This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look at the top stories in the coming week from our day Break anchors all around the world, and straight ahead on the program. Fetchair. J Powell Headstick Capitol Hill. I'm Tom Busby in New York.
I'm Gaily Liones in Washington, where Federal Reserve nominees will be appearing in a Senate hearing next week.
I'm Caroline Hetkee here in London, where we're looking at the Bank of England's unenviable position at the June rate setting meeting.
I'm Doug Christner. Prime Minister Narin Bermodi comes to the US. We look at the complicated relationship between the US and India.
That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg Eleve Them three own New York, Bloomberg ninety nine to one, Washington, DC, Bloomberg one O six one, Boston, Bloomberg nine sixty, San Francisco, DAB Digital Radio, London, Sirius XM one nineteen and around the world on Bloomberg Radio dot Com and via the Bloomberg Business App.
Good day to you. I'm Tom Busby. We begin today's program with the Federal Reserve, which paused its string of interest rate hikes this past week after ten rate increases in as many beatings, but policymakers signaled two more rate hikes may be coming this year and that rate cuts are still a long way off. And this week, Vetchair Jerome Powell heads to Capitol Hill for his semi annual testimony to Congress on the Central Bank's monetary policy report.
For more about what's behind the Fed's latest action and what to expect this week, we turned to Bloomberg's Global Economics and Policy editor Michael McKee. Michael, thanks for being here.
Happy to be here.
Well, Fed policymakers would not have left rates unchanged without good reasons, encouraging economic data about jobs or retail spending, inflation, housing, energy prices. So what will we be watching for Chairman pal to say this week?
I think people will want to know how serious the Fed is about doing two more rate increases. It seems that at least one is locked in, and that's what the markets are pricing. The dot plot suggested they would do too. What would it take for the Fed to decide it needed to raise another fifty basis points? Inflation going the wrong way. Is it inflation not moving, Is it some sign that the economy is collapsing? What are they looking for?
But we have seen good data. We have seen jobs a little uneven there, but the inflation some of the key inflation statistics that they look at, those metrics have been pretty good. Housing prices have gone down, energy prices have stabilized, even declined a little bit. Retail spending we got a real surprise for may Well.
It looks like the economy is doing what the Fed wants. It is slowing down gradually, and that's the scenario, the soft landing scenario that they want to have. The question is does it speed up its drop? Will we start to see things fall off a cliff? So far we haven't. As you noted that jobs numbers were still strong, even though unemployment rose, it's still three point seven percent. And we saw retail sales rise, which was something of a surprise.
But in each category, I think only gasoline fell, but in each category the increases were smaller than they had been in previous months. So it does suggest that people are still spending, they're just not spending as much. And that's what the whole point of the fed's tightening campaign is about now.
This past week, Chairman Powell told reporters we shouldn't call this pause, that he just made a skip, and he says the FED needs more time to make sure that they made the right move. So let's listen into what he told reporters.
We don't know the full extent of the consequences of the banking turmoil that we've seen. It would be early to see those, but we don't know what the extent is. We'll have some more time to see that unfolding. It's just the idea that we're trying to get this right. And this is if you think of the two things as separate variables, and I think that the skip, I shouldn't call it a skip. The decision makes sense, all.
Right, So not a skip? Okay, Michael. Does that give us any sense of what the FED might do at its next meeting in July or the three remaining meetings this year?
Well, the skip language that he accidentally used, and then he kept saying that the July meeting is live. We're sort of being read as signals by the markets that the FED is planning to raise rates again at the July twenty sixth meeting. That brings us back to what we were talking about earlier about what does the market want to hear in terms of the FED and what it would take to get them to stop or to move forward or do fifty basis points instead of twenty
five in July. The question then becomes what happens after that when they get to September? Do they have a rate increase in train? I guess we have to wait and see what the data show us. And to go back to your very first question, I'm sure that is a line that you'll hear from j.
Powell.
Yeah, data dependent, data dependent, But even until July, we get some pretty important data points. So what will we get before then?
Well, we get another payrolls report the week of Friday after July fourth, and then we get another CPI report and another PCE inflation report. The interesting thing is between the March and May meetings we had between them, I'm sorry, between the March and June meetings there were two or three CPI reports, two jobs reports. Now before July there's only be one of each, so they will have a less robust data set to judge how much the economy has changed. One way or the other.
And during the summer, I mean, anything could hapen happen with summer jobs lifting payrolls higher, but kids coming out of school, we really can.
Well, it's interesting because of course, the the Bureau of Labor Statistics seasonally adjusts UH to sort of take the lumpiness out of things like summer jobs for kids or teachers coming off the payroll because in summertime. But since the pandemic, their seasonal adjustment efforts have been troubled. It's
it's been difficult to do. So it'll be interesting to see what kind of numbers we get when we start to see the June We see the June payrolls number in July, because that's a month where the swimming pools open up the June in June, and you know, the the ice cream shops take on extra workers and stuff like that. We'll see how how that all plays out.
Well, you make it sound so nice, I gotta tell you. All right, Well, you know, let's let's go back to the what's coming up this week Wednesday and Thursday. Chairman Palse testimony to Congress. Now, some say that a lot of these people on the committees have less of a monetary agenda, more of a political agenda with the Chairman Powell and with the Fed. But Chairman pal has been, you know, there with a Republican president, now with the
Democratic president. He has seen it all. Let's talk about what he can expect to hear from people like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee. She's been very critical of the FED, very critical of the banking system, very critical of corporations, and very critical of, you know, the record setting profits that we've made. What can we expect to hear from her and others like her?
Well, you know that Elizabeth Warren, and this is just based on past performance, is going to lecture Jay Powell on the evils of tightening too much because then people lose their jobs, unemployment goes up to which his answer can be, we're very sensitive to that and three point seven percent unemployment.
Yeh.
By the way, we're not doing that to you yet, but you could expect that from her. Others will be talking trying to talk about the debt, the US national debt, and the deficits and how much money we're spending. You can expect that from the Republicans. They usually try to get him to say that we need to have budget discipline, and he will try to stay out of those arguments.
Ye, not my job, job as much as possible. Yes, well let's get back to more of those failed banks, because that's going to come up with him. It was just starting the last time he spoke. He did this monetary policy in March, but then it became a crisis. But things have settled down. So how will that play in, do you think to the testimony this week.
Well, he will repeat what he said at the press conference this past week that the FED anticipates there will be some credit impacts from the bank situation. And there's certainly a lot of people out there who think that we're going to see more banks fail and we're going to see more problems. The data don't support that at
the moment. This is a little wonky, but everybody's been watching this new funding lending program that the FED set up for banks, and it's still rising, and so people are thinking, well, the banks are still troubled, but there's another measure that accounts for all of the banks borrowings, not just from that, and it seems that the banks borrowed a lot from the federal home loan banks. They're
paying those off and going to the Fed facility. So when you look at the overall borrowing by banks, it has come down some and it does appear that things have, as you said, settled down quite a bit.
Got it so July again. The money right now on Wall Street is we're looking at perhaps a twenty five basis point increase. Yes, whispers of a fifty basis point.
Well, it's just math. They said they would do two more, which, since they do twenty five at a time, is a total of fifty. So you could do fifty at once. If you figure you need to get to that level, you might as well do it right away. But then that begs the question of why they didn't do it
last week. So we'll see. It's more likely, given the way Powell has framed this as an exercising caution to see the lagged impacts of the moves they've already made and what impact they're going to have on the economy going forward, that they don't want to go too high, too fast, and if they just do twenty five, that is a cautious kind of move.
All right.
Bloomberg's Global Economic policy editor, Michael McKee. Thanks for joining us again. Coming up on Bloomberg day Break weekend, the Bank of England and all the political economic pressure there Right now, I'm Tom Busby and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look ahead at the top stories for investors in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby in New York. Up later in the program,
India's Prime Minister heads to the White House. But first, the Bank of England out with a rate decision in the coming week, and it hits us at a time of continued economic and political pressure in the UK. For more, let's head to London and bring in Bloomberg Daybreak Europe banker Caroline Hepger.
Tom, the UK has an inflation problem. Price rises worth a four decade high last year, and although the figures have come down from eleven point one percent to eight point seven percent now, it has remained stronger than the Bank of England, and of course most economists had expected. For more on this, I'm joined by Bloomberg's UK correspondent Lizzie Burden. Lizzie, the Bank of England has a very difficult job on its hands.
Yeah, we saw in that Hot jobs data. The economy is resilient, and also saw that in the GDP data, But the flip side is it's going to spur inflation. So Bloomberg Economics as a result changed its call. It did just see a rate hike in June, now it sees one in August as well. Markets have ramped up their bets for where the Bank of England's peak rate will be. Increasingly it looks like six percent and it's nearing the levels that they saw in the aftermath of
the Liztrus's mini budget. So for the June meeting on Thursday, it's not really a question of whether they'll hike or not. Now it's becoming a question of will it be by a quarter point or by a half point and crucial to that will be the latest inflation data. Yeah.
Absolutely, Well, you mentioned the growth and the labor data that we've had out in the last few days. So the UK's finally joined other G seven economies in regaining the GDP that it lost during the pandemic. Took a long time. Output rows by two tenths of one percent in March, so now we are back up with three tenths of one percent larger in terms of the GDP than we were pre pandemic levels. In terms of the reaction to that, his Blueberg's Senior UK economist Dan Hanson discussing, I.
Mean, I think it came in broadly as expected. It was a little bit weaker than we thought it would be, but I think it's broadly in line. I mean that the big picture from the GDP data is that it's just holding up much better than anyone I'd expected, even sort of six months ago. And there are sort of lots of reasons. So that one is the labor market. There's energy, lower energy prices that's helping the global economy generally is probably doing a little bit better than people have expected.
So that was Dan Hanson, bloomberg'st Senior UK Economics so reacting to the latest data, I mean, yes, it does put the UK in a difficult position.
It does for the Bank of England, as I say, it's going to spur inflation probably which means more hikes. Further down the line, those hikes might mean that Britain enters a recession. I know you're speaking to Karen Ward of JP Morgan Asset Management, who's also as a side hustle an economic advisor to the Chancellor Jeremy Hunt. She thinks that a recession maybe likely, and that was even
before we saw this job data. Also, I have to say, zero point two percent growth, it's pretty anemic, isn't it.
Yeah.
Absolutely, it's not that much to shout about, I suppose, and yet of course the government will want to show that it's positive. And when it comes to that, Richie Sunac has pledged to half inflation, one of his big five pledges, which are largely economic in focus. Of course, given the turnover that we've had in prime ministers in the UK, this was you know, this is his big
kind of flagship bid for voters. And then Mervin King in recent days has come out and said very publicly in the national media that actually he thinks that that sort of pledge is a bad idea.
Yeah, so this is in an interview with LBC's Andrew Marr. I have to say, policymakers and actually even Tory politicians behind the scenes when I speak to them, have said that this is a bad idea. Look, she's Sunak. The thinking is, I hear felt like lots of people blamed liss Trust for higher inflation. So when he came in, he felt like he needed to grip the issue. And even though it's really the Bank of England's job to
reduce inflation, he's taking responsibility for him. But there's a difference between actively reducing inflation and not doing anything to add to it, right, So he's in a risky position when inflation is proving stickier and stickier as the months go on. And I thought it was very interesting listening to him at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday. He didn't really talk about halving inflation by the end of the year so much as reducing it. So is he shifting the goalposts?
Yeah?
Absolutely, And the former Bank of Governor Andrew Mervin king talking about how it's not bad to claim credit for it once it's actually happens, you know, but not before perhaps, And so too the relationship between government and business, which is the other big struggle I think for issues and
for the Cabinet. In our reporting around whether the UK is a drift or not, we've had a number of interviews with disgruntled, even despairing business leaders about this issue, including with Archie Norman, who's the chairman of Marx and Spencer. He spoke to me at length about why the UK needs a broader industrial strategy, a real plan for the economy, a skills agenda, so that the UK, although it's under a great deal of pressure, can actually compete globally. Have a listen to what he said.
An industrial strategy has to be profound, and it's not just about our atsues where we want to compete, It's about what skills do we want to have. Government plays a very big part in creating skills. We have something called the Apprenticeship Levy, which is a tax on skills and a tax on training. A large part of that tax is taken by the treasury and not recent spent. Other countries are saying, no, we need laboratory as systems, No we need more coders, No we we need more
data scienttists. We seem to be agnostic. We don't know what we need, and that's not good enough. When France and Singapore and Canada and the US have a point of view, we have to have a point of view too, So you've got to start planning ahead. The footprint of government is too big in the economy to say we're just hands off, that we let the market decide because government does create and shape the future direction. A competitive economy is one where the public and private sector work together.
That doesn't mean in an old fashioned sense of taxpayers money going into owning company or anything like that. It means we're working together on regulation, on trade, on investment in skills, on how government supports entrepreneurs, how we shape the tax system. At the moment that's come slightly adrift post Brexit. So there used to be a good hand in hand working relationship that was all swept away in the sort of Boris Johnson era and now we need to rebuild it again.
So that was Archie Norman there saying we need an industrial strategy in the UK. So then let's wrap it all together as we think about the coming few days and you know what Andrew Bailey is going to do about UK rates.
It's a really difficult position to be in for the governor looking at the data that has just come and as I say, we'll get more on inflation just before this BOE decision, but then thinking about the forecasts and what lies ahead when you've got members of the Monetary Policy Committee like Swatti Dingra warning about this lag in money Tree transmission eighteen months to two years. It seems to take four rates to pass through to the economy
because of so many people having fixed rate mortgages. It's a divided committee. It looks like it's going to be between twenty five basis points and fifty basis points. But we'll be watching our clues for what happens the rest of the year. Will there be a pause in August? When will the cuts come? It looks like the Bank of England may have been first to the rate hiking party, but it's going to be the last to leave and take longer than the ECB and the FED to get to the pivot.
Okay, Lizzie, thank you so much for being with me. You'll be with me throughout the coming days, of course, to cover all things UK economy. Bloomberg's UK correspondent, Lizzie Burden. I'm Caroline Hebger here in London and you can catch us every weekday morning for Bloomberg Daybreak you at beginning at six am in London. That's one am on Wall Street.
Tom.
Thank you, Caroline. That was Bloomberg Daybreak Europepost Caroline Hepgar and coming up on Bloomberg day Break weekend, India's Prime Minister comes to the US to meet with President Biden. I'm Tom Busby and this is.
Bloomberg broadcasting live from the Bloomberg it a active Brokers studio in New York. Bloomberg elemon three oh to Washington, d C, Bloomberg ninety nine one to Boston, Bloomberg one oh sixty one to San Francisco, Bloomberg nine sixteen to the Country Syrius XM Channel one to nineteen to London DAB Digital Radio, and around the globe the Bloomberg Business app in Bloomberg Radio dot Com. This is Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend.
I'm Tom Busby in New York with your global look ahead at the top stories for investors in the coming week. President Biden will host India's Prime Minister, Narendra Mody in a state dinner in the coming week. And for more, let's go to Hong Kong and Bloomberg Daybreak Asia host Doug Prisner.
Tom The Biden administration recently characterized the relationship with India as the most important for the US in the world. India is viewed as a vital partner in the US effort to push back against China's expanding influence.
In the world.
We want to take a closer look now with Bloomberg's Rebecca Chung Wilkins. She is our Asia Government and Politics correspondent. Rebecca, it's always a pleasure. I think we have to begin with the fact that this relationship with the US is somewhat complicated, and you have to look no further than India's failure to criticize Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Can Prime Minister Mody be counted on as a reliable partner for the US or will India kind of go its own
way without a strong alignment? What do you think?
Well, listen, I don't want to go too far back, but India, the very basis of its foreign policy goes back to sort of the Cold War when it essentially decided to set up this non aligned country framework. So it's important to sort of understand that India from the outset, since its independent has approached foreign relations with this idea of always being somewhat a neutral figure, somewhat a middle man.
And of course, you know, again during the Cold War that really was about striking a balance between the US and Russia, and while refraining from being a full on partner, a full on ally still developing relationships with both those countries that benefit them. Now, India and the US have grown much closer over the recent years, and it's really particularly accentuated by the fact that India increasingly views China's military aggression over disputed territory with India and whatnot as
sort of an increasing threat. And so as a result, we have seen these closer ties between India and the US. So Biden is now welcoming Mody, and Mody very much wants to be a participant in that. But I think it's unlikely that we see any kind of explicit criticism on Modi or India's part of Russia. And that's in part because it has these very close defense ties to Russia and also has been purchasing crude oil from it.
Yeah, we've heard from the oil minister in India saying his country intends to continue doing so. So we know given the war in Ukraine, that the West has isolated Russia over that conflict, although Moscow has the support of Beijing, and I'm curious about the relationship between presidents Putin and Chi and how Moody may view that well.
That is a complicating factor, and much has been made of the so called no limits friendship between Vladimir Putin and Presidency Dimping. I think we have started to see, however, the limits of that. I mean, China has been quite vocal about the need for the conflict to avoid any kind of nuclear aspect, and it does seem that China has become somewhat more public about not explicit criticism in any way of Moscow, but at least about the need
to try and find some kind of peaceful resolution. Chin of course has put forward its own so caused a peace proposal or a blueprint, but that has been received by much skepticism, partly because of season things very cozy ties with Putin and also because it's ultimately an agreement that favors Moscow.
Now India doesn't support the Western sanctions on Russia, and India continues to place orders for Russian made military weapons. How is the US going to navigate that territory? Do you have a sense of that?
Yeah, I mean it's interesting. My colleague Ian Marlow had an excellent story citing US senior US defense officials really explaining how the US is going to navigate this On the one hand, we've sort of seen them staying quiet on issues around human rights and civil rights and whatnot in India. But the expectation does seem that they're not going to be sort of too overtly critical because of how important it is for them to win over India when it comes to kind of trying to contain nor
curb China's rise. So we are going to expect to see the US sort of rolling out the red carpet for India and staying away somewhat from these tricky topics. It is worth stressing though, too, like the reason why India and Russia that relationship persists, from Modi's point of view,
is in part because of Chinese military aggression. So India, for example, relies on some of those defense supplies to actually push back against Chinese military aggression on some of those disputed territories in the Himalayan border, for example.
Well, speaking of rolling out the red carpet, while the Prime Minister is in the US, he will reportedly be meeting with the CEOs of twenty of the top American firms. Now we know that since the pandemic, many of these global companies have been reevaluating their supply chains and their reliance on exposure to China. So I guess you could call it diversifying away from China and towards India. Is that enough to entire Modi into changing some of his behavior or maybe not?
I mean, we have certainly seen both China and the US sort of try and rival one another to actually be India's top trading partner, so US again sort of inching out now, And that I think is in part, as you say, because India is this very attractive so called third country and alternative to China for companies that
are seeking to diversify. I think it is certainly to Modi's advantage, and we have seen that that sort of advantage rather than let's say, values based motivations, really driving a lot of his decision making when it comes to sort of closer ties, forging closer ties with China versus the US.
Do you think that for Beijing the government is a little irritated that India has become this other destination point for manufacturing of certain types of goods made by Western companies.
I mean, perhaps to a certain extent. I think the bigger concern really for Beijing is this fear that India has the ability to tip that balance of power, and that as the US tries to kind of form this more formal and closer allegiance of countries that are trying to contain China, particularly when it comes to strategic tech and whatnot, that India can play a pivotal role. And of course this shift to the Indo Pacific again in terms of sort of military strength, India again plays a
sort of critical role there as well. So I think there is some concern domestic concern for China that it really does need to get its economy back up and running, and that does of course involve encouraging foreign companies in particular to stay in China, to continue expanding in China. So any threat to that, of course is somewhat sort of undermines that agenda. But I think the bigger issue is how the sort of geopolitics is shifting and where
India ultimately comes out. And we've seen since about twenty seventeen India has sort of more closely to the US.
When you look at the India China relationship, they do share a disputed border of more than two thousand miles. Can you help me understand how significant this is in just the overall relationship.
Absolutely, it's a really critical part of why India views China as such a big threat. And China has tried to separate this issue away from, for example, is economic and trade issues with India, but India has maintained this is really a critical sticking point. And essentially, since twenty twenty, China India have been locked in their deadliest border conflict
in about four decades. Both countries have had fatalities, and both countries have tried to increasingly militarize the areas around that border, bringing in more soldiers, bringing in more artillery, guns, fighter jets and so on. So that really is a big sticking point for Mody and seedsmping.
Rebecca, thank you so much for helping us understand this complicated relationship between the US and India as the US prepares for the state visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the coming week. By the way, he's also been invited to address a joint meeting of Congress. Bloomberg's Rebecca Chung Wilkins. She is our Asia Government and Politics correspondent. I'm Doug Prisner. You can join us weekdays here from Bloomberg day Break Asia beginning at six am in Hong Kong, six pm on Wall Street.
Tom, thank you, Doug, and you can hear hosts Doug Prisner and colleagues on Bloomberg day Break Asia Sunday through Thursday Evening's Wall Street Time and coming up here on Bloomberg day Break Weekend, we turn our attention back to the Fed because a key Senate committee has scheduled the nomination hearing for a number of FED positions. I'm Tom Busby, and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look ahead at the top stories for investors
in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby in New York. A key Senate committee a scheduled a nomination hearing for a number of Federal Reserve positions. Talking about the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and for more, Let's head to our Bloomberg ninety nine one newsroom in Washington and Bloomberg Sound On. Co host Kaylee Lines.
Yeah, Tom, that's right. The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing this coming Wednesday to consider the nominations of Philip Jefferson who's a current board member to be promoted to vice chair, and Lisa Cook and Audrena Kogler to be FED governors. Cook of course, already became a governor last year, but filled a seat with a term that ends in January, so she's been renominated to serve another
full fourteen year term. So the question is will they sail through this process or could we see this get political? Joining me now as Kate Davidson, who leads our FED coverage here in Washington. So, Kate, are we expecting these confirmations to be politically difficult at all? Obviously we've seen this in the past. Everybody remembers what happened with Sarah Bloom Raskin, for example. But if Jefferson and Cook already are in the seats, does that make it easier?
I mean, it's certainly that would be the expectation, right, So, Phil Jefferson, he was confirmed I think ultimately ninety seven to three I think was the vote.
It was.
It was very bipartisan, and he's expected to get a lot of supporting and this is a promotion for him. He's in a he'll be in a bigger, kind of more influential role. You know, the FED Vice chair is typically like the right hand man, right or woman of the FED chair. You know, he plays a big role in getting out the message of the committee and sort of reinforcing or amplifying what Chair j Powell wants to communicate.
I mean typically, right, Leil Brainerd, who was in the job before, had a little bit you know, different stuff. I mean she you'd occasionally hear her sounded a different note on some things, but for the most part that's you know, it's an important job. So for sure, I think we can expect that he'll get some tough questions from members on both sides, and I would imagine that you know, Senator Elizabeth Warren, for example, she's been very
tough on Powell. I'm sure she's going to push Jefferson to commit to, you know, backing off of the raid hiking campaign, which which of course he won't do. I think he'll probably just say what we've heard other FED officials say, which is that their data dependent and it depends on how the economy evolves. So I think that ultimately he'll probably be fine. Lisa Cook, it's a little
bit less certain. She faced a difficult, difficult confirmation there was a lot of pushback from Republicans who had a lot of different arguments that you know, frankly, some folks said were kind of unfair and we're you know, not arguments that some of her colleagues or other people who are nominated at the time were facing. But you know, things like she she didn't have, you know, the proper experience,
she wasn't qualified. I mean, obviously she she got widespread support from the economic community, so she eventually did get through. We haven't heard that same kind of chatter this time around. She's on the board now. She made it through, so I think we can expect that she'll be fine. You know, Democrats still control the Senate, so there are more of them.
I don't think it will be a problem, but again, you could you know, there could be I wouldn't say fireworks, but definitely, you know, perhaps a tough line of questioning of her and the decision she's made. Since she's been on the board, things that she's said. She's kept a pretty low profile, so that could also help her. But then we do have a third third nominee, Adriana Kougler, who was new so that's sort of the big question Mark, I think.
And finally, if all of them were to be confirmed, how could FED policy look different under them? So I don't think it will.
Look too different, because, as we've been saying, you know, two of them are already on the board, but that third, you know, that third official Coogler, I mean she she's being nominated by the by the Biden administration, by President Biden, so it's fair to expect that probably her views will align with, you know, what he would like to see. The White House is always pretty careful to not weigh in directly on what the FED is doing, but I think they recognize inflation is still too high and needs
to be brought out under control. But also you don't want to do too much to undercut the labor market. So I would expect that she would hue pretty closely to that. That message what we're hearing from from other FED officials who were nominated by this administration and are currently on the board.
All right, Kate Davidson, who leads our FED coverage here at Bloomberg, thank you so much, and Tom, we'll look forward to Wednesday.
Thank you, Kaylee. That was Bloomberg's SOUNDWN co host Kaylee Lines reporting from our Bloomberg ninety nine one newsroom in Washington, and you can hear sound on weekdays one to three pm on Bloomberg Radio. And that does it for this edition of Bloomberg day Break Weekend. Join us again Monday morning at five am Wall Street Time for the latest on the markets, overseas and the news you need to start your day. I'm Tom Buzzby. Stay with us top
stories and global business headlines. You're coming up right now.