings on

0:28:20.680 --> 0:28:23.320
<v Speaker 12>in the Middle East, but bringing that additional supply online

0:28:23.359 --> 0:28:25.679
<v Speaker 12>from Venezuela would do good in the Western Hemisphere.

0:28:26.040 --> 0:28:27.879
<v Speaker 3>All right, Stud's going to stay with us because we

0:28:27.920 --> 0:28:30.240
<v Speaker 3>want tout broaden out our conversation even more and ad

0:28:30.560 --> 0:28:32.240
<v Speaker 3>a really interesting voice to it as well.

0:28:32.400 --> 0:28:34.000
<v Speaker 2>So I want to bring in Steve Moore. He's the

0:28:34.040 --> 0:28:36.840
<v Speaker 2>co founder of the nonprofit Unleashed Prosperity. He's a former

0:28:36.840 --> 0:28:40.280
<v Speaker 2>economic and senior at policy advisor to President Trump in

0:28:40.320 --> 0:28:42.680
<v Speaker 2>twenty sixteen and twenty twenty four. He served as Chief

0:28:42.720 --> 0:28:45.680
<v Speaker 2>Economists and Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation for

0:28:45.720 --> 0:28:48.080
<v Speaker 2>twelve years. He's the author of a couple books, including

0:28:48.080 --> 0:28:51.240
<v Speaker 2>Trumpanomics Inside the America First Planned to Revive Our Economy

0:28:51.240 --> 0:28:54.040
<v Speaker 2>in twenty eighteen and more recently twenty twenty four, The

0:28:54.080 --> 0:28:57.600
<v Speaker 2>Trump Economic Miracle. And then in twenty nineteen, President Trump

0:28:57.680 --> 0:28:59.960
<v Speaker 2>selected Steve Moore for the Federal Reserve Board of Governor

0:29:00.160 --> 0:29:01.960
<v Speaker 2>more ultimately withdrew from that.

0:29:02.280 --> 0:29:07.080
<v Speaker 3>All right. He is also the author of Trumpnomics, Inside

0:29:07.080 --> 0:29:10.360
<v Speaker 3>the America, First Plan to Revive Our Economy and The

0:29:10.400 --> 0:29:12.320
<v Speaker 3>Trump Economic Miracle. I think you said that, but we

0:29:12.400 --> 0:29:14.680
<v Speaker 3>always say it again. So there's a lot going on

0:29:14.720 --> 0:29:17.120
<v Speaker 3>Steve joining us from Washington, d C. Steve, it's good

0:29:17.120 --> 0:29:21.320
<v Speaker 3>to have you here. Bloomberg Economics US economist Canada economist

0:29:21.320 --> 0:29:24.360
<v Speaker 3>Stuart Paul is also with us. You know, we're talking

0:29:24.360 --> 0:29:26.000
<v Speaker 3>about a lot of issues, and it does feel like

0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:27.920
<v Speaker 3>when we think about what's going on in the world,

0:29:28.000 --> 0:29:32.200
<v Speaker 3>geopolitics largely at play in a big way. We're trying

0:29:32.200 --> 0:29:35.720
<v Speaker 3>to assess the different trade deals, the different alliances. Ste

0:29:35.960 --> 0:29:39.040
<v Speaker 3>just laying out if we had problems, certainly in Taiwan

0:29:40.080 --> 0:29:42.880
<v Speaker 3>or in the area, in terms of what that could be,

0:29:42.920 --> 0:29:45.560
<v Speaker 3>it could be a ten trillion dollar global economic hit.

0:29:45.600 --> 0:29:48.960
<v Speaker 3>These are big important things. The world though, is changing.

0:29:49.320 --> 0:29:51.680
<v Speaker 3>What do you assess when it comes to some of

0:29:51.720 --> 0:29:55.640
<v Speaker 3>these global alliances, trade or other and how that could

0:29:55.680 --> 0:30:00.880
<v Speaker 3>impact the global economy and the US economy? That for me, Yes,

0:30:01.000 --> 0:30:01.800
<v Speaker 3>that's for you.

0:30:02.480 --> 0:30:03.200
<v Speaker 6>So uh.

0:30:03.480 --> 0:30:05.200
<v Speaker 13>I mean, let's start with the fact that, you know,

0:30:05.280 --> 0:30:08.160
<v Speaker 13>we have a very very strong economy right now in

0:30:08.200 --> 0:30:12.520
<v Speaker 13>the US. It's it's all the all the economic make

0:30:12.560 --> 0:30:17.160
<v Speaker 13>indicators are pointing north. We have declining inflation, we got

0:30:17.720 --> 0:30:21.600
<v Speaker 13>really good job report yesterday. We are seeing, you know,

0:30:21.760 --> 0:30:24.920
<v Speaker 13>a booming stock market over the last a year or so.

0:30:25.600 --> 0:30:29.360
<v Speaker 13>We're seeing real wage increases for workers. So it's about

0:30:29.360 --> 0:30:31.160
<v Speaker 13>as good a picture as you can get right now.

0:30:31.200 --> 0:30:33.480
<v Speaker 13>And you know Trump was right when he went to

0:30:33.680 --> 0:30:36.440
<v Speaker 13>Davos and said, if you want to grow, because we're

0:30:36.480 --> 0:30:40.240
<v Speaker 13>growing much faster than virtually any of our competitor.

