It Will Take a Generation Before the Renminbi Plays a Global Role, Eichengreen Says

coffee because the Holy East Coast is free. I was noticing that hockey season Tom Keene has wandered in the studio and his Montreal Canadians jersey. Um, he's he's ready for hockey season. Uh. When you look at uh, the markets have been down, up, down, but not going rocketing higher as they have been as we get deeper and deeper into tax reform. Is that because people are holding their breath at this point? Or has sentiment kind of turned? This was a discussion that we were having on Bloomberg

Television yesterday and what did you miss? Um? Has sentiment turned? Are we now thinking maybe it won't pass until you've got to start pricing that in or is it too early. So I think that one of the first questions is is corporate tax reform priceton already we would say I

not really know. Um that the rally we've seen so far this year has been much more about the trends, the good global trends we're seeing in terms of growth and earnings as well as stability and energy as well as the dollar, rather than some huge expectation of corporate tax reform happening. So I don't think it's on an

unwind of expectations around tax or anything like that. It could be something just innocuous, like investors wanting to take a little bit of profit off the table, right, especially receptors that how done super well this year, like technology, which is the sector for example, that was down yesterday, rather than something really really bad. I'm also when a lot is going to get wrapped up in December, we have tax reform will either pass or won't get could

get delayed. But you've got the possibility of a government shutdown, and you get the dead ceiling which will be attached to that even if it's not solved. And it's the end of the year and it's been a heck of a year. So are people actually going to invest in December? Are we going to start seeing people get cautious and say I'm gonna do that and I'm gonna take the month off. I'm not sure. I think it depends on

where you've been so far this year. If if you've been in the market the entire year, maybe you do kind of trimmed down a little bit. Your your position has probably gone a little bit too big. By now right we're up fift percent. But for those investors that still haven't participated in the market, and there are actually a lot of them, maybe there is still a desire to get in the market. And we talked about selling May and go away, and Mike, your question is dead on.

I mean, sell you know, before Thanksgiving and run run. Let's come back to that in a minute. Good morning. If you want Bloomberg surveillance in institutions people that are behind, is there a level of panic this year that I need to catch up in six weeks. I've never bought that song and dance, but it's always there to people actually do that. For institutional clients, I would say, especially when it comes to equities, that they've been pretty well

positioned going into the year. What makes me think much more about people wanting to actually chase or participate in this performance is much more in the individual level, where so many investors for the last eight nine years have still not participated in the rally. So I think there's this sense of, oh my gosh, I'm not participating in this enthusiasm rally. The way this works is as on the West Side two nights ago, and I walked in the Apple store because I walked by it and there

was the iPhone X and I held it my hand. Wow, wow Wow. So do I come out the triple leverage all cash fun and like you know, double margin Apple to get myself to January to December? Idea? The problem is is going to take every penny you made this year to buy an iphoned Doug cass is going in Florida top of market right there. Tom, We're starting to hear. It's interesting because you're talking about all these people who haven't participated, and of course the old saws once retail

comes in, it's over. But you're starting to see some of the pros talk about not necessarily a correction or anything like that, but that maybe we're gonna top out for a little while. I noted, uh, and I have the I brought the story in here somewhere, and I can't find it right now. But people are looking at high yield and how it's kind of rolled over, and they say that's a sign that the stock market is

going to start coming to an end as well. Are you seeing any of those tea leaves that you're starting to say, hey, maybe there's something to look at here

coming to an end? No, I mean, it's always about the kind of earnings growth we're seeing, which is still incredibly solid even pre any sort of corporate tax reform implementation, which is which is really a great sign um, and that's really the fundamental driver of the market, right, So as long as the economy keeps growing, earnings keep growing, the market should continue to grind higher. But I do think that we should be expecting some sort of correction,

absolutely right. The average going back to would be to have a ten percent correction every single year, and the maximum we've had this year has been three percent. So definitely a correction would be very possible. Probabilities high, but we don't think this is the end of what we think is a much more secular ble market. Do you think, because it's been so long that if we did get

a correction, it could be magnified by fear. You know, people who've seen nothing but stocks go up for a long time start to get nervous and and pull back more than the otherwise would. Or the pro is going to come in and save us and say O time to buy. Well, we'll do our best. But I do think that sentiment is has improved a lot this year.

I think whenever we got to pull back last year, the year before even there was this feeling that maybe there's a recession around the corner, maybe there's something I should be worried about with emerging markets. So the pullbacks

felt very, very rapid and fearful. Uh. And where we are today is much better comfort with the global economy with stability, and so I actually think that sentiments is a little bit better this time around going into any sort of altility as I'm going to protect you from the general Council. I know, Mr Diamond Hanks on everywhere you say, can you buy the banks here? The financial sector is one of our favorite sectors along with technology. So there's a laundry list to tell me about the

Mike McKee wants to know about the yield curve. All right, so we've got for the financial sector. We've got a growing economy, so credit growth should continue being decently good. Number two, we do believe that the yield curve is going to stop flattening at this incessant rate we've been seeing for the past couple of weeks, which has been a little bit of a headwind here in the short

term UM. And then lastly, there is this underlying current of smarter regulation that I don't know is getting necessarily the due amount of air time, which help our pros. Here two tends of vanilla curve. Which curve do you look at to gauge financial forecasting? We look at the two tens. You look at the two tends to decide what Bank of America is doing, or bank or whatever. We look at it as as an indication of what's

happening with the yield curve. UM, and what we have been seeing for the past couple of weeks is a very what to us seems like a very surprising flattening of the yield curve. Now, we don't think that this is all of a sudden going to go to a completely flat or even inverted yield curve. As I was saying, we do think that this is due for a pause and a bit of a reversal here before we let you go very quickly, new FED coming in next year,

causing you to think about anything differently. Not at the moment. We do think we'll continue with the kind of pace we've seen. This year should look pretty similar unless we get some sort of overheating in the economy or big tarn and inflation, which we don't expect. Um if we don't three rate hikes, continuing to wind down the balance sheet. I've got a wonderful email that just came in that disagrees with you. And this is the debate over earnings

driven market versus valuation driving market. That's a great nuance. You have to come back and we have to talk about and this has been an earnings driven market though this this year. This should be a great conversation, Michael. We get gabriel As Santos with Douglas Cass, put us a differing view, put it down for a couple of hours, and we'll duck Cass and Gabriel a scientists together would be smart, smart, smart they live in two different worlds.

Thank you Mr Cass for that observation, well researched. Joining sound Stephen Ratner with will advise, that's what should point out that he manages the four one k of Michael Bloomberg, who has a modest amount to do with this seven hundred dollars a year and as far oh one k. Well, they wanted to they wanted to adjust that this is a limited liability corporation. I guess the limited partnership. Well,

this is a subject of not inconsequential interest. We'll have to see how the rights are, but it's not out of the question. We don't want to talk about Michael's money, but it does matter to a lot of people who

are not small businesses. Well, the whole thing is is a little bit crazy because they're going to have to try to write these rules and somehow distinguished between all the hedge funds, all the private equity guys, all the people UH present company included, perhaps who could just simply turn ourselves into a pass through to be eat the system. I want to back up, you were the cars are, etcetera. I know you hate that phrase. I don't care. You were the cars are, and you had to herd cats

across many institutions in Washington. If you were the texts are. Now, given your tangible, real world experience in the trenches of the Beltway, what would you do is texts are? Well? For first of all, I was able to succeed is cars are because I didn't have to deal with Congress. Taxes you have to go to Congress. But let's assume, let's assume you don't look. There's no doubt that the

tax code is riddled with problems. The corporate side of the tax code creates all the wrong incentives, all kinds of distancentives to invest here, to locate here. You would certainly change that. Around the personal side, there's a certain number of deductions, uh, certain of loophole's. You know, the six Tax Act did a pretty good job, still amazingly enough, of cleaning out the worst of the shelters. So I would I would eliminate a bunch of individual deductions. I

would fix the corporate tax code. I would try to lower rates, but I would do it on a deficit neutral basis. And I knew I knew you were going knew I was going to say, I've seen a single article, Tax Policy Center, Joint Tax all the other experts on this. That's a pipe dream to be deficit neutral, right, Why is that a pipe dree I'm asking you. I'm asking you. No, Look, it's not a pipe dream. It's easy enough to do. You just have to not cut some taxes as much.

And and the problem is that the deficit has been going is going up at the moment on the order of the say very round numbers a hundred billion dollars a year. We're on the wrong end of the expansionary cycle. This is not a time for a stimulative tax cut. It's just not in here. Yeah, I want to follow on that because obviously you spent all your time looking

at financial markets. What's the danger that we see interest rates rise more than they should because you've raised the deficits significantly, and then you run into a problem where you're working against yourself. Well, well, by definition, interest rates full rise more than the otherwise would have. It has to.

It's just math. But what the but what the sort of uh conservatives for lack of a better word, want you know want in fact is a tighter fed policy and a lucio fiscal policy that that was the recipe back in the Reagan years, and it's the recipe again today. I don't particularly see the argument for piling on more debt that we're going to leave to our kids. Okay, but within that tandem to review, they want a bigger deficit. What do you mean by tighter FED policy? They want

more rate hikes, they want a more restrictive monetary policy. Sure. I mean, if you look at the tailor rule and what low rate don it's low rate Janet, low rate Donald, it's but Janet is leaving and Donald absolutely is a low rate guy. But I didn't say I didn't say Donald. I said the conservatives, the traditional sort of fairly hard right conservatives. They hated the Quei. They want that gone and done. They think rate should have gone up sooner,

keeven Kevin Warsh. They have power in Steve Ratner's Washington to the conservatives of know. What's what's so interesting is that the president made his choice and uh and I wrote a p about it, one of the one much to my happy surprise, he actually picked the right guy,

and he made it. He took a stand against Mike Pence, who wanted John Taylor, against the traditional conservatives who wanted uh John Kevin Worsher, John Taylor type, and he picked someone who's, you know, not that different from Janet Yellen and that's great. Well, where do they go from here? Do you think? Do they continue with traditional um, well known kinds of people or do they put a Trump agenda in there into the Fed? I don't, I don't know.

You know, sometimes it becomes like Noah's Ark, where if you give one faction somebody, then you have to give the other faction somebody to exactly that's exactly you need a Republican um. So we'll see where it goes. But the chairman, as you know, uh, the last time a chairman was outvoted was Bill Miller in seventy something or another. I was actually covering it back then. So the chairman wheel is enormous power, enormous influence. Don't you hate it? Tom?

And he knows more about reporting than we do. I don't know more, but I did it for a good while. William Miller is a lot of people. But this is that brings up a good point, Steve. Right now, the collective memory of Washington is about one election ago. They really don't have a memory of vulgar. They don't have a memory that nobody. They don't have a memory of mckchesley Martin. I mean, there's there's really no historical memory that is that that is true on tax reform, What

should we look for next? We've had the Senate trot out what are you looking for into the weekend of the Sunday talk shows and then into the holiday season. I'm not sure too well. They certainly hope to pass

something in the holiday season. I look at what we're obviously looking for is to see uh in individual senators and then the Republicans who are in the bluer states where there are state and local tax deduction issues there that Peter called Peter King has made his position clear, But to why watch these swing voters, because it's gonna be like healthcare, We're gonna have to they're gonna have to be counting votes, and they're gonna have to be counting votes in the House this time as well as

the Senate. The House wasn't so hard for them last time. But there are a number of Republicans. Some people say it's twenty, some thirty, some thirty some forty. We don't know who who could well be influenced by the salt issue. And then on the Senate side, it's, you know, it's a bit of a director set. You've got you've got to you've got to assemble fifty and if you and if one drops out, you've got to find another one

and put in their place. So the trade off between the estate tax and the other kinds of things, Corker and his deficit concerns, they're gonna have to try to juggle all that and come up with fifty votes. And that's what we're gonna be watching. Well, since you come from both worlds political and financial, um, do you think that this is uh going to be a situation where Republicans are so desperate for a win it won't matter

what's in the bill, They'll just pass something. I think if we're up to the White House, that would be the case. And probably even the leadership they are desperate for a bill because if they don't get this bill done, and perhaps if they don't get this bill done this year, then they could end up going to the eighteen elections with nothing, and that is something that terrifies the leadership. The rank and file. They have to worry about their own skins. They're not worried so much about the party

because I let me say one last thing. The Virginia results and all the other results that happened that day could be a watershed here because it was a message and it may well influence a number of Republicans who are on the edge as to whether vote for another program that, by the time it's over, in my prediction, will be as unpopular as their healthcare play. And Steve, this is the distrust that Mike brought up on passers at the beginning. Mike and Steve, have you got nothing

to do this weekend? Out in East Hampton South, there's a thirty million dollar unit, and the headline here and thirty million dollars is it's two thousand eight square feet, uh two bedroom to bath. So the headline here is it's on three point six acres, which is how you get out to thirty million dollars. Rob Urban has a phenomenal Bloomberg story how they're already game in the system. They're gonna turn vacation homes into investment properties to get

around the legislation. Our audience believes the fancy guys like you and others are going to gain the system. Why will that not happen? Uh, it will happen, and it always happens. And the problem with this tax bill is that in some ways it makes it more complicated than less because of the past. Through is because of all these rules, and if you really genuinely wanted to reform the tax code, you'd get rid of a lot of this stuff that allows people to game the system. But

they're not doing that. Mike, this property says you. Actually it's idyllic. It's an idyllic property. Well, I read that. When I read the Senate bill last night. My first thought was I should incorporate as a limited partnership or limited liability corporation and buy a house through the corporation because the state and local tax deduction remains for companies even though individuals losing. So, I mean, you can see

the route to gaming this just laid out. We're trying to give you perspective on some of these events, including tax reform now, and really get away from the cliches that are out there. You can do that with Stephen Ratner will It Advisors, Michael, When you start us off, well, I was going to ask him a non tax question because I noted the story, and and you had Harvard football coach on yesterday to Murphy, there's a possibility of a seven way tie in the eight team IVY League

in football this year for first place. There's only one team that's winless at the bottom of the conference that cannot possibly tie Brown University. Now Brown University graduates. Stephen Ratner is with you've done your homework. You know when I was at Brown, we were pretty much winless. The only team that was worse was Columbia, And so I guess we're right back where we started from. Tom Tom, and I well, Columbia three and two started from they

have they have turned things around. We were doing college football today since we we thought we would. We get your contribution in there. Thank you for sharing um the the The distinguished journalist John Hartwood from The New York Times and a competitor of ours, did an interview yesterday with Gary Kohne in which Gary Cohne suggested that the tax reform plan will be a perfect example of trickle down economics. By helping the rich and businesses, it will

mean higher pay for the average worker. From what you've seen, do you think there's any truth to that, well, you know, look, there's a little bit of truth to it. But it's now been hotly debated or relitigated within the economics community for the last few weeks, as you guys have undoubtedly followed and saw on it, and I think by far the better argument is that the is that the share of any kind of corporate tax cut that would actually go to the workers versus go to the capitalists like

myself is very small. This idea that it's going to raise family incomes by four thousand dollars, and all this, I think has been has been thoroughly and completely proven to be ridiculous. So does it Who gets something out of this? Obviously there's a lot in there for Donald Trump and his family, but who else? Owners of capital

get a lot out of this? And if you want to know why the stock market is up seventeen percent or wherever it is at the moment for the year, a lot of this obviously, and part of why it's been week the last few days as anticipation of a significant corporate rate cut that would flow right down directly to the EPs line, ray share prices and those of us who own shares, which is a relatively small fraction of the country would be a good bit better off. The debate I find extraordinary, and it is to me

a debate of a plutocracy. Are we a national plutocracy? It's interesting, I think, and this is gonna sound very partisan, but I think the Republicans have managed to operate as a plutocracy while pretending that they are something else that there for the middle class, that they want to help the average American, they want to help the forgotten Trump voter, whatever. But as we saw in healthcare, people didn't ultimately buy it.

And I think in the case of tax reform, as this unfolds, as you get more and more dispassionate and now you know nonpartisan analyses from Tax Policy Center and Committee for Responsible Federal Budget and people like that, I think that the public will figure out that there is nothing in this tax plan for them of any consequence. Greg Ville leads is the Zack Seos today with the basic idea after Virginia that Republicans are in panic, and

there's levels of panic that I understand. Virginia's its own demographics. Can you extrapolate political Virginia to the rest of the Republican nation, Well, I think there's two. I think there's two implications that I mentioned. First, as I said earlier, I think they are in panic. I think Virginia is

not unique, it's a it's actually a purple state. It's very reflective of the country, and I think this is what happened there, I think is scary to many Republican legislators, and I think it is going to lead them to be more careful and how how blindly they simply follow these silly policies. And then secondly, yes, the House of

Representatives is jerrymannerd. We all know that. But there have been studies done that if the Democrats get say a three percent higher votes share than the Republicans, they could take the House. And right now, if you look at the polls, the public is giving the Democrats a much higher votes share than that. So I think there is I think there's a better than fifty fifty chance at the House flips, and if the House flips, the game changes. When when as an investor do you start taking that

into account? Look, this is, this is you know, this is we need an hour for this, and it's a very complicated. It's very complicated work. It's very complicated. We've studied this bullmarket endlessly and I could argue both sides of it, but yeah, we take it into account. We're being cautious, we're being careful. We're not plunging into into deep water. Thank you guys, fun as always, great Mike, what did you take out of it? I mean, to me, it's it's I don't know. I still don't understand how

they get this done before twelve three? You I just can't get there, can you? Um? Well, I think the argument is that they're so desperate to get something done that they will make compromises they might not otherwise make. The biggest one you gotta try to figure out how they're gonna do is the state and local tax deduction. Because the Republicans in the House in California, New Jersey, New York states like that, they can't vote for it or I mean, they're signing their own political death ward.

So how do you compromise on that and then make up the differences of the money that you lose? How I go to Mr Rattlers comment on one point five trillion dollar whole, and then you even go from there, I mean, how do they how do they get there? They've gotten there in the last twenty four hours. I believe they modeled out something at one point four or five trillion or something. Sure that will change by the

time we end the show today. Michael McKeon for David, I'm Tim Keene and to be honest on a November, cold, November morning, Michael, it's too late to be the book of the year, but this is without question the lead candidate to be my book of next summer. How Global Currencies Work, Past, Present, in future. A gentleman of named Harold James at Princeton University just says this could be the new standard. This is the book that everyone on

Global Wall Street will be reading in two thousand eighteen. Mike, you will go on an airplane and up in fancy class. There will be one, two and three copies of this for needed airplane reading. I can Green, mel and T two How Global Currencies Work Berry Iken Green joins us, the esteemed historian from Berkeley Berry. How does this book differ from exorbitant Privilege? How does it differ from your classics Golden Fetters and globalizing capital? Uh? Thank you for

bringing it to your your audiences. Attempt and Tom it differs in two ways. Number one, it is more systematic about the evidence, so the book is full of facts and figures, new ones, both historic and current, about the roles of the dollar and its rivals. And number two are views of the future have changed, so we're more optimistic about the Euro. I think people have been too pessimistic about the prospects of the Euro as a global currency. On the other hand, were more guarded or cautious about

the Chinese. Friendly and b Your book has a cover of an E. Howard watch company, Boston, Massachusetts. I'm going to say an ancient movement of of a pocket watch. Is it a well running Swiss watch system? Does the system work well? The system is still ticking. Um, I think uh, we have to worry about the stability of the mechanism. Um. Things could go wrong to undermine confidence in the dollar, from another debt ceiling embrolio to UH

foreign policy problems between the US and its allies. I do think the Euro has put the worst behind it, but the Chinese still have big challenges in terms of currency internationalization that they have insolved, and how the world will cope with three with multiple global currencies. Only time will tell how being how has the world been coping so far? I mean, the Chinese got into the to the SDR basket at the i m F last year, doesn't seem to have made a whole lot of difference.

As near as I can tell. The amount of men be traded UM has gone down over the last year. You're right, Michael, that it's still a dollar centered, dollar centric world. That the Renman b has made negative progress, if you will, not only in terms of foreign exchange trading, but on every other metric of global currency nous. The Chinese haven't yet built deep in liquid markets. Uh. The overnight announcement about bank internationalization will help, but it won't

solve that problem at a stroke. And they have a big problem in terms of stability. The market is volatile and confidence that people inevitably have questions about contract enforcement and rule of law in China. What do you think of the decision today by the Chinese to open up to the their financial system to outsiders. Is that going to materially change the use of their ENMNB or people still gonna want to just um convert because capital controls.

You know, they can't trust the Chinese. You can put bring your money in, but you might not be able to bring it back out. I don't think it will materially change anything in the short run. It will take time for foreign banks to come in and purchase majority stakes. That fact will take more time to change the behavior of the banks and how they relate to the state and to state owned enterprises. So the experience of other countries has shown that foreign bank presence is a good thing.

It's a stabilizing thing that helps with market liquidity and stability. But not overnight. Well then, um, how soon or you know, do we at all see the Chinese currency gain enough market share that we talked about it seriously as a third global reserve currency. If you asked me six or seven years ago when I put out that booking sort but and privilege, I would have probably hazarded the guests

within within a decade. I'm more guarded now. I think it will take a generation before the Renman b begins to play the kind of global role that the dollar does. Arry I con agreed with us the professor of Berkeley, right down the hall from Brad DeLong, how global currencies work past present in future. How often do you run into Brad DeLong? Are you like two ships passing in the night. Are you having coffee every morning arguing with

each other? No, we passed mainly in the hallway in the seminar room, but um Brad ducks into my office. That's not an argument. But it's so long, uh discussions. So that's really one of the pleasures of being academic. We have time and we have those colleagues. Interesting. Interesting Barry with the question that Mike head there on on what we're doing with the dollar? Where do we stand on our fiscal moment in this United States? You know

Reagan deficit GDP. Now we're out paste depends you measure in folks, But we've piled on a lot of debt. Does that give pause to bury Ion Green? It gives me great pause. I'm not a believer that there is some threshold level of debt like GDP, after which you you reach a tipping point. But I do think we need to be worried about the longer term fiscal projections put out by the CBO and others, about social security liabilities,

about state and local pension liabilities. So given that, given that we're in a near full employment economy, now is not the time to be cutting taxes and incurring another one five killion dollars of debt. There's a an argument made that that level um came by the book. This time it's different by Ken Rogoff and Company, that the US is serve exempt from that. We're we're the exception to the rule because there's economy like US and we have the world's reserve currency. Do you do you put

much credence in that? Is that part of the reason you are less worried. I think we do have more room to run because we have this additional source of demand for our treasury bonds, which is foreign central banks and global investors, until we get to the point where that fan drives up in a confidence crisis. So we're not exempt from the eventual confidence crisis if if we

court it. Very I can read with us as we celebrate, as he mentioned, a detailed book, a dense book, and I mean that in a good way, how global currencies

work past president in future. To give you the idea of the scope and scale, Professor I Can Green and his team open with Angus Madison and Mr Kindleberger Charles Kindleberger of m I T, two of the giants of the history of all the stuff we talk about UH, and it's really just an immediate read as he goes from currency to currency prospects for the Renminbi, the role of currencies in foreign trade, which maybe Mike is something

we can talk about. We are with very Green and Berkeley truly in celebration of our global currencies work, past, present, in future. Very unquantitative tightening your lecturing at Berkeley right now, what does that phrase mean? If we have a move from QA, are we going to something like quantitative tightening?

If we were about to see the FED and other central banks actively shrinking their balance sheets and selling securities they hold into the markets, then yes, I think we would worry about quantitative tidening, tightening and big negative impacts on securities markets. But the fact of the matter is there simply allowing UH securities to roll over, their roll off their portfolios as they mature, and they're not actively

selling into the market. So I wouldn't I wouldn't at this point, And guess what Ben Bernanke says, Yeah, Um, there is still some concern though about you know, we saw rates come down when the FED was buying security, so why shouldn't rates go up? When they are no longer buying them, and to a certain extent probably uh selling them. Well, the FEDS stopped buying quite some time ago. Now they're you know, they're talking about balance sheet reduction. Uh. And the issue is are they going to do it

actively or passively? And for all intents and purposes, the answer is passively, so you're not worried about rates moving higher or in a destabilizing manner. I don't think the FED would be the trigger for them moving higher. If there was news about the labor market, for example, in wage just began to take off, that would be a different story. But the FED would not be the trigger for them. Professor, we have models that we've all learned, and some like you have learned them better than and

most everyone else. I'll go back to Hicks I s LM model just as one classic economic system maybe marshal of years ago. Did those models work now? Or is Barry Ike and Green's international system become so supple, so rapid, so fast that the traditional models just don't work. We really had a wake up call in two thousand seven, two and eight that the models work imperfectly. I would defend those old school models. Is pretty pretty much still the best thing going, but I would be reluctant to

hang my hat on them. I think progress is being made through big data and computation and applying microeconomic data to macro economic questions. So that's a different kind of modeling. I'm wondering, Um, we were we were just talking about we were kidding, well kidding, but we're talking about Shohaio Tani, the Japanese baseball player. But I'm wondering it has been wondering about the end at this point. The President was just over there and he's talking with Shinzo Abi, and

you know, it just seems like Japan is treading water. Um, they don't get any better, they don't get any worse. Uh, their personal you know, their per capita GDP gets a little bit better, so people remain relatively happy. And yet um, the end still is one of the most used currencies in the world, and is everybody's out of the dollar favorite haven. Does that continue over the long term we were talking about, you know what happens with the red nd B. Does the end continue to be play the

role that it has played? If there ultimately is the um the Japanese debt crisis that some people have been betting on in that we don't make or trade for decades now, then the end falls out of favor. But I think if Japan continues to cruise along under the radar where they wrote decently given their demographics, where the central bank does begin to bring inflation up towards two, then I think the yen remains where it is not the leading global currency but one of the players. Very

thank you so much, Professor Green. Folks out with the jewel with ar Nold, Bill and Olivia should do how global currencies work past present in future. There's two kind of Iken Green books. There's sort of a thicker wandering book, which are fabulous, they're all great books. And then there this is a new addition to that series of shorter dnser two hundred page jewels with an emphasis on the word denser and the reason. But read these if you

learn something every three pages. It's written that tightly, and you see that. Michael mckeeon how global Currencies work. I hate Michael Barry, hate Berry. I can Green because instead of watching Lions Browns, I have to read How Global Currencies Work this weekend. Well, you can read the book because all you need is like a quarter just to see the lions. Did see the lions? And I can watch it with a sound off. Maybe I'll get through it. Berry Green, thank you so much how global currencies work.

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 Keene. David Gura is at David Gura. Before the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio