Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at seven am Eastern on Apple CarPlay or Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Richard Claret is here, the vice chairman of the FED, a prodigious economists associated with dynamics stochastic general equilibrium theory. We're not going there. People drive off the road, but we are thrilled at the former vice chairman is with us this morning. James Carter, James o'carter has to fill Michael Blumenthal's slot. He migrates the FED chare over the Treasury Secretary and goes, now what and he picked Paul Voker. Where were you when he did that? And it's seventy nine.
You would at Illinois at the time.
I was not.
I had just graduated Illinois and I think I was in my car driving out to Boston to start graduate school.
Did you go Paul who? Oh?
No, that he was already known at least in macro circles then.
But yeah, it's.
It's just a big deal.
It was a big It was a huge deal. Yeah, the store the inflation worries we have now, and part of that is, OMG, back to the sixties, that we're going to get inflation, not like what vulgar faced, but a higher inflation. Do you buy it?
Oh no, No.
Ultimately we're going to get the rate of inflation the FED once and and I think the FED once inflation.
Around two percent.
There's always shocks and noise, but but that's where we're going to end up.
How are we going to get there? I mean, are they going to have to? I mean it just feels like that that inflation is kind of stickier around this level. Here's how do you think this is going to play out?
Well? I agree.
In fact, if anything, you know, the bumpy road analogy has proven to be a good one. Progress continued in twenty four but slowed, you know.
I think we maybe discussed.
When I was on your show before hearkening back to the eighties, and so what we could see is what we used to call opportunistic disinflation. That is, you do the heavy lift and get inflation close to where you want it, so now say two and a half, but you basically wait till the next recession to cover that last mile, and so that's what we may see inflation in the load of mid twos until the next downturn.
Are you forecasting a downturn anytime?
Oh no, no, no, no, But remember we haven't repealed the business cycle so on. I think the unconditional chance of a recession is about one and six.
So at some point we're going to have a recession.
April of four years back when the Red Sox had a chance, Richard Claire to fed let me quote exactly, folks, I mean, I mean, this is just what it's about. Get the Sparta gets angry at me when I quote Latin. Okay, he's like, you know, time, give it up, Clarita. Inflation to average is two percent over time represents an ex anti aspiration of the FOMC, but not a time inconsistent
ex post commitment. Yeah, you lost some of us there, all difference equation, guy, What is a time inconsistent ex post commitment?
Well yeah, I think that was probably why share Clarido channeling Professor Clarita. The basic point was that price stability means that expectations of inflation are anchored at a low number, so say two percent, they're always going to be shocks, oil, shocks, whatever.
But you want people to expect.
Over five years that inflation is going to be two percent, and so really inflation targeting is really about targeting expected inflation.
And so the basic idea there is, if.
You want people to expect inflation is going to be too you want to try to keep it at two on average.
Okay, I'm going to go to the New School of Social research, Kyle Brunner in company. There's something new. It's called the debt in the deficit? Are we losing our anchored ability with the debt in the deficit where it is?
Well, it makes the Fed's job a hell of a lot harder, There's no doubt about it. And I'm glad Tom that you mentioned both debt and deficit because they're both relevant. The deficit is how much we're borrowing every year going forward. The debt is how much we borrowed in the last two hundred and fifty years, and that number is now north of one hundred percent of GDP. And the last time we saw a number like that was in nineteen forty five, at the end of World
War Too. Indeed, Ryan Hart and Rogueoff wrote a book ten years ago that said, you know, usually when debt gets one hundred percent of GDP, bad stuff happens, and so it will make the Fed's job harder for sure.
When I've been on Wall Street since nineteen eighty six, we've been talking about deficits.
And the dead since nineteen eighty at least. Then is it ever going to come to roosts? What will it be?
We have an auction for United States treasures and nobody shows up.
Well, it's a great point because I started my career around the same time, also in Boston. Yeah, so the boy has now cried wolf for forty years, but they're back in those days people were angsting about debt and deficits, but debt was thirty percent of GDP, not one hundred and so as the numbers get bigger, but the US can kick this can down the road because we still are the global reserve currency.
So let me take a while.
We welcome all of you across the nation, and I can't say enough about the schedule to they thank you, liz In Saunders and Craig Moffatt, the former vice chairman the other Federal Reserve System, Richard claireta Columbia and PIMCO with us this morning. Richard Claida, let's go back to Girtler in Clarida and the theory, the mathematics, the complexities of DSGE. You've had the courage to say, I'm thinking simpler now, Oh yeah. Do we have an operative theory
at the Equals Building? If everyone's thinking simpler in the new humility, well, I don't think.
The Eccles building are now the Martin Building can afford to be that theoretical. Indeed, my four years at the FAD really impressed upon me that there's there's a limit to how far theory can take you.
It's a good place to start, you know.
I think all central banks, including the FAD, are trying to learn lessons about the inflation and the disinflation, and I think an appropriate level of humility is probably warranted right now.
The labor market.
We're going to get some more labor market data today with initial jobs claims and then on Friday with the non farm payrolls. I don't know, four point two percent. That seems like a good labor market.
It's a great labor market.
You know. The the unemployment rate right before the pandemic was running right around three point nine four percent. The unemployment right now is historically low. Wage gains exceed inflation. It is a good labor market. The labor market clearly was overheating a couple of years ago.
But it is a good labor You.
Just said it's a great it's a good labor market. I've heard you say it's a solid economy. We had eighty two point eight percent of our listeners and viewers saying the vice chairman's nuts, okay, and that it's a disaggregated economy. Well, and there's people out there, charge card debt, bankruptcies, people can't get jobs, et cetera. Rent's coming down out west. How does a FED prosecute a barbel America?
Well, okay, so I'm glad you gave me an entree here. So when I said it's a good labor market, you would rather be operating with a four percent unemployment than a fourteen percent unemployment. But absolutely, Tom, Indeed, if anything, I think the last five years have impressed upon me how important it is both for macro economists and thinking about the political economy of macro to understand that there's
you know, there are halves and has nuts. And you know, if you own your home and if you own stocks, you've had a great five years. But forty percent of Americans don't own. They rent, and they don't own stocks, and for them, all of this talk about a great economy just seems like gibberish. So let me acknowledge the point thirty seconds here, just finish the thought.
Can a FED prosecute one monetary policy for two John Edwards Americas?
Well, the Fed only has one, really one tool, which is interest rates or job vooning about interest rates.
And so what the Fed at best can do is it can.
Keep the average rate of unemployment low, and it can keep the average rate of inflation low. But the factors that we just discussed and even more factors, are really beyond what monetary policy can address.
Paul wants to get to the adult conversation on tariff, so I'll be the rude one. Can you serve a treasury with mister pissent? Have you made the trip to mar A Lago? Are you under any consideration by the administration for your value services?
I love doing what I'm doing, so the answer is no.
That's your que Paul.
I was just putting the Clarity Time Out.
Chair and Lisa Matteo has been reporting on more tariff news here coming from this president seems to be an economic policy tool that this incoming president really is going to rely upon. Can you give us your, I don't know your two cents on tariffs and kind of how would you think about them?
Okay, tariffs are complicated because they have multiple effects. One is one thing we know for sure they do raise revenue.
The other thing we.
Know is they'll put upper pressure on the price of imports. How much is hard to estimate, depends on if companies absorbed in the margins. They can also invite retaliation, which also then influences our ability to.
Export. And so it's really been a number of.
Decades since we've had broad based tariffs. I think you'd have to go back really to the early nineteen fifties to look at levels of tariffs like some are talking about now. So pretty complicated, but we know for sure they raise revenue and they put upper pressure.
Do they bene for it? Do they raise revenue for the US government?
Well, mechanically, because if you import something and you have to pay a tariff on it, that revenue which is now zero roughly zero will go up.
Okay, I was in the Claire didn't know this, but I was in the back of the classroom at Columbia. Okay, the curve went down when I showed up. This is way more complex than the media discusses. And the answer is there's a thing called a dead weight loss in our in our tariffs price theory, professor, describe what a dead weight loss is for our listeners and viewers.
Well, boy, that's that's uh, that is econ I'm ask question.
Paul Kruman caught up and said, asked him about dead weight.
Essentially, the revenue that the government raises is more than offset by the losses to consumers and producers relative to their ability to either consume goods or produce goods. And so that's that's the dead weight loss.
My definition, it's a lose game.
Well, but the important proviso that almost any tax that raises revenue generates some sort of a loss, whether or not it's the consumption tax or investment tax.
But the heart of the matter here to go to Krugman, is magnitude.