0:30:39.760 --> 0:30:41.560
<v Speaker 6>Countries, do what we're doing.

0:30:41.840 --> 0:30:49.360
<v Speaker 13>Promote lower tax rates, promote energy production in your home country, deregulate,

0:30:49.440 --> 0:30:52.520
<v Speaker 13>and don't forget that's a huge, huge burst to the

0:30:52.560 --> 0:30:56.320
<v Speaker 13>economy in terms of increasing the productivity of our of

0:30:56.360 --> 0:31:01.760
<v Speaker 13>our businesses. So I feel very confident about the economy

0:31:01.800 --> 0:31:04.360
<v Speaker 13>in twenty twenty six. I think that I don't think

0:31:04.360 --> 0:31:06.760
<v Speaker 13>we're going to see the fifteen percent growth that Donald

0:31:06.760 --> 0:31:08.440
<v Speaker 13>Trump said we could see, but I think we could

0:31:08.560 --> 0:31:13.200
<v Speaker 13>easily grow at three, four or five percent, and those

0:31:13.240 --> 0:31:14.959
<v Speaker 13>are very positive numbers.

0:31:15.240 --> 0:31:17.240
<v Speaker 12>One of the things that I'm thinking about, mister Moore,

0:31:17.320 --> 0:31:20.520
<v Speaker 12>is that there's sort of a reshuffling of a lot

0:31:20.560 --> 0:31:24.880
<v Speaker 12>of a reshuffling of the global commercial order. There's a

0:31:24.880 --> 0:31:30.280
<v Speaker 12>reshuffling of global alliances. There's a reshuffling of military alliances.

0:31:31.200 --> 0:31:36.240
<v Speaker 12>There's a reconsideration of tax policy, there's a reconsideration of

0:31:36.320 --> 0:31:40.760
<v Speaker 12>regulatory policy. Big structural changes that have a lot of

0:31:40.800 --> 0:31:41.520
<v Speaker 12>growing pains.

0:31:41.640 --> 0:31:41.800
<v Speaker 6>Yes.

0:31:42.120 --> 0:31:44.720
<v Speaker 12>On the other hand, you have the FED, you have

0:31:44.800 --> 0:31:48.800
<v Speaker 12>the President calling for interest rate cuts perhaps to smooth

0:31:48.840 --> 0:31:51.840
<v Speaker 12>over some of those growing pains. But all the data

0:31:51.880 --> 0:31:54.440
<v Speaker 12>that we're seeing so far that you're alluding to is

0:31:54.520 --> 0:31:57.880
<v Speaker 12>pointing to a relatively resilient US economy. Sure, we didn't

0:31:57.880 --> 0:31:59.640
<v Speaker 12>see a ton of job growth last year, but it

0:31:59.640 --> 0:32:03.280
<v Speaker 12>looks like kicking off twenty twenty six really strong. Where

0:32:03.320 --> 0:32:05.880
<v Speaker 12>do you think that these two different tensions, these two

0:32:05.880 --> 0:32:08.760
<v Speaker 12>different things end up shaking out. On the one hand,

0:32:08.800 --> 0:32:12.920
<v Speaker 12>we have really resilient economic activity right now, but there's

0:32:12.960 --> 0:32:16.840
<v Speaker 12>a lot of risk in the reshuffling of these major

0:32:17.520 --> 0:32:18.600
<v Speaker 12>structural factors.

0:32:19.840 --> 0:32:23.240
<v Speaker 13>Well, there's no question you're exactly right that Trump does

0:32:23.320 --> 0:32:25.840
<v Speaker 13>want to It has reshuffled the deck when it comes

0:32:25.920 --> 0:32:29.880
<v Speaker 13>to bother foreign policy and our trading policy. I'm much

0:32:29.920 --> 0:32:34.200
<v Speaker 13>more of a conventional Ronald Reagan free trader, and so

0:32:34.880 --> 0:32:37.400
<v Speaker 13>President Trump knows I don't always agree with him on

0:32:37.560 --> 0:32:41.240
<v Speaker 13>his trade policies. There's no question that when we had

0:32:41.600 --> 0:32:45.080
<v Speaker 13>the Liberation Day that that really royal markets and did

0:32:45.480 --> 0:32:52.320
<v Speaker 13>cause a temporary reduction in economic output. On the other hand,

0:32:53.000 --> 0:32:56.760
<v Speaker 13>the one thing that I try to let people understand

0:32:56.840 --> 0:33:00.360
<v Speaker 13>that don't necessarily understand how Trump operates. Is the guy

0:33:00.480 --> 0:33:03.720
<v Speaker 13>is a deal maker. That's an obvious point, and he

0:33:03.800 --> 0:33:06.280
<v Speaker 13>has the way I like to put it is, Look,

0:33:06.520 --> 0:33:09.320
<v Speaker 13>the global economy is pretty simple to understand. The United

0:33:09.360 --> 0:33:11.920
<v Speaker 13>States is the hub of the world economy and every

0:33:11.920 --> 0:33:15.000
<v Speaker 13>other country as a spoke, and that gives the United

0:33:15.080 --> 0:33:19.040
<v Speaker 13>States an enormous economic advantage, just as we are so

0:33:20.080 --> 0:33:23.240
<v Speaker 13>majorly benefited by the fact that we have the world reserve.

0:33:22.960 --> 0:33:24.040
<v Speaker 6>Currency and the dollar.

