Biden Picks Jackson for Supreme Court

You can also listen to our radio show at two pm Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio, or watch us on YouTube search Bloomberg Global News. The big news is President Joe Biden nominating Judge Katanji Brown Jackson to be the first black woman on the Supreme Court, a historic selection that would add certainly a fresh liberal voice when it comes to the nation's highest court. Let's get to June Grasso.

She's Bloomberg News Legal Analyst, host of Bloomberg Law. You can catch that, recognize that ten pm Wall Street time on Bloomberg Radio. She's here in her interactive broker studio. This is significant. It's a historic day, of course it is. And his choice of katangi Brown Jackson. Judge Jackson was expected in a way. I mean, you could never be sure until they actually say the name. But she has been a star. She's a top contender for this position.

Barack Obama even interviewed her at the time he had an opening on the court and gave it to Merrick Garland. So she has just been a rising star on the bench, and she has everything. She has the kind of background that Ivy League background that they always have on the Supreme Court. She's sort of fits in the mold of Justice Bryer, who she clerked for. She you know, went to Harvard College and she graduated from Harvard Law School.

But what she has that other Supreme Court justices don't have right now is she served as a federal public defender, so she represented indigent defendants. And at the Supreme Court, the last time there was a justice who had significant experience representing criminal defenses defendants, it was the famous Thurgood

mare Scholl, who was the legendary civil right sler. You heard President Biden mentioned Justice Marshall in his comments, and so no one on the court right now has that kind of experience, and Biden has been trying to put people on the bench at every level that have different kinds of backgrounds. Not prosecutors, but a lot of public defenders. She's also a sentencing expert. She sat on the Sentencing uh,

the Sentencing Commission, So she's got a lot going for her. Okay, So a nomination is one thing, but what about that path to confirmation? June? She was nominated last summer to be the federal for the Federal Appeals Court and Washington, d C. She was confirmed to that position. Some Republicans voted for her. Does that set her up for success this time around? Well, you can't guarantee that. I mean,

I don't know. It's a different A Supreme Court confirmation hearing is different from a confirmation hearing, even for the DC Appellate Court, which is which is considered a feeder court. I believe about um at the last fourteen justices, five of them sat on the d C Circuit Court. So it's a springboard and she basically sailed through that nomination process. But that doesn't mean that she's going to get those same three Republican votes when she is. You know, when

the nomination comes up. I don't expect and most people don't expect there to be anything because she's been you know, she's been vetted just recently, and also the Republicans really don't have a sort of aligned to attack her. They don't have a coherent narrative against her. What they did during those hearings was there were some wonky questions about sentencing, and um, there was. The only real attack was that she represented when she was a public defender, she represented

a Guantanamo inmate. That's not really much of an attack. So I don't know what they could possibly hit her way, But that doesn't mean that she'll get those same three votes. Um. It's interesting just watching the Twitter universe and somebody's saying, what a great way to wrap up Black History Month? Um was interest things I do wonder if she indeed goes through the confirmation process and is confirmed, how will

she play against the existing Supreme Court justices. What I think is really interesting is that, of course she's not going to change the outlook of the court. There are still gonna be six conservatives and three liberals, but the three liberals the basics, that's certainly slanted towards the concerned side, but the three liberals are going to be three women three and a diverse three women, the Hispanic, Jewish and

now Black. And they are going to be dynamic. They're going to be in the in the descent a lot, but you're going to hear a lot from them. I mean even now, Justice Sodo Mayor is really strong in the comments that she makes. Justice Kagan is fluent and elegant in the way she talks and writes. So I think it's going to be, you know, really dynamic. And also you're going to have a perspective a black woman. Right now, there is one black on the court, Clarence Thomas.

But for example, an affirmative action, they're gonna be affirmative action cases coming up next term. Justice Thomas doesn't believe in affirmative action, so now we'll have another viewpoint of someone in that position of black person. So I think

it's going to be really valuable. I can't wait to hear the first oral arguments because you sort of get a feeling for how they're going to interact, at least at the beginning of Some justices sort of hang back at the beginning, but then you had like Justice Course that who went right full on and corrected the Chief Justice on something he said about where the tenth circuit was and then had to backtrack and apologize because he'd made a mistake and the Chief was right. I mean,

so you have this real dynamic. It will be interesting to see how she plays in that. That's just about using the right forks right at this, that's more than that. Well, also she does have now to open the door when they have conferences. The most junior justice has to open the door and take the notes. Justice Bryce said, I think he was like the longest he was decades doing that.

And also Justice Kagan said that you're you're in charge of the dining room, so you get nothing, but it is and if you put in a yogurt machine, she said, you're golden sky. All right. But again, you know, this is not something that happens. It certainly has happened relatively frequently over the last few years. But for people who don't recall, um, what's the process like and what's a realistic timeline that we can expect at least some sort

of confirmation process to get kicked off. Well, Dick Durban, who's in charge of this, he's the head of the Judiciary Committee, says he wants this done by Easter time. The first thing that will happen is, I mean, they're going to have to go through the background checks and she has to, you know, file different papers. She'll meet with different senators you know, and and have discussions with them.

Those are usually very cordial. And then you have the first here in which will be the Judiciary Committee hearing, and that will be a hearing where you know, the senators on the Judiciary Committee talked, ask her questions, and then you're going to have a full um you know, a full vote by the Senate, vote by the Judiciary Committee, and then a vote by the Senate, the full Senate. And he helped to have that done by um by

Easter time. So that's a pretty fast time. It's not as fast as it's been because any Coney Barrett I think was thirty days from from beginning to end of the process. So it can be done, and I think it will be done, and I think she will sail through. I think this process with any Republican votes are just Democrats question. I don't know. I hope that there will be a few. I hope that at least Senator Collins and Murkowski, who voted for her below and women's senators.

I hope that they will vote for her, and but we'll see. I mean, there couldn't even be more. I mean she is really a star. She sounds super far exactly super just based on the you know, looking at her background, right, I can't find I don't haven't found anything wrong that you could that you could point to that. Oh well there was this one thing. It just hasn't come up. All right, good stuff, Um, thank you so much.

Joom Grasso from Bright News Legal Alice. Anything pops up legally, ease in the news room, like June, I'll be here, He'll be here, I'll run it. Help me. What does this mean? Host of Bloomberg Law catch her weeknights Attempi in Wall Street Time. Right here on Bloomberg Radio, you're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg

Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. Bloomberg has been reporting a swath of major American businesses, from major banks to utility companies, preparing for possible cyber attacks against their computer networks as Russia has threatened consequences for nations that interfere with its invasion of Ukraine and Tim, you know, we've already been reporting on and talking about the cyber attacks on systems inside Ukraine to essentially undermine the security

of the country. Citizen. Yeah, certainly an important voice to speak on this is Hitesh Chef, the president and CEO of vector AI. It's a privately held organization that helps government agencies, corporations as well keep their networks sitting in buildings and on the cloud. Hit Tesh, it's great to have you with us. You're joining us from San Jose, California. How are you good? Good? And thanks for having me, No,

thank you so much for joining us. There's this is a perfect time to be talking about this because I think there is this elevated sense of perhaps there could be cyber attacks with especially you know, Russia and China being among the countries that are so good at attacking cyber networks. Help us understand how risk is right now? Is it elevated as a result of the invasion of Ukraine.

I think the risk is is very elevated. And and and the reason I say that is that, you know, I think we can all logically assume that the invasion of Ukraine was a planned event. It's not as though the government in Russia woke up on the twenty and said we're gonna invade next day in the morning. They've been doing this. They've been taking about this for a

very long time, likely toward twenty four months. And in that timeframe, Uh, they've I'm sure done scenario scenario planning with Hey, if we did this, these are likely ramifications globally, sanctions being one of them. And you know, and this is where they're going to originate from. And so therefore, what are the preemptive things we can do to to

do with those events? And one of the preemptive things I'm sure they've done is is gone and stealthily, you know, launch cyber attacks already on a lot of the infrastructure we've got you in the country. Um, you know, key institutions, and and there is malvery that is sitting there. Um, they're ready to get activated, right and you know it's it's you know, as as tough as it is, it's a matter of pushing buttons. Now this is where we are. So I am curious to tash how strategic is Russia

thinking about this? Well, first of all, Russia, we know along with Iran, China US among the world's leading practitioners of cyber warfare. It's not what warfare, It's not just Russia. I mean, we do it the United States. But I'm curious how much in terms of of planning their military strategy into Ukraine, how much are they being strategic in terms of the targets they hit because they to some extent want to keep the cyber world up and running because it can be very productive in their own goal

and mission. Yeah, but they will look at what they just did, right they They were I think very e stategic about this right there. You know, three things have occurred. In the first and foremost at the highest level, you know, the first time in human history we're seeing cyber attacks

becoming a weapon of first choice. Now we have a long theorized, especially those of us who live in in in uh in cybersecurity, that this is gonna this event is going to come to pass at some point, um, you know, and and obviously we're all hoping that we would not have to see it. But but here we are. And so they were, they were, I think we're very very thoughtful about how this got integrated into their overall

attack framework. Number one. Number two, Um, you know at least a mini moment wasn't reported out there, right, you know, they went after financial institutions, a very logical target if you are thinking about how to disrupt uh, you know,

the general population. The second thing they did is go off to social media, right, I mean, I think we we revolts in the news on Twitter and and again you know, if you the reason to go off for social media is you know, when when democracies are either getting formed or the threat, right, it's a it's a very effective way to either spread misinformation and or cut off you know, news getting shared, not just in the in the country you're targeting in this case, Ukraine, but

even within Russia itself. And so I think though, I think they were very thoughtful about how they than the utilize several attacks in this campaign of theirs. And let's not forget there's a headline earlier that I know across the Bloomberg Russia saying will limit access to Facebook from February, so right till they are looking at the role of social media in it. Yeah, wondering what lessons there are for just normal folks who don't necessarily run organizations. But

how we can keep our information safe. I think of a tweet that I saw earlier today from Josh Wolf, he's a venture capitalist at Lux Capital. Uh, I've interviewed him before. He says that there's some advice that he has have calms, backup plans now, not just for your firm, but for your family. Yeah. Look, I mean I think you know, uh, the normal advice of one would give to somebody's sitting in the house, right, which is if

you're dealing with ransomware direct. Now we're talking about attacks on social media, right, It's always good to have you know, your data backed up. Just something as basic as that is critical, not not just for enterprises and small businesses, but for people in the home. Backup your data, right. Just make sure you are not trusting you know, random emails.

You know, don't don't get don't fall for fishing attacks. Um, make sure you've got basically protection software is sitting on your on your laptops and funds, right, keep your software up data. I mean, these are basic hygiene things that the average consumers should do um to protect themselves. Um, you know, and then you know, beyond that, the companies themselves,

like people like Twitter have irresponsibility. Social media companies themselves have responsible to make sure that while they cannot control whether Russia is going to cut off Facebook, they have they definitely can have a set amount of control or making sure that the right information is getting out there, right. You know, these these platforms are have been used as a as as a weapon to spread misinformation, and I think they have a unique responsibility to get ahead of

that and not just hide behind the veil off. We're just a platform and we just put out things there and we really don't control when the truth is absolutely control what's getting put out there. So when we think about sanctions, you know, you get to think about their recyber sanctions as well. We could talk about that with the former Ukrainian finance minister who's going to join us

a little bit later on TESH. Thank you so much at test Chef president and chief executive officer of Victor AI joining us on the phone from San Jose, California. I mean, that is a reminder that we're living in different times. Make a good point to Carol, it's not just China and Russia that are the ones who are doing the cyber attacks. This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Masser and Bloomberg Quick Takes. Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio.

We have an incredible guest with us, UM Natalie Drusco, former Ukrainian Minister of Finance from twenty sixteen during the initial Russian invasion occupation of Ukraine. Tim also the executive director of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico. She's been helping that area with their financial problems. She was also the subject of a Bloomberg Business Week story back in twenty fifteen. It was entitled The American Woman

who stands between Putin and Ukraine. She joins us on the phone from San Juan, Puerto Rico. Um, Natalie, so nice to have you here. I know you did a really smart interview with our surveillance team earlier on Bloomberg TV, and you told our Tom Keene Um about what you're hearing from you brain. What's the latest on that. Well, we're going into the evening into the nighttime, so people are retiring and going into the bunkers and the bomb shelters.

So the you know, the casing now is massive, waiting to see what happens next. Um. Obviously there's fear but you know, Ukrainians are stepping up in a way that you know, every nation should be proud to act as brave as they are. They're they're volunteering in any way they can. They're volunteering, whether it's to give blood, whether they're volunteering for the civil defense and picking up guns to fight UM. But they are, they are acting UH

with you know, full intense to keep their homeland. Natalie. We just spoke a few minutes ago to Angela Stent, senior adviser to the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies. She shared with us her assessment that she really thinks things are going in the direction of Putin being able to overtake KIEVU and indeed install a Putin friendly governing official there. And at this point that's really inevitable. And I'm monitoring if you share that assessment. Well, I

will never say that that's inevitable. Now, I do know that that is the objective of Putin. His objective is to decapitate UH, the government, to suffitcate the economy, to deny Ukraine It's freedom, deny Ukrainians their existence. But I also know the strength of the Ukrainian people and the desire of people to maintain their peace, their freedom in

their own country. And so Ukrainians will resist and are resisting and have given the Russians a little bit of a surprise in terms of the incredible morale and training of the armed forces of Ukraine. So there is a

great deal of hope against hope. But I will say that, you know, Ukrainians would have greater hope if are the Western partners, the United States and Europe could deliver much more massive UH sanctions, economic, financial and much more massive military support for them to defend themselves, right, Because that what I'm wondering is, you know, is there an outcome where Ukraine remains neutral, independent without greater support, whether it's

military or tougher sanctions um from the West. I mean, there's a really lot packed in there for so independent and neutral or not to to to the same thing, Ukraine's independent constitution has MADEO has an objective, a goal. It doesn't mean as a timeline, doesn't mean that they're there yet, But that is up to the Ukrainian people and they have chosen their direction in terms of what Ukraine will do without for their Western support. I think

it's unfair to say that. I think the West has to look at this as a singular set of defining days to isolate the pariah states, to isolate Russia. And the reason this is in the United States, in the reason this is an every single American's interest, every single bridge interest, is because Ukraine right now is standing between the world as we know it, a world of rules and rules based society, a rule uh a world of peace and freedom that we created and developed and built

since World War Two. It is standing between that life that we love and a world of of chaos and conflicts or power and autocrats and tyrants move borders at their own will. That is not a world that is good for the U S. Stock market. It is not a world that is good for the US investor. It's not a world that's good for the U. S. Worker. It's not a world that's good for the United States

or for other freedom loving countries. So, Natalie, if you were advising the United States government or perhaps European governments right now, what sanctions would you advise them to put in place? So uh, full and in mediate sanctions on the financial sector in Russia, meaning starting with the Central

Bank of Russia, which has not yet been sanctioned. Moving on to all the state banks in Russia, some have, some have not closed the circle, cut them all off, cutting Russia off from Swift, UM and UM, putting restrictions on ruble clearing. I would go even further to encourage

all asset managers to divest of all Russian investments. In fact, I would ask the marketplace to look at this as we did growing up and giving away my age UH and discouraged the businesses from investing in South Africa because of apartheid. There is a moral equivalent here, UH, in the sense that we should not be investing in a country that in a government, in businesses from a government

that are knowingly clearly trying to create another genocide. UM. Above and beyond financial restrictions, I think there's a great deal we can do UM in terms of trade restrictions, export controls can be increased. I think we should stop allowing Russian airlines to fly in our airspace. UH. You know, Ukraine has unfortunately had its sports closed and its airport's closed as they try to suffocate the economy. There's no reason we should allow Russian plane airlines air flux to

fly in our space. I think sanctioning the entire leadership, sanctioning everyone from President Tooting, which the news is reporting the United States is considering all the way through the members of the Duma, the members of the National Security Council, the members of the cabinet, ministers and all their families. Why should any of them have access to our to visas,

to our to our universities, to our bank accounts. If they want to enjoy peace and freedom in the United States and Europe, then they ought to allow Ukraines to enjoy peace and freedom. So I think there's just they're just numerous things that can be done. So what's the world afraid of? What's the United States afraid of? What

are the European allies? And one of the conversations we've had certainly is that for Europe, where it's much closer to home physically, geographically, you know, they are concerned about, you know, access to energy, I mean their economies. But what is everybody afraid of in terms of pushing back harder? Yeah, you hear this with regard to energy sanctions. Um even in President Biden speaches where he talks about trying to ensure that the unit that American consumers don't see an

increase in gasoline prices at the pump. So, yeah, there are economic costs to implementing some of these sanctions, but I assure you that the costs are much greater if the world becomes an unsafe place for rule of law. I assure you that our businesses will not do better if they cannot assure themselves that their investments are free of the kind of political risk that major US investors are now seeing in Ukraine today because of the Russian invasion.

So I think that we're looking at short term costs um to to apply these sanctions to achieve a result that I think is critical for the way we wish our markets and our lives to be. And so those short term economic costs, whether they're in you know, I heard something today about Italy wanting to exclude its luxury product makers from from training. Thanks. Really, it's just it's

somewhat ridiculous. People are dying, Hundreds of people are dying every hour, and we're discussing whether or not the kindergartens that got blown up by the Kremlin, whether the orphanage that got blown up by the by the by the Kremlin today is worth more or less than those trade sanctions. That is unbelievable. The last time we did that in World War Two, we all regretted it. We all regretted not stepping in sooner. We can't allow this to happen again. Natalie, Uh,

very again, just very powerful comments from you. I'm wondering how nuclear weapons, how they complicate the situation here. It was something that Angela Stent just referred to that you Western nations, they know that that Russia has nuclear weapons. We know that Russia has We work with Russia on their nuclear weapons. Uh. What's at stake there? And that how does that hold back the United States and in Europe? Now there are three elements on nukes. UM One is

Ukraine agreed voluntarily to give up its nuclear weapons. It had the third largest UH supplied nuclear weapons and they did it in return for security guarantees from both United States and Russia, amongst others. And so number one, if we want to talk about nukes, will go all the way back to in the fact of the matter is we have security assurances from from both the aggressors as well as the United States. And so let's start with that. But yes, I'm not suggesting that NATO stepped in or

the U s boots be put on the ground. I actually believe that instead the United States and the Western partners ought to be providing all the military support possible for Ukraine used to defend themselves, massive urgent air air defense, logistical armament, things needed for you know, the stingers, the drones, to even the even the field. Ukraines are willing to fight themselves where they're not asking for American boots on the ground. And I'm not suggesting any but the third

element on the nukes is clear. If we believe that they are a dangerous nuclear power, and I do believe that, then be aware that this is not likely to end in Ukraine. If Ukraine is not able to maintain its freedom, they will move on. They have already described how they don't believe that the Baltic extinct should be part of NATO. He's putting has said that out loud. It's not in

my imagination or or a theory. So if we want to stop him, we should stop him now before it gets to the point where NATO has to defend We just have about a minute or so left here what do we need to understand you? You have been front and center at this situation for years, as he said, you know, Minister of financing, that initial invasion and occupation. What is it that we need to as a world understand about Vladimir Putin? He warned us, He warned us,

and we never listened. He warned us when he invaded Georgia, then in two thousand and eight, then he invaded Ukraine in two thousand and fourteen. He lookedally did in Syria to the people of Syria. He killed his opposition with polonium on the streets of London. He's murdered his opposition on the streets of Berlin. He's interfered in our elections, He's interfered in other elections. What more do we need to know? That he is trying to destroy the democratic principles,

the liberal world order that we live in. I don't think we need another warning, and we shouldn't let anyone else die. Twenty seconds left here China thoughts on that, and they're all very quickly. I think they're looking carefully. I think they're watching that. Maybe the single most interested capital to see how the United States and our allies react and then they'll be able to gauge what their

what their next moves are with regard to Taiwan and elsewhere. Natalie, thank you so much, and we hear A Bloomberg really appreciate the time that you have been carving out for all of our platforms in your insight. UM, incredibly valuable. Natalie Arrasco, former Ukraine Minister of Finance from sixteen UM, really giving us so much there. Really appreciate that. Natalie Roam, Yeah, I'll bet you let me drive. Oh no, no, no no, non, please, I'll go. I want to drive. It's a good question,

good driven. This is the Drive to the Clothes on Bloomberg Radio. All right, what a wild week, and we've just got a few minutes left in the trading day, about ten minutes to wrap off the holiday short and trading week. But it feels like it was almost a month because of some of the volatility, understandably. So let's get to it with Victoria Green, Chi's chief investment officer at G squared Private Wealth. They've got five hundred and fifty million in US it's under management. And she joins

us on the phone from College Station, Texas. Victoria, nice to have you here with Tim and myself. Who to thunk considering where we were, certainly early yesterday in terms of the equity markets, just the financial markets over all, that we'd actually see some gains heading into a weekend. It's crazy, right, and it's funny. It really has it felt like a month this week and it's it's forgot. It was a holiday week too long. It's been forgot we were off on Monday. Um. But I think that

just kind of reinforces uh. And I'm not trying to downplay the humanitarian crisis from the tragedy this is, but Marcus really tends to ignore conflict or at least bounce back quickly historically, and you kind of saw that play out a little bit when neither NATO or the U S seemed to want to put boots on the ground and we're going to focus more on sanctions. I think that the Marcus kind of breathed the side of relief that this conflict isn't going to potentially get bigger, uh,

And that really helped help find some footing there. I mean, the NOZAC moved what eight h our basis points based Sally from from Tropope. Yeah, that was really wild, especially what happened yesterday with the NAZCAC one hundred Victoria. I'm wondering, though I understand what you're saying, but I also wonder. You know, we've talked a lot about Ukraine over the last two days and over the last few weeks on

this program. Uh, I wonder if it means that Putin is going to keep going and if the markets not pricing that in and that's something that we you know, that's something that we heard about from the former Ukraine finance minister Natalie Duresco just a little bit earlier. Yeah, how far he goes? I think it's it's interesting, um,

And you know, obviously Latvia's getting a little nervous. Poland and some of your old old foes are feeling that the pressures like this is the nineteen fifties and sixties again. And I think when you have to look around, one of the questions is was he expecting his own country to kind of rise up a little bit? You know, in his own country does not seem a hundred percent

behind this war. And then it's a lot harder to hold a hostile country than it is to to welcome a rebel held area like he did in Georgia and Crimeal So could he move further? Yes? But is he finding it harder to do this than maybe he anticipated. Possibly he's meeting stiff resistance from the Ukrainians and it's a lot harder. We saw that in Afghanistan. If you conquered hostile territory, holding it and ruling it is extremely difficult and costly. So where do you go from here?

Are are you potentially in a little bit of a holding pattern? We've got a job's report right a week from today. But more importantly, I feel like I keep pulling out the f O m C function on the Bloomberg terminal, you know, counting my meetings. Jim Buller came out and he's looking for a hundred basis points by July.

That's four meetings from now. So do we though, are we in a little bit of a holding pattern to the March sixteenth meeting, which is just a few weeks away, to kind of get a better idea of what the FED is thinking and to see if they ultimately do something at that meeting. I think they We're still going to move and I think you saw that reaffirmation today. Um I think also the market was hoping potentially those

conflicts which slow the FED. I don't. I think the Fed has to me they have to move their late again and they need to do something about inflation. Fifty basis points seems probably off the table. Becauld they move once a meeting for the next four meetings. Absolutely, Uh, we're still pricing in. If you look at the market implied rate, it's right a little over six right now.

It's certainly come down a little bit from those eight or nine hikes who are having thrown around there for a little but it's still going to be a rate hiking environment. I don't think this is going to put the stock on it sort of absolute catastrophe. I don't think the feed is gonna be derailed. So what does that mean for tech stocks? I think a little bit. I don't want to say dead cat bounce, but I think that they may be bought into that theory that

that rates aren't going to move as aggressively. And still look, if we only do four hikes this year or five hikes this year, that's technically dubbish from where they we are right now. Right you know, if we're considering six or seven to be baseline and they come in with three to four or five, then then that is a little bit more dubbish. But I think tech stocks still have some hurdles. I think you're really seeing the no earnings tech stocks still struggle. I think everything got dragged

down a little bit in that sector. You had well run stocks that do you produce cash flows and earnings that didn't probably deserve to sell off as hard as some of them did. If you look at like Navideo or some of the chip stops that that really took a beating, but are very quality companies that generate good, solid cash flows, I think they have the potential to

bounce a little bit faster than the speculative arms. I think the speculative arms are still When I say speculative arms, I mean speculative stocks that really aren't generating cash flows. You're buying them for the potential feature that they may provide. They may struggle more because they really will be hit

harder by rate. That's so interesting that you say that, I'm looking at our innovation E t F A r k K hit a fifty two weeks you know, earlier this year, just a few days ago, but it rose seven point eight percent yesterday, it's higher more than three percent right now, Carol, Right, so you know this is something great point, Tim, And I was like this perspective, Victoria. There's a point where and we talked about this yesterday, that investors like understanding the situation in terms of the

Russian invasion in Ukraine. But so then starting to say fundamentally, wow, you know we've seen what official correction you know on the S and P. We're looking at some of these corrections and say, wait, I still believe in this company. There's gonna be earnings, there's revenue growth, maybe not as fast as we thought, but that's a buying opportunity. Yeah, if you like Amazon at four thousand, why don't you like Amazon at three thousands? You know, unless you think

Amazon's going away? Right, if they go away, I'm gonna cry so bad. That's gonna ruin my life that they can't go away. They we need to like declare them utility at this point almost they're systematically important to United States. Absolutely. Maybe there's some regulators who want to regulate them, Like I was just gonna say, if they want to regulate some of the rates there, No, but I know what you say that it's a part of our economy, like were there's many of us who are so in trench.

Not everybody, but a lot of people. Yeah, and they look they race trime and I said, sure, take my money, Like I'm not about the cancel prime over what they raised it. Um, But I think you honestly have to look at that. We got very spoiled in every time we hit that five percent pullback, it was like clockwork right, we bounced right off of it and came back. We we actually saw a correction, which is a very normal,

healthy market thing to do. And so we look at this and it's a very rare corrections turn into bear markets, especially not during recession. So honestly, unless you say, hey, we're going recession here on the next six to twelve months, which which I don't see. But if if that's your your barrish case, then potentially you're not a buyer's exist. But short of recession, it's very unlikely this turns into

a bear market. And we don't think I would say is that the FED it's often tricky when they start to raise hikes in terms of getting it right, and that we often can turn into a recession as a result. VI Terry Green, thank you so much. Really enjoyed it, Chief investment Officer at G Squared Private Wealth, joining us on the phone from College Station, Texas. Thanks for listening

to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com, and you can also listen to our radio show at two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio. Watch us on YouTube search Bloomberg Global News. Mmmmmmmm