Oh, sure, you can do.
It's almost like negative interest rates. You can do. Tariff light doesn't matter. Yeah, and what the president elect wants is a magnitude of big tariffs. Is there a tip point where Trump's right and they work.
Well? Again, it depends on how long they stay on.
You know.
One view is that you put tariffs on countries basically then come to the negotiating table and then they come off.
And so it's very importantly going.
To depend upon the detail of the tariffs, whether or not there's retaliation, and whether or not there is an endgame. And really without answering that, it's really hard to make an informed assessment.
One of the economic discussions over the last year or two has been US exceptionalism.
Yeah, vis be some of our large trading partners.
Let's look at China here, we had some more data about the China yields falling here. As a global economic advisor at PIMCO, what is your view of China here? How concerned should the world's economy be about the Chinese economy?
Well, I think, look, China is huge in terms of the size of the economy now and importantly, there are some important and I think ongoing challenges, including the fact, you know, they've got the first thing of a big real estate bubble they have a high unemployment rate among their youth, and of course the rest of the world, including the US and Europe, is going to be more aggressive in terms of resisting a surge of China exports and so near in long term, it's a challenging environment.
Paul Krugman with US on Friday. Wow, it's great to have Clarinon. Krugman's what Luberg says about I have on my reading desk. I'm two chapters in Ned phelps fabulous book summarizing his work. Explain why people should read Ned Phelps.
Well, Ned, my colleague and dear friend for thirty five years, is literally one of the giants of economics, won the Nobel Prize, incredibly creative, along with Milton free Even, essentially began to define modern macro and also his work on growth and innovation and entrepreneurship just uh, just a treasure and brilliant.
And so brilliant. He had a second career with dynamism and the enthusiasm and the economy. You heard it from Richard Clarita. Don't take it for me. I'll get Phelps's new book out on Twitter and LinkedIn. It's Jewel Even mentions Clarida. You know a Dina the party you gotta he gave Phelps' parking spot.
I say, during my four years as chair, we had three Nobel laureates so here n yeah, the Barrel and then Stiglitz and then Vickory before.
That, and you were not on speaking terms with any of the good. We got to go and took the fire. Richard CLAREDA thank you so much with you co.
You're listening to The Bloomberg ser Valen's podcast. Catch us Live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern. Listen on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Lindsay Newman, I really can't say enough about her perspective here with G zero media, and you know there are their top ten risks and you know it's sort of pretty grim about it. It's like a G zero world and he's looking at at his jungle here, Lindsey. Sure have you been reading in on Greenland and Panama?
Absolutely?
Tom who was?
And I have to say I've been to Panama. I have not been to Greenland. Certainly flown over Greenland living here in London.
Look what we heard.
Yesterday from the President elect Trump is really what strikes me most, Tom. And this is not an isolation a story. Right, If we think about the first term of President Trump, to make America greater, grant America first, it was really about bringing jobs and manufacturing back to America. There was a concern about the US turning inward. When we see him yesterday talking about perhaps annexing Canada, making it the fifty first state, taking back the Panama Canal, his ambitions
for Greenland. This is a very different set of aspirations that he has for his second term foreign policy approach.
You've got in your top ten risk. First of all, I had Bremer's doing the hoodie thing. Now I mean he's really you know right, he's really cutting a cash Look there, I look, Lindsay Newman, the idea of the rule of don is one of your risks. Is this a different Donald Trump this time around versus eight years ago.
This is a Donald Trump who is facing down the prospects of one more term in office. And what we really see from him is he is different. His approach, not just his approach, but also his perspective is vastly different than what comes from what has come before him. If we take the nearest example of that, of course, as President Biden, and we know that administration was really
about consensus building, negotiations almost to a fault. So how many envoys do we see if we take the Middle East theater, how many envoys do we see fly back and forth? Bill Burns back and forth, Anthony B. Lincoln back and forth to almost know out, you know, to no avail. We're still in the middle of the conflict. The hostages are not home.
And with Trumps, he's taking a very different approach, right.
The approach is, let me scan the landscape, let me look for the points of tension. Let me look and see how the US may be disadvantage. What are the interests that the US wants to pursue, and what are the levers that the administration can pull to create forcing functions and advance Trump and Trump's Administration's ambitions. And we know we saw yesterday and you Las Guest was just talking about this, We know a couple of those already.