0:33:24.520 --> 0:33:27.280
<v Speaker 13>And so Trump is for the first president in my

0:33:27.320 --> 0:33:30.960
<v Speaker 13>lifetime that is sort of using flexing America's economic muscle

0:33:31.440 --> 0:33:33.920
<v Speaker 13>to force other countries to do things that are in

0:33:34.880 --> 0:33:37.040
<v Speaker 13>many cases of their own interests, but also in America's

0:33:37.040 --> 0:33:39.040
<v Speaker 13>interests as well. And so what I'm saying is that

0:33:39.480 --> 0:33:41.320
<v Speaker 13>I don't I'm not a big fan of the trade

0:33:41.760 --> 0:33:44.600
<v Speaker 13>tariffs that Trump is put into effect, but some of

0:33:44.640 --> 0:33:48.360
<v Speaker 13>these trade deals that he has delivered, But we don't

0:33:48.400 --> 0:33:50.400
<v Speaker 13>know for sure yet because it's still early in the game,

0:33:50.440 --> 0:33:53.840
<v Speaker 13>but it looks like if Trump is even nearly right

0:33:53.880 --> 0:33:55.640
<v Speaker 13>on this, that they will bring a lot of capital

0:33:55.640 --> 0:33:58.680
<v Speaker 13>investment in the United States, will see lower terriffts applied

0:33:58.720 --> 0:34:02.160
<v Speaker 13>on American manufact during and agricultural products and that will

0:34:02.160 --> 0:34:03.880
<v Speaker 13>only make America strong.

0:34:04.680 --> 0:34:06.600
<v Speaker 2>You mentioned the president is a deal maker. One of

0:34:06.640 --> 0:34:08.239
<v Speaker 2>the deals that he made in his first term was

0:34:08.280 --> 0:34:11.960
<v Speaker 2>the US MCA Trade Pact. Our team reporting that the

0:34:12.000 --> 0:34:15.359
<v Speaker 2>President is privately a musing about exiting that trade pact,

0:34:15.440 --> 0:34:19.120
<v Speaker 2>according to people familiar with the matter. Earlier today, we

0:34:19.280 --> 0:34:21.640
<v Speaker 2>heard from White House trade advisor peat In Navarro. He

0:34:21.680 --> 0:34:25.279
<v Speaker 2>said the North American Trade Pact has significant flaws. He

0:34:25.400 --> 0:34:28.400
<v Speaker 2>expressed worries about China shipping goods through Mexico and Canada

0:34:28.440 --> 0:34:31.120
<v Speaker 2>should the US get out of the US MCA.

0:34:33.080 --> 0:34:34.359
<v Speaker 6>Now, I'm a big fan of that.

0:34:34.680 --> 0:34:36.239
<v Speaker 13>In fact, I mean I was a big fan of

0:34:36.320 --> 0:34:40.320
<v Speaker 13>NAFTA when it was first talked about on O'ronald Reagan,

0:34:40.360 --> 0:34:42.800
<v Speaker 13>then then signed into law by Bill Clinton, a Democrat.

0:34:43.400 --> 0:34:46.680
<v Speaker 13>It's been enormously advantaged to the whole North American continent.

0:34:47.160 --> 0:34:50.400
<v Speaker 13>It's critically important that we trade with Mexico because for

0:34:50.480 --> 0:34:54.600
<v Speaker 13>many reasons, we want to make sure that Mexico remains

0:34:55.080 --> 0:34:59.280
<v Speaker 13>politically stable, and we want to see higher living standards

0:34:59.320 --> 0:35:02.640
<v Speaker 13>in Mexico and Canada. Is a lot of people don't

0:35:02.680 --> 0:35:05.120
<v Speaker 13>realize by the way that Canada Mexico are our biggest

0:35:05.160 --> 0:35:08.880
<v Speaker 13>trading partners, not China, not Europe, but Canada, Mexico, Nory.

0:35:08.880 --> 0:35:10.440
<v Speaker 2>The Bloomberg audience know, Steve.

0:35:11.760 --> 0:35:12.400
<v Speaker 6>That's for sure.

0:35:12.760 --> 0:35:16.160
<v Speaker 13>So the well I was even surprised, frankly, when I

0:35:16.200 --> 0:35:18.279
<v Speaker 13>was looking at these statistics. I thought our trade with

0:35:18.400 --> 0:35:21.520
<v Speaker 13>China might might have been larger than Canada Mexico, but

0:35:21.560 --> 0:35:24.719
<v Speaker 13>it's not. And so look, you're talking to somebody who

0:35:24.760 --> 0:35:29.400
<v Speaker 13>is very much in favor of continuing free trade flows

0:35:29.400 --> 0:35:31.840
<v Speaker 13>between our three countries. Now it is I think Trump

0:35:31.880 --> 0:35:35.240
<v Speaker 13>has a legitimate complaint that if we have a free

0:35:35.280 --> 0:35:38.920
<v Speaker 13>trade deal with Canada Mexico, and then Canada Mexico are

0:35:38.960 --> 0:35:41.640
<v Speaker 13>bringing in goods from China, and then the China is

0:35:41.760 --> 0:35:43.719
<v Speaker 13>using them as a port of entry to bring in

0:35:43.760 --> 0:35:46.040
<v Speaker 13>things to the United States, that's a problem.

0:35:46.680 --> 0:35:49.080
<v Speaker 3>But are we doing that? I mean, that's I guess

0:35:49.080 --> 0:35:51.759
<v Speaker 3>we should know, you know, you know, we have to

0:35:51.800 --> 0:35:54.240
<v Speaker 3>be careful about what is said right to understand exaust

0:35:54.480 --> 0:35:58.600
<v Speaker 3>because I think Mexico and Canada understand the importance of

0:35:59.200 --> 0:36:02.000
<v Speaker 3>an ally the United States, and certainly when it comes

0:36:02.400 --> 0:36:07.279
<v Speaker 3>comes to China. What do you think, Steve, is the

0:36:07.400 --> 0:36:10.320
<v Speaker 3>damage though that is being done to the United States

0:36:10.760 --> 0:36:15.480
<v Speaker 3>on a global level because alliances, the EUS moving on,

0:36:15.680 --> 0:36:19.200
<v Speaker 3>China's moving on, and I do wonder that those aren't

0:36:19.239 --> 0:36:23.719
<v Speaker 3>quick fixes necessarily. Are we being kind of hurt longer

0:36:23.840 --> 0:36:26.799
<v Speaker 3>term by some of these you know, former allies or

0:36:26.840 --> 0:36:31.120
<v Speaker 3>allies still in name, but also they're looking elsewhere because

0:36:31.120 --> 0:36:34.600
<v Speaker 3>they don't love the volatility and instability of this White House.

0:36:35.080 --> 0:36:36.240
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, that's a great question.

0:36:36.440 --> 0:36:38.000
<v Speaker 13>And the last thing we want to do is send

0:36:38.040 --> 0:36:40.799
<v Speaker 13>these other nations running into the arms of China. I

0:36:40.840 --> 0:36:44.920
<v Speaker 13>don't quite get the logic of that, by the way,

0:36:44.960 --> 0:36:47.160
<v Speaker 13>on the part of the Europeans who've really been saying, well,

0:36:47.160 --> 0:36:49.200
<v Speaker 13>maybe we'll try it with China. I mean, my goodness,

0:36:49.200 --> 0:36:52.160
<v Speaker 13>se there's the same countries for the last fifteen years

0:36:52.200 --> 0:36:54.399
<v Speaker 13>have talked about, you know, climate change being the most

0:36:54.400 --> 0:36:57.160
<v Speaker 13>important issue on the planet, and here they are running

0:36:57.160 --> 0:36:59.160
<v Speaker 13>to the country that's the biggest polluter in the world.

0:36:59.239 --> 0:37:03.120
<v Speaker 13>So that's a little hypocritical. But look, we want to

0:37:03.160 --> 0:37:04.960
<v Speaker 13>trade with Europe, we want to trade with Canada.

0:37:05.680 --> 0:37:08.839
<v Speaker 3>I think it's do we need to do We need

0:37:08.880 --> 0:37:11.680
<v Speaker 3>to to keep the US economy you talked about earlier. Yeah,

0:37:11.840 --> 0:37:13.880
<v Speaker 3>that this economy is doing well, don't we need.

0:37:14.840 --> 0:37:16.960
<v Speaker 6>Yes, trade is critically important here.

0:37:17.480 --> 0:37:20.000
<v Speaker 13>I believe that, you know, in fact, the one thing

0:37:20.040 --> 0:37:23.080
<v Speaker 13>I would say that I disagree with Trump about him

0:37:23.080 --> 0:37:25.560
<v Speaker 13>he thinks that the free trade regime over the last

0:37:25.600 --> 0:37:29.480
<v Speaker 13>fifty years has been negative for the US. And my

0:37:29.560 --> 0:37:31.840
<v Speaker 13>own opinion is I don't think there's any country in

0:37:31.880 --> 0:37:34.920
<v Speaker 13>the world that has benefited more from free trade than

0:37:34.920 --> 0:37:37.760
<v Speaker 13>the United States. I mean, my goodness, when I first

0:37:37.760 --> 0:37:42.279
<v Speaker 13>came to Washington in nineteen eighty two, eighty three, the

0:37:42.360 --> 0:37:45.080
<v Speaker 13>Dow Jones was at a thousand. Now we've got the

0:37:45.160 --> 0:37:47.600
<v Speaker 13>Dow Jones at fifty thousand. I mean, we have so

0:37:47.920 --> 0:37:51.000
<v Speaker 13>dominated the world economy in terms of the competitiveness of

0:37:51.040 --> 0:37:54.520
<v Speaker 13>our businesses. No other country, not even China, comes close.

0:37:54.600 --> 0:37:56.880
<v Speaker 13>I mean, our our net worth as a country in

0:37:56.920 --> 0:37:58.880
<v Speaker 13>terms of our businesses are almost as large as the

0:37:58.880 --> 0:38:01.600
<v Speaker 13>rest of the world comes about. Yeah, and that's largely

0:38:01.680 --> 0:38:05.200
<v Speaker 13>because not not just just but that means that trade

0:38:05.239 --> 0:38:08.360
<v Speaker 13>has actually benefit of the United States, not hurt our workers.

0:38:08.480 --> 0:38:11.359
<v Speaker 12>As an economic competitor. I'm sure the US has been

0:38:11.360 --> 0:38:13.560
<v Speaker 12>a tour to for us. If you ask somebody like JD.

0:38:13.719 --> 0:38:17.360
<v Speaker 12>Vance whether it's been worth the toll that it's taken,

0:38:17.440 --> 0:38:19.359
<v Speaker 12>Let's say, on the rust Belt. It seems like he's

0:38:19.360 --> 0:38:21.840
<v Speaker 12>a little bit unsure. And Scott Best and of course

0:38:21.880 --> 0:38:24.719
<v Speaker 12>famously has the line that the American dream is not

0:38:24.840 --> 0:38:28.680
<v Speaker 12>having cheap imports and cheap labor flooding the country. Instead,

0:38:28.719 --> 0:38:32.200
<v Speaker 12>it's about, you know, having having a job and building

0:38:32.200 --> 0:38:34.960
<v Speaker 12>a future. We were just talking about housing affordability. Having

0:38:35.000 --> 0:38:36.759
<v Speaker 12>a stable job and being able to afford a home

0:38:37.760 --> 0:38:39.719
<v Speaker 12>one of the things though, that I think about in

0:38:39.800 --> 0:38:42.719
<v Speaker 12>terms of free trade. So at a minimum, it seems

0:38:42.760 --> 0:38:44.680
<v Speaker 12>like there's at least a questioning in the White House

0:38:45.000 --> 0:38:48.600
<v Speaker 12>whether free trade has truly benefited us. What I'd like

0:38:48.640 --> 0:38:51.239
<v Speaker 12>to hear your opinion on is whether free trade for

0:38:51.360 --> 0:38:55.200
<v Speaker 12>manufactured goods is different, let's say, than free trade for

0:38:55.600 --> 0:38:58.960
<v Speaker 12>input inputs to production. Like we definitely need graphite, we

0:38:59.000 --> 0:39:02.120
<v Speaker 12>definitely need nickelsthium, copper, things that we don't necessarily have

0:39:02.280 --> 0:39:05.600
<v Speaker 12>under our feet. Is that different to some extent than

0:39:06.080 --> 0:39:08.880
<v Speaker 12>trade for cheap manufactured goods that the White House seems

0:39:08.880 --> 0:39:09.920
<v Speaker 12>to be so upset about.

0:39:11.000 --> 0:39:13.319
<v Speaker 13>Well, let's put a little bit political angle on this,

0:39:13.440 --> 0:39:15.480
<v Speaker 13>because look, as I said before, I think this is

0:39:15.520 --> 0:39:18.880
<v Speaker 13>a strong economy, but a lot of the American people

0:39:18.920 --> 0:39:20.800
<v Speaker 13>don't agree with me, Right now if you look at

0:39:20.960 --> 0:39:23.920
<v Speaker 13>the polling, you know, middle class Americans have a lot

0:39:23.920 --> 0:39:26.560
<v Speaker 13>of anxiety right there. Now, some of it is many

0:39:26.600 --> 0:39:28.520
<v Speaker 13>people just don't like Trump, but some of it is,

0:39:29.160 --> 0:39:31.120
<v Speaker 13>you know, people aren't feeling the love, so to speak,

0:39:31.160 --> 0:39:34.360
<v Speaker 13>and they're not feeling the positive effects of the kind.

0:39:34.160 --> 0:39:37.120
<v Speaker 6>Of statistics that I mentioned. And so.

0:39:39.000 --> 0:39:42.640
<v Speaker 13>That's a political problem because we do objectively see a

0:39:42.680 --> 0:39:45.520
<v Speaker 13>lot of things moving in the right direction. But you're right,

0:39:45.560 --> 0:39:47.840
<v Speaker 13>you go to these, you know, towns in the Midwest.

0:39:47.880 --> 0:39:50.680
<v Speaker 13>I grew up in the Midwest, and they're not feeling

0:39:50.760 --> 0:39:52.680
<v Speaker 13>like it's a sort of shared prosperity.

0:39:52.960 --> 0:39:55.759
<v Speaker 3>Well is it because they're not? For Steve, is it

0:39:55.800 --> 0:39:58.200
<v Speaker 3>not that they're not feeling it. It's the reality of it.

0:39:58.200 --> 0:39:59.600
<v Speaker 3>It isn't a shared prosperity.

0:40:01.360 --> 0:40:01.920
<v Speaker 6>Well maybe not.

0:40:02.160 --> 0:40:05.080
<v Speaker 13>I mean, although even the statistics show that, you know,

0:40:05.200 --> 0:40:08.520
<v Speaker 13>the incomes for even the lowest income groups have been rising.

0:40:09.280 --> 0:40:12.719
<v Speaker 13>And you can tell I'm kind of flummings by this

0:40:12.840 --> 0:40:16.719
<v Speaker 13>because it does look from the objective evidence like things

0:40:16.719 --> 0:40:19.160
<v Speaker 13>are getting better. But there are there are you know,

0:40:19.400 --> 0:40:23.200
<v Speaker 13>certainly patches of the country that have not felt the

0:40:24.719 --> 0:40:27.480
<v Speaker 13>kind of prosperity that other parts of the country, and

0:40:27.520 --> 0:40:29.920
<v Speaker 13>So that's why it applies to manufacturing jobs, because a

0:40:29.920 --> 0:40:33.000
<v Speaker 13>lot of Americans believe, you know, we're losing a lot

0:40:33.040 --> 0:40:36.680
<v Speaker 13>of those old, you know, nineteen seventies, eighties, nineties jobs

0:40:37.120 --> 0:40:39.960
<v Speaker 13>that that gave people a middle class living.

0:40:40.160 --> 0:40:42.400
<v Speaker 6>Now the prob if I may, I mean, what's.

0:40:42.200 --> 0:40:45.920
<v Speaker 13>Sort of interesting about this subject, though, is that many

0:40:45.960 --> 0:40:50.160
<v Speaker 13>of those sort of manufacturing jobs won't even exist in

0:40:50.360 --> 0:40:53.520
<v Speaker 13>twenty years. I mean, we are moving into a new

0:40:53.600 --> 0:40:57.600
<v Speaker 13>era of artificial intelligence or robotics. It's you know that

0:40:57.920 --> 0:41:02.480
<v Speaker 13>just are changing so dramatically and so rapidly, the way

0:41:02.520 --> 0:41:04.920
<v Speaker 13>we work, the way our businesses worked, the way we play.

0:41:05.280 --> 0:41:07.120
<v Speaker 13>I mean, how many trucking jobs will we have in

0:41:07.160 --> 0:41:07.760
<v Speaker 13>twenty years?

0:41:07.920 --> 0:41:08.359
<v Speaker 6>Not many?

0:41:09.360 --> 0:41:12.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, maybe, you know, if the tech there and if

0:41:13.000 --> 0:41:16.000
<v Speaker 2>the legislation gets there. But I kind of see that happening.

0:41:16.160 --> 0:41:18.320
<v Speaker 2>We're speaking with Steve Moore. He's the co founder of

0:41:18.320 --> 0:41:22.320
<v Speaker 2>in Leashed Prosperity's a former Trump economic advisor. He joins

0:41:22.400 --> 0:41:25.400
<v Speaker 2>us this afternoon from Washington, DC. Also joining us to

0:41:25.440 --> 0:41:29.760
<v Speaker 2>Stuart paul Us and Canada economists for Bloomberg Economics. Steve,

0:41:30.000 --> 0:41:32.520
<v Speaker 2>the president is trying to bolster the shrinking US coal

0:41:32.560 --> 0:41:34.880
<v Speaker 2>power industry he'll use one hundred and seventy five million

0:41:34.920 --> 0:41:38.879
<v Speaker 2>dollars in government funds, tax payer money to upgrade six

0:41:38.960 --> 0:41:41.520
<v Speaker 2>plants and have the Defense Department by power from others.

0:41:41.600 --> 0:41:44.080
<v Speaker 2>We had an interesting conversation with our colleague Will Wade,

0:41:44.080 --> 0:41:47.440
<v Speaker 2>who covers energy here and power at Bloomberg News, and

0:41:47.480 --> 0:41:50.360
<v Speaker 2>we asked him why the US moved away from cole

0:41:50.400 --> 0:41:52.320
<v Speaker 2>and I was expecting an answer from him to be honest,

0:41:52.320 --> 0:41:55.480
<v Speaker 2>that it was about, you know, environmental reasons. But he

0:41:55.560 --> 0:41:58.319
<v Speaker 2>had one word. He said, money. It's cheaper to use

0:41:58.400 --> 0:42:02.000
<v Speaker 2>natural gas and have natural gas fired power plants. Is

0:42:02.040 --> 0:42:04.719
<v Speaker 2>this a bad move by the Trump administration because it's

0:42:04.800 --> 0:42:08.759
<v Speaker 2>it kind of goes against the free market forces. Well,

0:42:08.760 --> 0:42:12.120
<v Speaker 2>that's a tough question too, because it's also intertwined into politics.

0:42:12.200 --> 0:42:16.319
<v Speaker 2>You know, the the coal is still a fairly important

0:42:17.200 --> 0:42:19.280
<v Speaker 2>source of our energy, and we get much more energy

0:42:19.280 --> 0:42:22.040
<v Speaker 2>from coal than we do from green energy, for example,

0:42:22.200 --> 0:42:26.000
<v Speaker 2>not that muchmore. We get about sixteen percent from coal,

0:42:26.440 --> 0:42:28.399
<v Speaker 2>and then if you take all renewables together, you get

0:42:28.400 --> 0:42:33.120
<v Speaker 2>twenty percent. I'm not sure about those stats, but but

0:42:33.280 --> 0:42:36.920
<v Speaker 2>the point is that coal is still it's basically, you know,

0:42:37.280 --> 0:42:39.600
<v Speaker 2>been an important part of our energy mix.

0:42:39.760 --> 0:42:43.320
<v Speaker 6>I happen to believe that we should use all.

0:42:43.239 --> 0:42:48.640
<v Speaker 13>Forms of our power that are competitive, and coal was

0:42:48.719 --> 0:42:52.720
<v Speaker 13>made uncompetitive in no small part because of the regulations.

0:42:52.719 --> 0:42:55.839
<v Speaker 13>But we also all want clean air as well. But

0:42:55.880 --> 0:42:57.920
<v Speaker 13>I look, I'm not going to count out coal. I

0:42:57.960 --> 0:43:01.200
<v Speaker 13>don't want government subsidies to call I certainly. I think

0:43:01.239 --> 0:43:03.560
<v Speaker 13>I'm glad that Trump is getting rid of the Remember

0:43:03.600 --> 0:43:07.160
<v Speaker 13>those green the green movement grew only because they were

0:43:07.560 --> 0:43:10.480
<v Speaker 13>lapping up, you know, tens and tens of billions of

0:43:10.520 --> 0:43:15.520
<v Speaker 13>dollars from tax payers. They just weren't competitive. So look,

0:43:15.560 --> 0:43:17.520
<v Speaker 13>my view is very simple on the future of energy.

0:43:17.520 --> 0:43:19.880
<v Speaker 13>It's the two wins. It's natural gas and nuclear power,

0:43:20.200 --> 0:43:22.320
<v Speaker 13>and ultimately those are going to be I think the

0:43:23.000 --> 0:43:26.520
<v Speaker 13>fuels of the future. And that means that in the

0:43:26.520 --> 0:43:28.359
<v Speaker 13>good news about that is both of those are very

0:43:28.360 --> 0:43:29.360
<v Speaker 13>clean burning fuels.

0:43:29.480 --> 0:43:32.120
<v Speaker 12>Is it possible to have your nukes without subjecties?

0:43:34.160 --> 0:43:37.680
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, that's what without news? That is a good question.

0:43:38.239 --> 0:43:40.080
<v Speaker 6>I don't know the answer to that. I mean, you

0:43:40.120 --> 0:43:41.120
<v Speaker 6>may know better than I do.

0:43:41.239 --> 0:43:44.360
<v Speaker 13>But but because nuclear power has been subsidized. But I

0:43:44.360 --> 0:43:47.400
<v Speaker 13>think I'm going to go with with the optimistic forecast

0:43:47.520 --> 0:43:52.120
<v Speaker 13>that we will we will see nuclear power becoming more

0:43:52.200 --> 0:43:58.600
<v Speaker 13>efficient and more productive and competitive without any government subsidies.

0:43:59.000 --> 0:44:01.600
<v Speaker 3>Hey, least times to eve you were with us. This

0:44:01.719 --> 0:44:03.040
<v Speaker 3>was at the end of the year, before we knew

0:44:03.080 --> 0:44:05.759
<v Speaker 3>the President would pick Kevin Warsh as his nomination to

0:44:05.840 --> 0:44:08.480
<v Speaker 3>the Federal Reserve. Is this a good choice in your view?

0:44:08.520 --> 0:44:12.040
<v Speaker 3>Does this ensure that there will be an independent FED?

0:44:12.080 --> 0:44:14.800
<v Speaker 3>And I'm assuming you think an independent FED is important?

0:44:16.280 --> 0:44:16.520
<v Speaker 6>Yeah.

0:44:16.560 --> 0:44:20.360
<v Speaker 13>Look, I told the President early on in this process

0:44:20.440 --> 0:44:23.919
<v Speaker 13>that I thought that the three people I thought would

0:44:23.960 --> 0:44:26.640
<v Speaker 13>be the best for that position, where Kevin has Kevin

0:44:26.640 --> 0:44:29.439
<v Speaker 13>Worsh or Outhro Laffer, And so I'm glad he picked

0:44:29.480 --> 0:44:34.080
<v Speaker 13>somebody off of that list. I am incredibly excited about

0:44:34.480 --> 0:44:39.759
<v Speaker 13>Kevin Worsh. He will be independent, and he's a smart guy.

0:44:39.800 --> 0:44:44.120
<v Speaker 13>He understands monetary policy. He understands the importance of keeping

0:44:44.360 --> 0:44:46.839
<v Speaker 13>The most important thing that FED needs to do right now,

0:44:46.880 --> 0:44:50.360
<v Speaker 13>in my humble opinion, is to keep the dollar strong

0:44:50.400 --> 0:44:53.200
<v Speaker 13>and stable. And by the way, Trump isn't always in

0:44:53.239 --> 0:44:56.160
<v Speaker 13>favor of a strong dollar. Sometimes he favors a weaker dollar.

0:44:56.480 --> 0:44:58.840
<v Speaker 13>I disagree with them on that. I think we clearly

0:44:58.880 --> 0:45:00.839
<v Speaker 13>benefit from having a st under dollar. And by the way,

0:45:00.840 --> 0:45:03.120
<v Speaker 13>if you want to afford. You want to have things

0:45:03.160 --> 0:45:05.239
<v Speaker 13>more affordable, you want the dollar to be stronger and

0:45:05.280 --> 0:45:08.520
<v Speaker 13>not weaker. So I think he's got all the right

0:45:08.600 --> 0:45:13.919
<v Speaker 13>economic instincts and I think he will he will once

0:45:14.000 --> 0:45:16.840
<v Speaker 13>the Democrats on the you know, because the big committee

0:45:16.880 --> 0:45:20.000
<v Speaker 13>hearings will be coming up for his Senate approval, and

0:45:20.239 --> 0:45:21.560
<v Speaker 13>I think he will do very well with that.

0:45:21.600 --> 0:45:23.440
<v Speaker 6>I think he will be confirmed and.

0:45:23.440 --> 0:45:26.040
<v Speaker 3>It'll be an independent fed just quickly.

0:45:26.840 --> 0:45:29.040
<v Speaker 6>I hope. So I think it will look.

0:45:29.320 --> 0:45:33.000
<v Speaker 13>I think he's not a political guy for the most part,

0:45:33.080 --> 0:45:36.680
<v Speaker 13>and so I mean he's a Republican. But I've known

0:45:37.040 --> 0:45:40.839
<v Speaker 13>Kevin worsh for many years and he will and he's

0:45:40.840 --> 0:45:44.160
<v Speaker 13>a real professional, and I can't think of any any

0:45:44.200 --> 0:45:46.520
<v Speaker 13>better really, truly, I think he was about the best

0:45:46.600 --> 0:45:47.360
<v Speaker 13>choice that we could have.

0:45:47.480 --> 0:45:47.759
<v Speaker 2>All right.

0:45:47.800 --> 0:45:50.680
<v Speaker 3>Stephen Moore, thank you so much, co founder on Leash Prosperity,

0:45:50.719 --> 0:45:53.920
<v Speaker 3>former Trump economic advisor joining us from the nation's capital.

0:45:54.000 --> 0:45:58.279
<v Speaker 3>Stutpaul still here in studio, part of our Bloomberg Economics team.

0:45:58.320 --> 0:46:00.000
<v Speaker 3>We're counting down to the clothes. Got about a minute.

0:46:00.080 --> 0:46:01.040
<v Speaker 3>Hear your thoughts on that.

0:46:01.600 --> 0:46:04.759
<v Speaker 12>Well, So I think that Kevin Warsh actually runs the

0:46:04.840 --> 0:46:07.000
<v Speaker 12>risk of being a little bit too political. I think

0:46:07.040 --> 0:46:11.640
<v Speaker 12>that when we saw an additional half a cut or

0:46:11.680 --> 0:46:14.560
<v Speaker 12>so priced in upon the announcement that he'd be the nominee,

0:46:14.600 --> 0:46:18.200
<v Speaker 12>I think that that was markets reconciling this fact that

0:46:18.239 --> 0:46:20.040
<v Speaker 12>there's going to be a little bit more of a

0:46:20.040 --> 0:46:23.000
<v Speaker 12>political charge to monetary policy if we were to see

0:46:23.000 --> 0:46:26.560
<v Speaker 12>somebody like Kevin Walsh. But the Senate Banking Committee members

0:46:26.680 --> 0:46:28.920
<v Speaker 12>know this to be true. That's why Senator Tom Tillis

0:46:29.000 --> 0:46:32.799
<v Speaker 12>is going to prevent that nomination from going forth until

0:46:32.840 --> 0:46:36.359
<v Speaker 12>we see the DOJ probe into the FED stopped, and

0:46:36.480 --> 0:46:39.839
<v Speaker 12>we'll see just how much President Trump is devoted to

0:46:40.000 --> 0:46:43.640
<v Speaker 12>Kevin Walsh as a nominee, because he would have to

0:46:43.640 --> 0:46:45.719
<v Speaker 12>direct the dj to stop the probe into the FED,

0:46:45.880 --> 0:46:47.560
<v Speaker 12>something that it doesn't sound like he's been willing to

0:46:47.560 --> 0:46:48.160
<v Speaker 12>do to this point.

0:46:48.280 --> 0:46:52.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we'll see what Tom Tillis and the Senate Finance

0:46:52.280 --> 0:46:55.520
<v Speaker 2>or Senate Banking Committee rather ends up doing. I do

0:46:55.600 --> 0:46:57.680
<v Speaker 2>want to point out I'm looking at the US Energy

0:46:57.680 --> 0:47:01.160
<v Speaker 2>Information Administration data for twenty twenty three. It's the most

0:47:01.160 --> 0:47:04.920
<v Speaker 2>recent data that's available in terms of total electricity generation

0:47:04.960 --> 0:47:06.360
<v Speaker 2>here in the US. Because we just had this debate

0:47:06.360 --> 0:47:09.480
<v Speaker 2>with Steve Moore, sixty percent comes from fossil fuels, sixteen

0:47:09.520 --> 0:47:12.360
<v Speaker 2>point two camp percent came from coal, and then renewables

0:47:12.400 --> 0:47:15.560
<v Speaker 2>accounted for twenty one point four percent of those. Of

0:47:15.600 --> 0:47:19.920
<v Speaker 2>that twenty one point four percent total generation, more than

0:47:19.960 --> 0:47:23.000
<v Speaker 2>ten percent came from wind power. Back then hydropower was

0:47:23.040 --> 0:47:24.799
<v Speaker 2>at five point seven and solar was at three point

0:47:24.880 --> 0:47:26.880
<v Speaker 2>nine percent. Yes, so we do have we do do

0:47:26.960 --> 0:47:28.760
<v Speaker 2>more renewables than cole.

0:47:28.960 --> 0:47:31.760
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, at least does a film that move good stuff

0:47:32.040 --> 0:47:34.879
<v Speaker 3>ster Paul, Thank you so much, Thank you really appreciate it.

0:47:35.080 --> 0:47:37.120
<v Speaker 3>Here is us and Kenada e Commerce, with our Bloomberg

0:47:37.160 --> 0:47:40.880
<v Speaker 3>Economics team joining us here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker studio.

0:47:41.440 --> 0:47:46.799
<v Speaker 11>This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,

0:47:46.880 --> 0:47:50.640
<v Speaker 11>and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday

0:47:50.640 --> 0:47:54.680
<v Speaker 11>afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com,

0:47:54.719 --> 0:47:58.640
<v Speaker 11>the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:47:58.840 --> 0:48:01.640
<v Speaker 11>You can also watch as live every weekday on YouTube

0:48:01.840 --> 0:48:04.000
<v Speaker 11>and always on the Bloomberg Terminal

0:48:06.360 --> 0:48:06.400
<v Speaker 13>M