Most Americans Will Get Tax Cuts, Lieber Says

US growth? Johnny gus now to discusses Chris rob Key, MUFG Union Bank chief financial economist. Chris, is it the former or one off sugar high or the latter the beginning of something more sustainable? Well, I guess the problem was starting in two thousand and twenty, they think the tax reform is going to lead to three percent GDP every single year for those finals seven years or so. That seems a bit of a stretch. I mean, one of the things we're struggling with here, and you know,

this fiscal stimulus. It's not convinced the Fed at all, right, They're keeping their GDP call like two in two thousand and twenty. Um. Yeah, I mean it's just gonna be very difficult to achieve. One of the things that we're running into is that the unemployment unemployment rate is so low. Who are we going to employ to make the economy

run faster? There's no workers. This is the first time, really an economic history, modern economic history since the seventies, that we're going to test can the economy grow without having a good labor supply? CHRISTI touch on something important. Most economists would say that any improvement growth is just a function of one of two things, or perhaps both, an increasing productivity or an increase in the size of

the population. Are we going to get either? Yeah, I mean we don't really get the population is slowing or at least the Baby Boom generation. Uh, you know, it's a twenty year wave of people. The first one retired in two thousand and eleven. You know, people who retired don't spend as much. That's the theory. Uh, you wouldn't think that the economy has as much spending power based

on demographic headwinds. I think that's why the Federal Reserve has two percent growth and not three percent like the administration. Productivity it's trickier. I mean, when when whenever I hear the word productivity, you really want to look at our consumer spending as investment, and you know consumers are spending enough right now despite all the claims that graphics are going to hurt. I got excited. Christa heard Tom King clear his throat, and I thought maybe he'd be joining

us Wednesday. Decide should I start my Christmas shopping Wednesday or Thursday. I know what I want, it's a very very your tax cut a tax cut, well, I don't know. We'll see. There's been some interesting early analysis on that. We'll touch you. I'll wrap up the script and we'll do that here in a moment. Plumberg Surveillance this morning with Chris Rockki. Thrilled he's with us, brought you by Investco.

Learned how investcos pure focus on investing, diversity of thought, and passion to exceed can help you get more out of life. Visit investco dot com slash more out of life. He is with m U f G. Chris Rupki. Chris, people read your note because they know on the first page they're gonna get a payoff of the linkage of the fixed income market into what's going on in economics. William Hoagland was with us yesterday. He was brilliant, and he put out a tweet yesterday. I should point out

Mr Hoagland, John is not some young Twitter type. He's like, you know, relatively ancient. And he said, in twenty four months, we're gonna have a one point one trillion dollar US deficit. How I'm sorry, John dine underd billion is a lot, lot, lot less than one trilliont How will your world react, Chris Rupki when we start to frame a what is that nine figures three six, nine, twelve figure deficit? Yeah, I don't know. I mean I'm looking for anything to

push up tenure treasury yields, economy. We got it yesterday, Yes we did. Where did that come from? I think it was just technical. I don't know where that came from, although it could have been partly the the idea of greater deficits out there from the tax reform um. You know, we had trillion dollar deficits during the Obama years, four years of it ending two thousand and twelve I think

it was, and tenure treasury yields never went up. I would like to think that, you know, one point one trillion dollar deficit could push up tenure treasury yields, get some more auctions of treasuries, maybe there'll be no one to buy them. Uh, maybe yields would go up. But I don't know. It's a it's a major question mark. Chris. You think yesterday's I'm one if that flatten it going into your end was just purely exactly that unwinding position

the markets feel. I'm on the high achiever train every day from the suburbs. People don't talk on the train, and it doesn't feel like anyone's in. You know, the market seem to be very thin right now. There's no corporate bond issuance. I don't trust the upward move in movement in yields, even though I want it, but I don't know if it's gonna stick. We did some FED talk this morning. Let us continue that right now. And and you are clearly in the camp of four rate increases.

That's a non linear market in behavioral event. The next rate increase, I'm gonna suggest there is no big deal. But when does the not the pain click in? But when does the market impact click in of the second or the third or the fourth unit increase? Yeah, I mean we always I mean, remember, we haven't really had a major bond market sell off higher soaring yields for

a long time. And it's really what we need to see is the Fed got consistently to start scaring people on the raid out look a little, so they have to go March, June, September. Maybe if we get to December they go four in a row, or we're thinking they go four in a row, then maybe ten year yields break out above three. But you got to really awake the market up. Okay, better said, when do we wait? John? This is important? When do we wake the market up?

Beautifully said? At this time of year? I say it's just months away, and then yes, exactly, and then I'm bitterly disappointed by the summer when China arises and brings down all the works. You're holding talking about a deficit which have choked that a kingdom. You know, I don't know what the deficit the g d P numbers on that CBO can inform us here in a couple of months. Do you just assume the price of this tax legislation is deficits that you and I talked about when we

had no gray hair. Uh Um, yeah, I'm just assuming that we'll get through the one trillion, although that you're right, it is a big number. I think part of the problem is we don't realize that right now the deficits running about seven hundred billion and six D sixty six billion. Yeah, and the auction schedule isn't enough to really push up yields on an extra three hundred billion. I don't know if that's enough to John Ferrell doesn't know who there's

some real forces of our listening audience. Michael Bardie, you know who ever dirks and is I was sick that day. How much coffee if you had this morning? To King distinguished, I am fired. I'll tell you a minute. On the Wednesday before Chris extinguished, senator from Illinois, Ever Dickson, who said a billionaire, a billionaire or whatever, Yeah, what doesn't matter.

That was Senator Dirkson as well. Chris Rupki. Thank you so much with m U John Farrowe and Tom Keane with you, and now we are thrilled to bring you John Lieber with p w C, who has been wonderfully, wonderfully correct about this process of tax reformed, tax cuts and deficit expansion. John, you have the privilege of working with Alan Meltzer years ago at a EI and I went back and I looked, it seems like yesterday a wonderful discussion on at the time a burgeoning deficit of

Alan Meltzer, led by Gordon Theesen. And this is with Larry Ball and others. In the title of it is great. What do budget deficits do? William Hoblin's suggests we are going to have a larger budget deficit, even out to one trillion plus US in a matter of twenty four months. John Lever, what the budget deficits do? And the Senators and congressmen and women do they care? Well, it's hard to really pass judgment of what a budget deficit does in a vacuum. I mean the real question is can

UH sovereign fund and finance the budget deficit? Are there outsiders willing to lend money? What will the monetary authorities do? How fast is the rate of growth? I mean, all of these questions are important when evaluating what a budget deficit does. There's been a lot of panic about the budget deficit over the last eight or ten years after financial crisis, and that's really calmed down. The politics of that have really changed recently, especially with the election of

President Trump. So I think that you know, the Republicans voting for this bill today are hoping that not only will this deficit not do anything, but will be much smaller than is projected because of the growth they're going to get from the text bill. John talked to me about the effects that this is going to have going forward in terms of who this is actually for. There's a narrative out there and this is just for corporate America. This does not help the middle class. Can you punch

your any holes in that narrative? Yeah, Look, I mean of taxpayers are getting a cut next year, that's courting to j C. T. You're going to see an immediate increase uh decrease in withholding, which means that paychecks are going to grow starting in February. And that's a huge effect. That's going to be important to folks now that dollars for a lot of people are small because the reality is a lot of lower income in middle class taxpayers don't play a lot in tax so it's really hard

to cut their taxes. But you're doubling the standard deduction, you're increasing the child tax credit, you're doing things that will be meaningful to people who are on the bottom half of the income spectrum, and the loser's jump. Well, you've got you know, high income people living in high tax states with high talk to livings like in Silicon Valley Manhattan, who are going to pay probably more because

they're gonna lose the state and local tax deduction. Um. You've got you know, the real estate industry is and thrilled with this bill because the increase in the standard deduction means fewer people will take the mortgages your deduction um. But the reality is, you know, looking across the income spectrum, most individual Americans are going to get a tax cut next year. Will that be overwhelmed by higher interest rates as we moved to a back of the envelope five

and a half percent deficit to GDP. It's possible. I mean, if you look at the CBO, the j c T projections, you've got you know, higher financing costs due to the deficit. But you don't see a lot of the government forecasters saying that this bill is going to either crash the economy or overwhelming That's a really important distinction, John Lieber, It's not a question of crashing the economy. It is the weight of new deficit worries upon the Washington and

frankly the national debate. Is that what we voted in last night a new dampening or a new initiation, I should say, of deficit analysis and angst. Um, I think I would argue, Know, I think we're kind of an give an era than we were even five years ago, where the deficit has just become a second tier of political consideration. Um, You've got first these tax cuts one point five trillion dollars to the deficit before any economic growth.

And now you've got a lot of new spending that's coming down the pike in the next month or so. You've got disaster funding, you've got increased military spending. These are all priorities of the Trump administration, and politically, UM, I don't think the Democrats are going to score a lot of points going after the deficit. They've got a lot of other things that they're John wants to jump in here, but I got to ask one obvious question that we'll maybe get at one PM today. Is Donald

Trump in any way like Ronald Reagan? Uh, he's in some sense he's a you know, Republican leader of his party. So I guess you give him credit for that. Um, I'm not really sure. I'm qualified to give you a much more uh detailed analysis, and that I'm going to get. John talked to me about what an accomplishment this actually is to get it done in such a short period

of time, given its directly it's taken years, not months. Yeah, I think the key thing, I mean, again getting back to the deficits, The key thing here is that Republicans about three months ago said that they're there. They kind of decided to hold hands together, jump off the devaicity cliff, and that was really key to unlocking getting this bill done. Tax reform has been a long standing goal for the

Republican Party. UM. And you know, in particular, lowering the corporate tax rate is considered a very essential pro growth, pro u S policy, And knowing that they didn't manage to get it done under Obama, it wasn't really on the table under President Bush, and a year in the Trump administration, they've achieved this major reform that's going to have lasting effects for decades on both on the US

and around the world. As other countries raced to keep up with where the US corporate tax rate is going, John, most economists would say that this is not the time for fiscal stimulus, that they should engage in counter cyclical fiscal stimulus, which is a countersygnical fiscal policy, which would mean on a downturn, expand the deficit and when things are good, tighten things up. That's not what's happening, Kia.

But what I find strange, even stranger than that, is this renewed worry about the deficit and the debt pile. Why are we're worrying about this now? We've had years to worry about this. The debtload has been trillions and trillions and trillions, and we've added to it in multiples over the last ten years. So why is now the time to worry about it? Well, I think the political

opportunism is a good reason for that. I'd love to hear what these critics were saying if this were going to be a deficit finance infrastructure bill, where there's a lot more bipartisan buy in for an infrastructure bill than there is for tax cuts. I mean, the US has not had any trouble financing its deficits in recent years, and you know, depending on who you talk to, that doesn't seem like it's going to get acutely worse in

the near term. It just strikes me as odd that we're always, in fact, maybe it's not at all, Tom, We seem to be politicizing the deficit. It seems to be a story that's not going away anytime soon. When the Republicans were out of power, of course, they politicized the deficit, and now the Democrats seem to be doing the same thing. To Mr Leever's point, though, the conversation is nothing like it was in the early nineteen nineties really, or the so called Clinton surplus. And on we go

from there. What will you watch for in the next two or three weeks in the budget debate to come? John, Um? You know, I think there's there's a non zero chance of a government shutdown coming up, you know, as earlier this week. Um, both chambers have to pass a bill to keep the government funded. I think they probably will at least through mid January. And there's a lot of issues on the table that are going to be you know, where there's bipartisan support war that are gonna keep kind

of hard to do. Um. Increasing the discretionary spending, caps on descents, and mess expending. I'm looking out for that. That could be a significant boost to government spending next year, which would also be a significant fiscal stimulus because it's all going to be added on the debt. I think

there's you know, a couple of help. What's gonna happen to the insurance industry, whether or not the federal government's offering support for insurers who are selling into the exchanges and losing money there um something like that could be coming down the pike. And then you've got a host of other like non fiscal issues, such as what to do with the children of immigrants, legal immigrants that were

brought here, or what to do with surveillance authority. There's a lot of things going on that have to be resolved in Congress in the next fo a week and is going to come come to head the next three days. John Lieber, thank you so much. He's with p WC and gave us wonderful perspective and timeline wisdom on all

of this text cut effort. As well. We digress away from economics, finance, investment, we do international relations, we do politics, and maybe they all implode into what Secretary Kissing you're called me. Dr Kissinger called told me was without question the issue of the moment, not only for you Germany, not only for Europe, for the United Kingdom, but frankly for all. And this is the idea of refugees and migrants. We can avoid it. We're a transatlantic ocean away. David

Milliban would suggest, no, we can't. You know the name. It is a political family within the United Kingdom. He's confused on a daily basis with his brother. He has written a brilliant monograph, Rescue Refugees in the political crisis of our time. He's dedicated himself to this issue. Dr Kissingers said to me, without question, this is the most important issue in Europe going back hundreds of years. Where's

the dynamic as we end two thousand seventeen. Well, the dynamic today, thank you very much for having me on. The dynamic today, is that the refugee crisis is a

trend and not a blip. The forces driving record numbers of people from their homes around the world, across the Middle East, across Africa, but also most recently the Rhinga who have been driven from Me and mar those forces are EAP, that to do with weak states that don't share political power, that to do with a weak and divided international system, that to do with tumult within the Islamic world. Those are not going away. And so not

just for Europe but for the US too. There are fundamental questions of geopolitics, which is I guess why Dr Kissinger was interested in it, but also of personal commitment and what the West stands for, because the West is a political idea, not just a geographic one, and it's under assault. You're you have a hundred and twenty pages here. It's brought out the Ted people. This is the Ted speaking people. But this is a heavyweight hundred and twenty

pages about a massively adult topic. Let's go back to the Europe of nineteen twelve where everything was stable and then it became instable. Uh, there was an instability out of Saraevo and then aren't we go to World War one and all that? Can the refugee crisis have a tendencies towards a Saria Avo where it generates real instability. There's a massive difference because the refugee crisis of the twin year century, certainly the first half of the twentieth

century with a result of wars between states. There are no wars between states today. There's no hot wars between two countries. What we have are so called civil wars. In fact, they're very uncivil in various ways. Civil wars are producing record numbers of people fleeing for their lives, and that is because states are collapsing. They're not able to protect their own citizens. Sometimes they're all suiting their own citizens, as in the case of Syria, and sometimes

you've got proxy wars being fought. So there's a massive difference today in terms of the origin of these refugee crisis. Second big difference. The Second World War seemed like a long war in the twentieth centuries, six years for America, anything over five years exactly. So the wars in Congo, in Somalia and Afghanistan their thirty year wars. The civil wars that are taking place today are longer and more numerous than at any time in the nineteen or twentie centuries.

Third big change. Third and final big change, refugees don't live in camps anymore. Of the world's refugees are in urban areas. It's a phenomenon of globalization that people are urbanizing. That's true of refugee populations as well. So the humanitarian aid model, which was about keep people in camps, give them food and water and healthcare and then they'll go home. Now, well,

Turkey's an interesting example. Turkey has built but some of the best refugee camps in the world for two hundred thousand Syrians who they thought would flee as a result of the war. How many fled to Turkey two point seven million. So if you go to a stan bull a thousand kilometers from the Syrian border, it's full of refugees. How should our listeners coast to coast respond and forget about the comfort of the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean in our good relationships with Mexico in Canada, how do we

respond to the ageless emotion? Just shut the borders down? I mean, I mean the conservatives are gonna say, oh that Miller Bay and there goes with his lefty tailed again, bring in more people. And then the liberals are going to say, no, we have to bring in more and more and more, and then you have the immediate social Actually it's credit responded. I respond to that by saying the number who come here are very small compared to

the numbers. So the US has the global economy and one percent of the world's refugees, and by arguing that the administration could should keep up the historic nine average, we're arguing that that should continue to be a relatively small number. But these are the most vulnerable people who

need a new start in life. Secondly, it's vital that countries like Jordan, who are after all, your second closest ally in the Middle East, get the kind of support that allows them to sustain their own administ They're not because neither from the Trump administration nor from the pre administration. They're on a drip feed of short term aid. The Saudis cut off all their aid actually two years ago, and so a country like Jordan, Look, don't take it

from me. The King of Jordan says, these countries are boiling. They've got six hundred thousand refugees. So my point is that America's geo strategic interest, as well as the moral interest symbolized by the lady on a plinth in the middle of the water a couple of um that the moral interest is not the only argument. I'm like, I'm not here saying America should just have a big heart. I'm saying here, should have a smart head, which is that if you don't address these problems, it's so causes

your interest to suffer, not just your morals. David Bimbad where this is the book is Rescue Refugees in the political crisis of our time. I think of it as something much like what Alan Krueger Princeton would do, which is a short, heated book on the topic. Whether you agree or disagree, it gets you thinking about these issues. Okay, if that's the case, and I want to go to Jordan again. Here is the King of Jordan's he is is Americanized. I mean i I've I've heard him speak

at a major independent school within the United States. He's he's as ally as we can describe the refugees in Jordan. Right now, forget about the sanitized view. What's actually there. Jordan's a country of seven in people. It's got six hundred and thirty five thousand registered Syrian refugees, their sunny Muslims.

About a hundred thousands of them are living in camps, so five hundred thousand plus are living in towns and cities around Jordan's take Mafrac, which is a small town of about hundred thousand people in northern Jordan's it's population doubled five years ago with the arrival of Syrian refugees. Half of the refugees are kids, and so immediately you've

got pressure on housing services, healthcare. Is there a Jordan constituency saying much as in the United States, get them out of a Jordan constituency saying how much longer is this going to go on? Because this looks like a long term problem. They're they're not building a wall, and they are trying to cope with the people who are there. What they are desperate for is some international understanding of

their situation beyond short term made. So they're on a just to go into Jordan from minute, they're on a dollar peg. They've got an I m F program and their debt has basically able to GDP since the refugee crisis started, and they're saying there needs to be a strategic approach. And my book says employment for adults is only gonna be possible if countries like Jordan get macroeconomic help.

Half the refugees are kids, So it's crazy that two percent of the world's humanitarian aid budget goes on education that must be increased. Thirdly, these people don't need food intents, they need cash because they need to be part of the part of the Jordanian economy. There's one other thing they need, which is that for the King of Jordan.

The politics in Jordan's are five times more difficult when it looks like the US is saying we're not going to let these people come into here because there Muslim. That's a political problem, not just a problem for the individual refuge And in the time we have left and look at eighteen topics to talk about, including why someone should go to your Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Let me go here. You were the wonder child of the Gordon Brown era? Were you like thirty seven or three? But

I wish I was forty two when I became two. Okay, you were young. You've now had the courage now and you you've you've left and you've been out working on this project and doing other things. Do you want to get back into the public swirl within a completely fractured United Kingdom? Well, I think that I feel I'm in the public swirl in a way. I have much less power as an en GEO leader than as a government minister. But there are also fewer obstacles to me doing what

I want to do. I always say to people, look, I'll choose where I put myself professionally by how much difference I can make. And four years ago I felt I could make more difference running an NGO in New York than I could in as a politician on the back benches of the UK Parliament. And that's why I'm doing what I'm doing. We've published this bookcause I think this is a symptom of the crisis of globalization that is roiling countries like this one and countries across Europe

in distigle. It's acclaim book, Globalization and its Discontents. Where is this discontent of refugees and migrants in five years? I think the trends are that it will be a source of more instability because and I say that for two reasons. One, there's a crisis of diplomacy. Your State Department is being shrunk. Yeah, there's no there's no sign of the kind of active diplomacy that will get to the roots of these problems. I mean, the crisis in

Yemen is mushrooming not going away. Um. But secondly, there is a feeling that you have to tackle your problems on the home front rather than the global problems. And my argument is, in the modern interconnected world, if you don't solve the world's problems, and you're gonna have bigger problems at home. David, don't be a stranger. Thank you so much. The monitory effort. It's a lovely short brief must read rescue and refugees and migrantes. Jim Bianco with

US out of Bianco Research, Chicago. A few years ago. He worked for firms called First Boston and Sheerson Lehman Brothers. For those of you younger, you have no idea who those firms are. That's how old we're getting, Jim. When we look at this, we look as you looked at First Boston and Cherson Lehman Ubs and other firms. It's support. Is there a support on bitcoin? Oh, that's a good question. And boy, you're to bring me back into memories with those firm names. I there, Well, I'm not sure what

you mean by support. Let me ask you. If I'm running an arithmetic it's clearly log hyperbolic. It's clearly hyperbolic. But even now with a log arrhythmic y axis showing percent change, it's bordering on allusions to a hyperbolic move up like you get with the Zimbabwe dollar or whatever. Okay, so I got a moon shot up in bitcoin. How does a technician of your acclaim fine support on a

moon shot? Oh? You you can and you can't. I mean, if you use your traditional tools, what you wind up saying is you buy it, but support where you'd want to consider selling it is a thirty or drop you at your money? Yeah, so it becomes it becomes a very difficult market from a technical standpoint and even from a practical standpoint just watching it going, you know, straight up through the through the sky. Uh So it is

something that you have to look at. Accordingly, anybody who invest in it should be investing a very small amount of money because you can wake up and half your money is gone and you don't want to leap over that. And the key sentence there, folks, And you know, I know where Jim is going on this support is you know, twelve thousand, it's like five six eight thousand, uh dollars below and a bitcoin pim do you have anything wise to say? Over here. You're just know, I'm just well,

I thinking about bitcoin. Let me just give you the actual change, the actual figures here. The of course you can. It's a three a difference in the bid ask right now, I think, and we're hey, Jim, you know when Tom brings up this idea of a bitcoin um the fact that there may be this sort of you know, an ability to sell it. I mean, you very rarely hear people coming out and saying sell you you know, when to sell a stock. So you know, it's not like he got a lot of advice on that side. Either

you try to dump a million shares or something. I mean, you're going to affect the price, that's right. And see the benefit bitcoin has right now is it only has buyers. And you know who sells bitcoin is somebody who's already bought it and is trying to liquidate a existing position, probably at a profit because of the big rally that it's had. You can't spend them. You technically can, but not in any numbers that matter. You can't short it.

So what would get the price of bitcoin basically to crash like some people have predicted, is you'd have to scare all of the longholders out. Probably a act or a change of technology or something like that would make everybody afraid of the money that they have in their electronic wallet and seek to close it real fast, sell

everything they've gotten get out. But that hasn't happened. So that's one of the biggest supports that this thing has going is it's just money coming in all the time, and the only selling you get it's down a little bit, you know, relative to its folatility, is those are existing people taking profits. That's the only person that is selling it right now, which is why it relentlessly goes up

because more money keeps coming in all the time. If we come back in a year, do you think that bitcoin is going to be more legitimate or another of these uh sort of coin offerings. No, I'm a I'm a big believer in the long term of the cryptocurrencies.

I think that they have a real promise to fulfill a need that the world doesn't have right now, and simply that is, we have no way to transfer money free because we have to have like a credit card company or bank stand in the middle as an intermediary, and we have no way to do micro payments, you know, finished listening to this interview. For five cents or something like that. Bloomberg can't put that on that too rich. We couldn't do that, yeah, okay, or even a tenth

of a penny. We could go stoppenny because it's been suggests. Keep talking, Jim, Yeah, right. But the point is the meter is ticking, you know. The New New York Times finished reading this article. For five cents, that's what bigcoin can offer, A free way to transfer very small sums of money without an intermediary making any prohibitive cost. The intermediaries, the banks don't offer that right now. That's why I'm

such a big believer in it. We hear uh, Pim Fox and Jim Bianco that the President's uh signing of the bill passage. They're calling it a bill passage event shifts from one pm to the vicinity of three pm three pm this afternoon. Uh, And it's really I'm not sure if there'll be Q and eight. It was earlier believed there would be a chance to discuss this with

the President the United States. We're not sure. But the key point there is for those a two to one pm, we're shifting to three pm with the president today as well, Jim Bianco. One of the great things, and again within Bianco synthesis, is everybody said it's a single digit world, and yet we keep getting double digit stock market returns. When do we get back to the actual assumption of a single digit world. It could be as early as

next year, I mean right now. The big benefit that the market has had throughout the second half of two thousand and eighteen is there has been a relentless move, you know, to use Wall Street parlance of money towards risk on money keeps coming into either e tfs or funds every day that invest in stocks, invest in credit, and invest in what we refer to as risk on assets. In the last couple of weeks, that's been waning a little bit. Uh, you know, it's still coming, but not

as much as it was a three months ago. And if it was to reverse into the beginning of the year, we could finally start being a correction or maybe some turbulent in the market. But right now that it's just theoretical park, we're not quite there yet. Jim Byako, thank you so much, greatly appreciate it. Bianco Research with a nice uptake. 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