Of course, it's going to be tariffs.
He sees that as the solution not just for the trade discrepancies, but he sees it as a solution for how he could perhaps pursue those ambitions with Greenland. And it's also what also came through very clearly yesterday was about energy policy, the differences in energy policy.
We're going to He's saying, you know, we're going to.
Drill day one, and he went on and on about those six hundred and twenty five million acres that Biden has just recently taken offline that obviously irked President elect Trump quite quite clearly. So energy policy is another lever that he's going to be pulling.
Oh, I'm exhausted.
It's exactly so, lindsay, how do you think our big trading partners are going to interact and deal with Trump?
President elect Trump over the next four years.
Yeah, it's a great question.
I mean you're saying, Tom that you're already exhausted, Paul, you're asking how the Europe, how Europe is going to deal with This is actually the column before the storm, I hate to tell you. And you know, it's been a stormy week for Europe if you look at what Elon Musk has been saying.
On X on that platform. We know I've been writing in my columns for G Zero that you.
Know, Europe and Trump's allies, the US's historical allies, they're already packing their go bags.
They're thinking about this. How are they going to be prepared?
You see, for example, defensive spend is now no longer two percent is not the is Yeah right, Trump himself said yesterday five percent. That's going to raise some eyebrows in Europe today. But they're looking to be more flexible on defensive spends. Lindsay says he's going to sit He's willing to sit down. Pujin has said he's willing to sit down. So everybody's looking to be to know what it is to be in Trump world.
Okay, you got the top ten risks out and folks, we're gonna, you know, instead of doing this in one interview, which I've told Ian I'll never do, We're going to spread it out over January. We're thrilled that Lindsay k Newman can be with us from Jezero Media. And you know, Lindsay, I look what Ian said to CBS. He said, it's Trump's way or the highway. What does Secretary of State Rubio do whether it's Trump's way or the highway?
Well, we know that this is Ian is absolutely correct. There he's put in place. Trump has put in place a cabinet around him, or his ambition is to put together this cabinet around him that they all know.
Rubyo knows that the buck stops with Trump. So Rubio has his ambition.
He has his sort of hardline ways with China, his hawkishness on China, which does dovetail nicely with what Trump is after, but ultimately it will be Trump's policy, and those around him, like Rubio know that.
Fascinating. I just what's are the top ten risks, Lindsay, are you really focused on? Which is the You know, I haven't even read the entire document yet, but which is the top risk for Lindsay Newman?
Yeah, well, I will absolutely say that Ian's view of the world as and Eurasia groups of the world around the G zero winning, which just means that the world is in.
A point of geopolitical recession.
That is the lens through which Eurasia Group is seeing all of those other related risks, and that is sort of a thread line of the world in disorder. The multilateral institutions no longer having that same level of buying, the US sort of retrenching and retreating from its role as global guardian.
That is the top risk for your Asia group.
And I would also throw my hat and tied to Greenland these issues of ungoverned spaces. I mean, why is Trump so interested in Greenland? He's now saying because of national security, because of its placement in the world.
It's the bridge to the Arctic.
And we know these ideas like ungoverned spaces, both in sea and in actual space, will be increasing.
Geopolitical risk for the years and decades ahead.
This has been brilliant, Lindsey, when you figure out what the new Washington consensus has, let me know, Lindsey Newman with G zero Media.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Apple car Play and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty joining.
Us now adjusting his schedules. Craig Moffitt Worldwide yesterday put a cell rating on Apple guiding down twenty twenty three percent. Who's counting. Let's start with a why, Craig Moffitt, Why a cell on Apple?
How are you good to see you again? Look, this is really a valuation call.
And look, the market overall is pretty frothy valuations.
But Apple, even relative to.
The MAG seven peer group, is now extremely stretched with a PEG ratio of around three, where the rest of the MAG seven trades with the PEG ratio of round two.
So there's this perceived safety in Apple, wonderful franchise, very dedicated customers, But there is no safety when you're paying thirty three times earnings for a company that's growing organically in the very low single digits, and even with the even with buybacks, earnings are still growing at sort of half the rate of the rest of the MAG seven.
When I look at it, it's the idea of a cell rating, and that means a fractured free cash flow. Are you suggesting this will filter down in the mix of cash from operations, capex and then finally free cash flow where they're going to miss the mark?
No, No, I want to be clear, we're not saying Apple is a broken company. I want to come back to some very real risks that we should talk about.
But Apple is not a broken company.
It's a broken valuation, and there are, as I said, some significant concerns that ought to be reflected in a lower multiple, or at least a more sober multiple than what you've got right now. You know, there was this narrative over the past couple of months, particularly into the last couple of weeks of last.
Year in twenty four.
Where everyone was talking about the fact that Apple was quote unquote melting up in the face of no news. In fact, there was actually quite a bit of news, and it was bad or at least sobering and concerning news.
Obviously the risk of italiatory tariffs when we've got a Trump administration, but more saliently, over the last couple of months, you've had the judge in the Google anti trust case say that the payments that Google makes to Apple for search, which remember that's twenty five percent of Apple's operating income, are patently illegal. Now we don't know how those will change, but there's obviously a risk that they do that ought
to be reflected in the multiple. And then there's real deterioration in China, and some obvious concerns that with China. The Chinese government is obviously not going to allow Western large language models to answer questions in China. So you're going to have to have Chinese partners. That's got to be contemplated with margins and all that sort of things.
So again, nothing says that Apple is broken, although one more thing, there are real concerns about whether AI is going to drive the kind of up grade cycle that seems to be discounted in the stock.
Pretty skeptical, But Apple's not broken. It's the valuation that's broken.
So Craig, given that the valuation may not reflect some of the risk here, I want to go to the China risk here because I think one of my concerns, I think the concerns from a lot of investors is this is a market that was seen as a growth growth driver for Apple, and maybe it's not going to be going forward given the improved competition, maybe the sense of nationalism in that country in terms of you know, buying Chinese products. How do you view China as a risk factor to the Apple story?
You know, that's absolutely right.
Remember, Greater China is the second most important market for Apple, and you've had a couple of things happened since the Big five G upgrade cycle back in twenty one ish First, you had the real growth and empowerment I suppose of
Huawei in China. Where after the US banned exports to China and or chip exports and the like, and tried to limit Huawei and banned Huawei equipment in the United States, Huawei had to turn internally and actually has done quite well, developing quite credible products that are now driving a significant amount of Chinese market share. You've also got companies like Honor and what have you that have built a much more competitive handset market in China than what we've seen
in the past. So it's simply not realistic to think that Apple is going to have the same kind of market share that it had in China. And then the Chinese economy is soft, and so you've got relatively slow growth in China anyway. And then, as I mentioned before, you've got limitations on what China is going to or what China.
Is going to allow Apple to do with respect to AI.
So, Craig, we've seen Tim Cook go to China on several occasions, trying his best. Given the importance of China to the Apple story, what's the risk to their supply chain? Apple supply chain here when we have a Trump administration coming in, which might suggest, you know, just higher tensions between the two countries.
You're right, you know, these kinds of risks are really hard to map out. Last time, under the Trump administration, Apple was exempted. So remember almost all of Apple's key components are imported and in large market measure from China. Those imports were exempted, and I suspect it probably would be again this time. But you also have the risk of retaliatory tariffs that could be related too entirely separate products.
You know, automobiles or something where and in.
Other countries where you have where Apple as an ambassador of the US and with a clear US identity, could face real tariffs elsewhere in the world.
Right, Craig, We've got time for one more question. It's so important Comcast. You've got to buy in Comcast. It's back to a twenty seventeen pricing. I mean, it's not doing a Warner Brothers discovery, but it's moldy. What would you suggest to Brian Roberts that he needs to do to make a permanent force out of his Comcast.
Well, you remember, Tom, you started that question by thinking about the media side of Comcast. And while the media side of Comcast is important, it is still the tail and it shouldn't be wagging the dog. Comcast is primarily a cable infrastructure company, and they have actually a lot of advantages in cable infrastructure, not least that this convergence world that we're heading into really favors the cable operators because they can offer mobile everywhere that they offer broadband.
The telephone companies can't come close to doing that. So I think the real story of Comcast is actually on the cable side, not on the media side.
All right, one of our interns made up the notes Craig for you on short notice, thank you so much for joining And they thought we were talking to Nathanson, so they said, ask him about the Yankees, Craig Moffas.
I'm a Jets fan, so if you want to talk misery, talk about the Jets with me.
I mean it's painful to say the least. I mean it's been clumsy. The Jets have been clumsy. Craig short notice on the way to the airport, Thank you so much for joining us today. His cell rating on Apple that made a global news yesterday from Moffatt Nathansen as Well.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Apple car Play and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal.
The Lissaber tell you our hugely anticipated We go to Lisa Mateo. Now for the newspapers, what do you see?
All right?
So last night they kick off to the new High Tech Golf League tg L. You've been hearing all about it right in the sports. Oh you have to because this is the future.
Okay.
So Tiger Woods, Roy McElroy, they envisioned it for years, right, finally kicked off fifteen hole mac under two hours to complete. Okay, So that's the thing. There is there a clock, there's you know what, that's a good question if there is a clock. But under two hours?
Are they quivering in Augusta wise?
No, they actually though in the in the traps and the bunkers they used to sand from Augustine extra cool that it's a made for TV thing.
It's to bring in the younger demos, the younger kids. I did not see your thoughts. It's fine, it's fine.
It's just trying to make golf more fun, more accessible to more people. Take it out of the stodgy country clubs. That's making it a little bit more like a man cave of that. A lot of guys, you know.
Is it top golf?
It's something like that, Lisa, have you done top Golf?
I have?
I love it. It's so much fun because you have food and drinks and you.
Just go crazy, like you're doing the margarite in your head.
Yeah.
But in Top Golf, though, you're actually hitting it. So this one is more like video screen, like a simulation to for this one. So that's the thing behind it.
But you're like, no, it's not for me.
But it's DJ Khalid was there.
They had music.
DJ.
Again, it's a big party.
But you're right, next generation. So ultra processed foods, are they really bad for us? Okay, this is a question a lot of people are asking. There was a study out the Wall Street Journal point to it, and it said eating packaged foods doesn't automatically result in over eating and waking as long as you stick to foods that are low in calories program don't have these certain combinations of fat salt, carbs, and sugar. So let me give
you an example what you can do, Tom. You can avoid foods at clock in a two calories program or more like frozen meatballs there you go stick to those at around one calorie, like low fat flavored yogurt.
Okay, butch See actually has a smile on her face.
It's just laughing at us. You should see her breakfast, folks. It's like twelve on. It's like, no, it's like two hundred calories, isn't it about? Okay, you can cheat on this, but you got to if we could small portions.
Smaller portions, yes, that is key, but moderation, like if you do have these ultra protects.
The Cracker bowel does not believe in small portions.
No, they do. I'm reading David McCullough on Paris right now. In eighteen thirty the Americans were complaining about the small portions in Paris. Nothing's changed, right.
No, yeah, they do have tiny portions.
Well, so, well, look we watched like it's like goodbye Columbus. They're at the dining room table and Jack Cloud's going you eat like.
A bird, leasty, eat like a bird.
Next?
Okay, Tom, I have another social media platform to you to join.
Okay, ready it is Blue Sky. Okay.
So it's not really new. It started like it was an extension of an X an internal project, but it launched about a year ago. But sources telling Business Insider it's in the final stages raising. New funding led by Bane Capital Ventures could value the company at around seven hundred million dollars so could give X some competition.
Who knows.
But it's really been on the rise. It grew from twenty five point nine million users in twenty twenty four, and it started about a year ago, so went from three million to twenty nine million.
I mean, I mean people are looking for alternatives to X. But I mean, yes, we'll see it's still kind of it's still out there and nobody really cares if it's profitable or anymore.
Somewhere I said, X has actually picked up breaking news momentum. The reality at one am last night is I'm watching Los Angeles scanner on Twitter and I'm watching it with all the fire people in that and it's some guy in his house on Twitter telling you exactly what's going on street by street. You become the bad mouth in Twitter. I don't get I see everybody using it.
Next, okay, last one and that big casino complex and Manhattan's huts and yards. They were pitching it twelve million dollars. Well actually got shot down by Community Board four. So that's a big black eye to it. We had this eighty story tower, wanted to bring all this casino to the Hudson Yards area. Those of members are saying, you know what, it's just a nightmare. Is going to bring traffic emission problems. But the vote still has to go to the city council to sign off.
So so thank you for not doing congestion pricing today you walk it was congestion free. Yes, very good, Lisa Monteo, thank you so much the newspapers this morning.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast, available on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else and you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal