Fed Should Remain Accommodative, Kocherlakota Says

agenda as you get back to work. It's Wednesday, January three. FED minutes were about to drop your waiting for earnings from some of the big corporate side of the next couple of weeks as well. What is at the top of the list I think today on the agenda. Obviously we're watching for the FMC minutes, as you've already mentioned. But the other thing I think a lot of us are working on right now is trying to figure out exactly how the tax reforms in the US will affect

earnings for US companies. I mean, there's a lot of detail and the Tax Cutting Jobs Act the t c j A, and so we've had companies gradually trickling out a bit of information about how they might pay out a small bonus to employees. You know, a number of the banks have come out and said they'll give a thousand dollar bonus to each of their employees who make under a certain income level. But what we really need to see is the very specifics of how that tax

plan will affect net income. And it's not that easy to assess from outside of a company because a lot of it depends on cross border flows in terms of between multinational entities, and you know, understanding how I think the provision was called BEAT, which is basically the the Enhancement and Avoidance of tax element, so base enhanced, baseline enhancement. So we're trying to watch a lot of this waiting

for companies to give us more granularity. I think we'll start getting that late next week, whenever we start getting the bank earnings. How mechanical would it be run? Because from the outside looking in from thirty five, fast and fate, you could just sit there and say, Wow, they tighten the new open tax. Right, they pluck that in, and then they give you some brand new guidance for the year ahead. Oh it's I wish it were that simple.

And I think what you've seen from a number of the cell side strategists, which is still helpful, is taking a broad brush approach and saying, Okay, if your effective tax rate was x and the new tax rate is why,

let's look at the difference. Now, machits go up. But it really does come down to which legal entities within a company have, which exposures across borders really drives for example, some of the interest the corporate interest deductibility provisions, and that is not disclosed in most ten ks or ten queues. So even if you do the most in depth fundamental research you can possibly do from outside a company, much of this is almost impossible to decipher. Do you have

a big sector focus right now? Uh? With in terms of holdings, No. I think one area where we have seen opportunity over the last year, and say the latter part of last year, was increasing disposure to the energy sector. Um it is one of the few areas of the market where actually you've seen the PE ratio go down materially last year, we've seen energy prices basically move up,

which could bode well for some of these companies. And also our long term analysis of the demand trajectory for fossil fuels still actually looks reasonably positive for these companies.

You mentioned fossil Fuels catch us right to a headline which is run from our ute when you and I were younger doing level one, level two, level three, and it would be the offshoot of the Virginia Railway and Power Company, And of course that is Dominion D and you know the ultimate yield stock of years ago, Dominion to buy Scanner. I hate these modern names run s, C, A, N A. I have no idea what Scanning is. I think they serve hot dogs at the Atlanta Brave Stadium.

South Carolina Electric and Gas Company is the adult name for SCANNA, but it does speak to one of the trends here, which is mergers. Into this year Dominion to buy Scanna stock deel fifty five dollars thirty cents, A little buch more on that through the day, but there it is no nominal GDP. Tough revenue growth, we gotta merge. That's a theme, right. I think we'll continue to see that. I mean, I do think we will see better top line growth on the back of better wage growth in

the US. I think the synchronized global recovery will lead to a better economic environment for companies to organically grow. But I also think if you think about what drives murders, mergers and acquisitions, it's CEO confidence, it's financing costs. You know, it's a number of these kind of factors in terms of the drive activity. And John and I have talked

about this before. John, this is the Lemmings thing. Everybody for the door in the theater is rates rise, John Farroll, you wonder what CFOs tell the CEO, like, let's go, is maybe the big surprise for two thousand have they been planning that already run on the refinancing side of things, if they've been plugging in the low rights for longer, longer maturities, lower rights, that they've been making those moves

before rates rise. I do think the corporates have largely termed out their debt and taken advantage of these incredibly rates, and they recognize that they're historically low. But by the way, let's be fair, they've recognized they were historically low for the last ten years, right, so every time you turn them out, you found you could turn it out even longer at a lower rate. But I do believe in two thousand and eighteen, that we are going to see

higher interest rates the long end of the curve. I mean, if I look at the Eurozone, we're fifty percent roughly of Eurozone sovereign debt had a negative yield at the end of the year in nominal terms, and yet you've got an economic recovery that is four years into this process. I think you're going to see higher rates in the Eurozone. I mean easily. I think you could see ten year blewn yield's top one percent this year, and I think that will have a relative value effect on US treasuries.

So so if I look at fixed income and interest rates, I do believe rates higher in twenty eighteen is a high probability call. And if I'm a company, I'm going to think about that in terms of my opportunity to lock and load in terms of these So that's the culporate response. I want to gudge what the investor response is,

because investors will look at that situation. At some point, you stop using the SMP five hundred a t F as a money market fund and catching in whenever you like for a profit, and start looking at what's happening in treasuries and saying, you know what, there's some income in fixed income and I'd like to go to that. This is a multi factor question, right. I think part of it is the level of dividing yields. Part of

it is the level of interest rates. The other factor to keep in mind is what's happening with corporate pension plans. With record levels on equity markets, many of the private pensions are now fully funded, and if they get the opportunity where you get a fifty basis point, you'll back up. The appeal of immunizing their pension risk and shifting out of equities into fixed income to match their assets and liabilities will be pretty compelling. So I do think that

will be an interesting interplay. Run Thank you, Thank you, Thank a run Temple with us Lazar just a great way to kick off the year. He is with Lazard Asset Management out of Minneapolis. Narrianna Cucha Dakota one of our most esteemed economists. Thinking in a way of mathematics. He decided getting out the map in Minnesota to move to warmer climbs and joins us this morning for Rochester, New York. Let's cut to the chase. UH Professor Caucho Dakota at the University of Rochester. You can look out

your window his the Genesee River frozen over. Uh you know, I I don't look on the river, but I'm sure it's frozen. It is. Well, it's quite quite cold. It's been called here for quite some time. You know. Hate the Jenny Creemel was worm as well. You have a terrific chart out for Bloomberg View today of the core conundrum the chairman Powell of faces Can people like you actually move inflation? We have disinflation, we're told we have a core pc South. Can people in suits and ties

and expensive dresses like cher yelling war? Can you actually move the needle on inflation? You know, I think the key is really to think about it is that the FED can stop inflation from coming, and it can stop inflation from coming by by raising it's it's regulator tightening its regulat around the economy that is raising rates. Um. And what I worry about is that over the past few years, you know, since the initiation lift off in December. Uh,

you the Fed's complaining, boy, inflation is too low. Well, if inflation is too low, why are you trying to choke off acond of activity by raising rates. Um. If the FED were to to take a much more gradual approach to raising rates, uh, standing back letting, letting the economy grow more rapidly, that's gonna it's going to have to lead to more demand for for workers. That's gonna push up on wages and costs for firms, and you're gonna get inflation within the model building that we do,

within the Newtonian mechanics that you are expert at. And frankly, we go beyond the work of say Alfred Marshall and even Maynard Keynes and and John Hicks as we go to modern mathematics. Do we have the tools available given the behavioral and demographic realities of our economy? Can you dovetail your mathematical world with the d peopling of America, with a lack of population growth, with with all sorts

of inequalities that are out there. Yeah, these are great questions, and there's a ton of work going on and all these issues, um, you know they uh. The major meetings for for economics are gonna be taking place over the weekend and there'll be a lot of conversation about exactly these kinds of questions. But with all that said, monetary policy doesn't really isn't really at the cutting edge of

all these kinds of issues. It if you see inflation too low, it's pretty simple what you have to do, keep policy and and and right now what we're seeing is the opposite you are, I'll suggest, I mean, and this goes to the legacy of Gary Stern in the Minneapolis You were wonderfully agnostic in the political debate. There is a common ground. I'm just gonna pick on two folks between Rick Michigan of Colombia and Charles Plasser out

of the Carnegie Rochester Freshwater School. They have a lot of common ground, and yet they aggressively disagree on whether a central bank can get out in front of the trend or if by definition they act after the fact. What's your experience here is a central bank by definition ex post? I think that the it's it's very difficult to predict where bad times are going to come from. Always, I think the the the job of central banks is to be as aggressive as possible in terms of the

clean up after after bad shocks have taken place. Well, I agree that I guess we saw that but it's not two thousand and eight, two thousand ten, the intellectual courage of Ben Bernanki and other as we came out of this crisis, we're now a decade on. So now

what should be the policy? Uh? Look, I think that um, the post you are kind enough are referred to, made the point that actually we still see the economy very subdued relative where we were ten years ago, and even even relatively we were eighteen years ago at the beginning of the two thousands, um, And so I think that behooves the FED to remain very accommodated with monetary policy. Look, it's not a question of trying to make things happen, it's a question of not getting in the way of

things that are happening. So you see this great tax bill that Congress passed, and I say great in terms of actually trying to improve the growth outcomes for for the US, both on the demand side and on the supply side. If um, uh that those growth outcomes can only materialize if the FED doesn't get in the way of them happening by raising rates to rapidly. How do you respond to the cocktail of potent chual GDP, that

is subpar based on new productivity and population realities. If Michael Faroli at JP Morgan out of Boost Chicago, if Michael Faroli can say it's sub two percent, do you adjust your calculus now at the FED or do you have to wait until you see the whites of subpar? G d p iyes. I think that you know, the FED has been adjusting it's it's vision and potentially agree with the last over the last eight or nine years.

And and um, you you'll see in the forecast from CEE participants that they they've adjusted their their vision downward. But the question is how much downward should you go? And how much gap has left? And I I I think there's still more room for improvement that can be facilitated by monetary policy. Um. The one piece I'll mate point on makeoff potential is that that some of the things that are in the tax bill and also the deregulatory UH initiatives coming out of White House are actually

aimed at boosting potential output. Okay, but that's something that that the fantastic no account This is critical and I don't want you know it's a media question. I apologize, professor, but I'm gonna go there right now? How do you respond when the President United States suggests three percent real GDP and some of his supporters get out to four percent real GDP? Can we get there given the potential

calculus we've got right now? So I think it's a question of what people mean when they throw those numbers around. If they need uh they think that uh potential? Can growth can be permanently or even over a decade at four percent per year? I'm extremely skeptical, Um, can we get there without? Can we get four percent growth for a year or even two years without causing undue inflation? Possibly?

I mean that's a possible issue. And then that becomes you know, if you're in the White House, I can see why you might want to push on that as much as you can. Professor Cutchy Cola, let me ask you one final question by requirement, do we need a culture lacoda like vice chairman of the Fed? Everybody says Chairman Powell has certain constructive attributes, but does he need someone that understands Clarida and Gurtler's d s g E. Does he need somebody sitting in that vice chairman chair

that can get through your pH D thesis. Uh. You know, I I think that I worked closely with Jay when I j Paul when I was on the scene. I think that he's a very smart guy. He's able to analyze a bunch of the frame I think he understands the frameworks well. I think he understands how they come to the data. Is is he going to do cutting edge research and economics? Now? Do you need a vice chair like that? Please? I don't. I don't really think so. I think that it's you want someone who the chair.

The main thing you're gonna want in that position is um someone who's gonna be very supportive to the chairs. The chair feels comfortable with the chair, feel ols is going to be helpful to to him in uh, in making their decisions. That might well be somebody who has a lot of mathematical firepower, but it might well not be. I think it really depends on what on the chair, what what what? What? In this case he wants professor, thank you so much for joining us today from the

University of Rochester and Arianna Cultural Dakota. Of course, with the mini applos fed a good tour of duty there between Gary Stern and Neil Cush Curry a bit ago. Why don't you bring in Christian Mamandy, Alright, you don't. I don't even know why he showed up for work in two thousand and eighteen after Hour International performed last year. All right, well, Christian MoManI, thanks very much for being with us. Of course, from Oppenheimer Funds, the chief investment officer,

Happy new year to you. You've written in the past or set in the past that the tax overhaul bill is going to give us a one time pop. What happens after that? So for the markets to get to a different level altogether, economic growth has to pick up in a meaningful way through increased investments. If this tax bill is going to deliver superior growth, in our view, that is less likely. What is going to happen is

you basically have a trillion dollar deficit. That's basically provide a fiscal stimulus, and as a result, in the short term you'll get a pop in terms of growth. In addition, companies would be making more money because they're paying less taxes, and as a result, earnings are going to go up. Once all of that kind of flushes through the system, we're back to the same trend upward trajectory as we had before. When you say upward trajectory, upward trajectory of

what asset prices like stocks? Oh, yes, upward trajectory. Both. Growth is going to be at a constant in our view around let's say two and change. In that context, as the economy grows, profitability grows, asset prices will probably continue to trend up. In our view, this is still going to be the longest business cycle that any of us has ever experienced. We don't expect a recession in two thousand and eighteen or two thousand nineteen for that matter. Is this really a business cycle or is it a

credit cycle? Really good? I think that's a that's a that's a really good question. I think the business cycle and credit cycle at this point are correlated. And because this cycle really has been so muted. If the if the credit cycle UH has difficulty in some way, that is we in a situation where we have problems in in credit creation, I think the growth is going to slow down. Okay more so than before PIM was old enough.

We were too young Christian to do this. But if we were at Oxford with Johnny Hicks a few years ago, and you look at the classic I S l M model. What Pim's great question is, are we on the I S curve and is that the dynamics we should watch the real economy? Or are we on the l M curve that strange financial system and money base that we work within. What has your attention here that real economy or is it the financial dynamics that that reigns supreme

in two thousand eighteen. So, I think this has been a topic of discussion for quite some time, people asserting that it's really all funny money, that is, it's because of monetary jerrymandering that we are getting the markets to a different level. We don't think that is the case. That is, if you look at the growth and earnings, if you look at the fundamentals of the economy, things have improved meaningfully and they continue to improve. In two

was an eighteen. We think growth is going to be better in the US and on a global basis, Earnings are going to be better in the US and on a global basis, and therefore markets are going to be had. A lot of that is already anticipated and therefore price thing. So we don't have superlative expectations with respect to the market. But I think this is more fundamental driven rather than just the LM part that you were talking about. So where do you focus your attention in growth stocks? Well, yes,

we continue to favor growth stocks. We some expectations in the market is that we'll get back to the value band wagon soon. I I don't think that is the case. For that to happen, rates have to move up meaningfully higher, inflation expectations have to go up meaningfully higher. We don't think that happens. Uh. You know, the things to watch in that regard would be if the investment cycle picked up in a meaningful way. Again, we don't think that

is going to be the case. So we are still focused on growth stocks, and we are from a geographic standpoint, we have far more folks in international and emerging markets

than in the US. Christian. If I go to Davos, which I am here in a number of weeks, there are gonna be buses plastered with there's gonna be an infrastructure boom and pick kazakhstand This morning, Jonathan Mahler in New York Magazine writes a definitive article Excuse me, New York Times Magazine, The definitive article on the case for the subway. I'm building the subway, and you know all that I mean is infrastructure part of the investment cycle

that I could be in domestically and international. So internationally, investments are actually slowing rather than accelerating, primarily because of slowdown in investments in the places like China, which have been booming for quite some time. They are moving to a consumer driven economy. What you're talking about is really an infrastructure boom. Uh. In the US, I wish that

was the case. I wish the billion or the trillion dollars that we spent on tax cuts was spent actually in infrastructure, because that would have revived the U s economy and potentially gotten us to a different level from a growth perspective. We're thrilled to have with his Christian Mormoney it Oppenheimer Funds. Full disclosure, folks, Oppenheimer Funds has been more than supportive of all we do, your Bloomberg Radio and Bloomberg surveillance. Uh, Christian, we've had a bang

up year. As we mentioned earlier. How do you find companies? I mean, do you make sector bets on Indonesia? Do you go long Indonesia like the game of risk from our childhood or does somebody out there, some thirty two year old young Turk at Oppenheimer Funds, do they find a mom and pop business forwarded miles from Jakarta and say this looks good, how do you actually do it? So for investing in emerging markets, for that matter, investing anywhere,

we are more companies specific rather than geography. So the best example of that is probably China. If you want to invest in China, you don't want to invest in a Chinese steel company, despite the fact that Chinese steel companies probably the largest part of the Chinese economy. You really want to invest in Chinese consumers, the internet companies who are doing fantastic things in terms of creating new

businesses and opportunities. So for us, it's all about companies, and then we aggregated up to a level that that we look at, but it's really about companies rather than geography. Okay, So in the time of Method two, in this historic day for Global Wall Street, it's based on by side like Oppenheimer Funds or sell side traditional sell side research. Do you need sell side research in the future or is that can become less dominant for her Christian Mamani

by side animals. Well, so you know, at the end of the day, if we simply rely on sales side research, then we basically would be part of the consensus because there are lots of consumers of that reason, So we we we really focused on doing all of our things. Our investment philosophy is really focusing on long term trends.

You know, we have stocks that we have owned for twenty thirty years because if it's a particular approach and philosophy, so we focus on finding those opportunities and companies that can take advantage of those. You'll remember this the way you played Mexico hosted by t Max. Yeah, I mean that's what you used to do, Christian. You'd buy the big telephone company or the big concrete company. Writing those days are over, Christian, I just want to push a

little bit here. Okay, I got the idea of China and the consumers, So in my mind I immediately think Ali bobba symbol B A B A. That's not hard if you decide that Ali Bob is going to be sticking around and going to benefit from ink respending from the Chinese consumer, Why do I need Oppenheimer to tell me that the stock is up a d from last December from December. Why wouldn't I just stick with Ali

Baba and call it a day. If you have the capability of going out and finding those opportunities, but not finding those opportunities, I mean finding this opportunity, right, I mean, Ali Baba's plastered over every story that you write or here when it comes to China, I mean, we we got it, Ali Baba, jack mass success story, fabulous stocks up seven and a p this year so far, and

I mean so I'm wondering, why make it more complicated? Well, we we like Ali Baba too, but our point would be that there are better opportunities than just Ali Baba. What do you want to do is find Ali Baba five years ago so or finding ten then ten years ago. So it's really not focusing on names that we all know about. It's really focusing on names that have the potential of becoming names that we will eventually know about. So that means that you were you were invested in

Ali Baba way back for example. Absolutely, we have been invested in Ali Baba from the I P O and we invest in some private companies long before the I p R. So, yes, we go out and talk to I was actually in China three weeks ago meeting all of these little companies that that kind of are creating new businesses. So tell us about the best new business,

the best small business that you met with three weeks ago. Well, so you know, we we met with a car hailing company, the competitor for uber in in in in China, and they are delivering almost let's say, twenty million rides right here.

It's a private company, and we are invested in it as a private company, along with all sorts of really good investors like soft Bark and Alive Baba and and having getting access to these types of opportunity would be yes, that would be exactly d D. All Right, so you you met with you met with d D and you said, this is a company that we love. Is there any pushback?

I mean, what do you mean? I guess right, hearing, but I mean, you know, Hubert doesn't make any money, and d D is investing money in places like Brazil and buying bike sharing programs. Well, so you know clearly they are investing in lots of new opportunities. But there their current business in China, and even their business in Brazil is actually getting to a much better level than their their comparis. The point isn't that that we we uh we invested in d D because the point returning up,

you know, positive. The point is you basically have to tap into the ecosystem. We met a company there, for example, that is actually trying to do the same thing that the car healing companies did for ride sharing into the half truckload transportation in China, which is a fantastic opportunity where you can distant media a whole lot of local brokers and create a create a good business. Then if you can get to that in an early stage enough, you can you can do very well. Thanks so much,

Christian Mamati greatly greatly appreciate it. With Oppenheimer Funds a good briefing there on some of the block and tackle because all of this on the backdrop of MIVID too. Okay, the stereotype, the myth Texas is Republican. That's begin with a little history. Lyndon Baines Johnson twenty three seats in the Texas Delegation, the explosion of the Texas economy. It brings us out to thirty six seats today and the stereotype and myth is they're all Republican. You know the story.

Will Heard knows that is not true. He's a congressman from a twenty three district, thinks San Antonio, his district is Hispanic and he won barely within that closely contested twenty three district and he joins US right now. Thomas Cogsman heard wonderful to uh speak to you. I know, my colleague Pim Fox wants to talk to you about the fractious nature of your district. I want to talk about your skill set. Out of Texas A and M. You became a c I, a employee and operations officer.

Does the President of the United States from your party, does he understand what our intelligence community does? Um? He does understand what the intelligence community does. A selection of a guy like Mike Pompeo to run the CIA, he's a real professional and it knows what he's doing. Sellecting a guy like General Maddis to head d O D, which has you know, significant intelligence operation and UM is important.

And while you know I probably wouldn't be tweeting about some of the things that our federal law enforcement or intelligence communities aren't involved in the rank and file. The folks that do the job that I used to do. Um, they don't listen to the nonsense in the belt Way. Um. They're they're quiet professionals that go on and do their job. You people. And we feature the people that have died for the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Frank and folks.

There's a lot of people that are Central Intelligence Agency. If you know, if they died, we never hear about it. Within this is centered the Justice Department is the president's interpretation of how justice works. Is it appropriate or does he need to find a new techt for two thousand eighteen? Um? I think the Department of Justice should be you know, independent, Um. One of the folks that should be looking out and making sure the Justice Department is doing everything properly. Is

is the is Congress. Um. That's why we have an oversight role. Um. But we also can't just think that d o J and the political leadership of d o J are always going to do the right thing. Um, and so so having overside over them is important. UM. And that's why Congress has that responsibility. UM. You know d o j's ability to investigate Americans to UM get you know, fis a collection that's foreign intelligence, UM collection

on Americans. It's you know, we got to make sure that they're following and protecting Americans Fourth Amendment rights and that they're crossing all their teas and and dotting all the eyes. So UM, there should always be a healthy a healthy at tension, UM, and we should always be making sure um that because you know there are you know, I always say I've gotten the honor of serving side by side with many men and women in in the FBI.

And the reason that we haven't had another attack on a homeland like that we saw in at the Pentagon and the Twin Towers in New York back in two thousand and one is because these current professionals are out doing their job every single day. UM. But again, we got to make sure that we're all crossing the teas and dotting dotting the ice. Congressman, you and your colleagues are going to have to vote on a resolution on a bill to keep the government open. I believe the

deadline is January the UH. If the President insists on funding for the border wall, can you give us some thoughts about your position because I believe that you have already gone on the record to say that a wall between the United States and Mexico on our southern border is a third century solution to a century problem. Um.

That that's pretty accurate. I think building a thirty foot high concrete structure that takes four hours to penetrate from sea to shining sea is the most expensive and least of active way to do border security. Um. It's we do not do not have operational control of our border. And the reason we don't is because we don't look at all two thousand miles of our southern border at the same time. And the only way to do that

is with technology. And so I I favor a smart wall or a smart solution to border security that relies on technology. Now, there are some places that a physical barrier makes sense, um, where there's urban urban contact. You know, something along the lines of some of the physical barriers that are already um in existence makes a little bit more sense. Um. But this is you know, border security is is going to be part of the debate as we look forward to funding the government and in the

next couple of weeks. And I think, um, I hope the only way we're going to solve some of these problems is by working together across party lines, and um, I think we can we can get there. Sometimes a rhetoric what you see on social media on TV is not always there. But behind closed doors, UM, there's a lot of good conversations going on. Well, could you give us some idea of what some of those good conversations are because if you look at the votes that have

taken place in Congress in there's no bipartisan anything. Uh, well, I would I would disagree with that. I think probably one of the biggest things that we did was something that we have to do every year, the National Defense Authorization Act UM, which authorizes, uh, you know, the activity of our military. It gave the largest raise to our military in in eight years. UM. You know piece of legislation that I work on dealing with I T procurement um is something that is that was included in that.

So so there there, there are. There are some of those examples, um in um that we've seen in but but we need more and and I actually believe, you know, in a district like mine, UM, folks want to see us come up here and actually get things done. Um. And and not just have these food fights we just had. Congressman, if you're just joining us here, we're thrilled to speak to the Congress. Fro from the twenty three district of Texas is along the southern border up to San Antonio

as well. His name is William will heard out of Texas saying him a few years ago and a former operations officer with the CIA as well. Congressman heard, I believe we just passed tax legislation. I believe somebody in New Jersey or Connecticut is hammered by the inability to deduct a good portion of state and local taxes. I think the same thing maybe is gonna happen in Del Rio, Texas to people that are very financially successful. How is the tax bill played on the border with Del Rio

or the fat cats of San Antonio. Are they as livid as the people in New Jersey? No, they're not um and And the bottom line is was when you really start getting into the details, this is something that's could have benefit all Americans in my district. Of the folks in the district, UM do not itemize, so they fill out to say pretty easy. So if you're filling out the ten forty easy and the you UM have UM the standard deduction doubling, and that's a pretty big deal.

I think a lot of people don't understand what the standard deduction is, and when he started explaining it to them, they get it. You know, Folks like my brother. He's gonna be able to buy a whole lot more diapers for his his twin girls that are you know, about

to be about to be too. And when you look at the impact that this has on business, you know, we've seen the number of of business, you know, corporations that have increased hiring, that are talking about the investment they're gonna be doing in in UM in their businesses. We're seeing small businesses being able to take advantages from the pastors. What about you, how do you find a common ground with Mr Smith the fourth District of New Jersey.

You're both Republicans? Do you just throw Chris Smith under the bus? Now? I look, I think it goes down to every individual person, right, And I think when you look at some of these high net worth individuals that are in UM New Jersey or New York City, when you look at you know, much of their income is probably coming through UM. You know escorts or they're they're

gonna see benefits in other ways. And so I think really drilling down into the details on an individual is is the most important thing and the way people are going to see this realized. One of the things I'm nervous about, you know, in in looking at the impact two jobs in our economy and the markets, is what we're gonna do with NAFTA. Um. That's something that hasn't been talked about enough. Um. The one way to screw up the markets, the run the markets are on is

screwing up. Here's here's what we're gonna do. We're gonna get you back on again soon. Congress heard to talk about NAFTA. We've been unfair enough to bring that up with you with your district on the border. Will heard the twenty three district of Texas a Republicans Pim Fox of surveillance. Bad phone just lit up like a candle. You think it's just the lights. We gotta yeah, we gotta get impact on a lot of interesting stuff to talk about. But when he said there about Christmas in

the fourth District of New Jersey, is the whole debate. Yeah, people need to have money in order to spend money. I think that was great. Will heard from Texas. Thank you so much for being with us. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio