Surveillance: Coronavirus Response With Rajan

how should invest this process? The agreement overnight in Washington, d C. Well, good morning to all of you. I hope you're doing well in this lockdown. But you know, look, I think this is uh, you know, this has been expected obviously for the last couple of weeks. We didn't know the exact timing over to the size, but I think given in the state of Washington over the last

few years, they got this done pretty quickly. And to try and as a series number at least I mentioned you know which you've include QUI we've got a six trillion dollar stimulus of some you know, some form. You know, our estimates are like everybody else, we think the second quarter is going to be a bit of a black hole on the economy. It's about a trillion dollar hit, maybe a trillion two trillion three when all of a sudden done, assuming there's a recovery in the back half.

So you've got about a trillion trillion two hit to the economy and you've got a six trillion dollar stimulus. I mean, it seems it seems like that's appropriate, and it seems like that's gonna be good enough to uh kind of put in a low here, which is what we've been sort of calling for. It doesn't mean it's gonna not be volatile, doesn't mean we're not going to

read test some of these levels. But stocks have discounted a lot of bad news, and we think, you know, as we've been saying for the last few weeks, you should be you know, averaging in over this period where the news is going to be really scary. You know. I look, Mike Wilson, and good morning to you and to all of Morgan Stanley on lockdown nationwide and indeed worldwide as well. Mike Wilson. So much of this is

about the elasticities of malieabilities of corporations. Can they adjust on the income statement to that one trillion dollar hole this quarter. Yeah, that's the right question time. I mean, here's the way I think about it, which is maybe a little bit different than the consensus, which is the government, you know, because this is a such a shock. I mean, we've never seen anything like this. Okay, let's and John you said it right, there's a there's a human toll here.

It's not just a statistic. Okay. People are going to be losing their jobs and some of those jobs are gonna be coming back for a while. That is whatever sssion is. And so there is a human cost, there's an economic cost, and that's typically you know, what happens is when you have a when you have a situation, as government does step in with easier monetary policy and stimulus. And I think in that case, the government is on

the ball. Now, when we think about it as equity strategist and investors, you know, we try to and we try to be objective about what's actually going on. And here's the way I think about it. So companies are basically we're going to go through a full employment cycle in a month, meaning typically it takes about two years for us to see an unemployment rate go up three or four basis points, which is likely what's going to

happen over the next thirty days. Okay, now that's really scary and bad, But at the same time, what it really means is that, you know, costs, costs are gonna be coming down. I mean, companies are going to be getting their house in order, so to speak. And that's

the bad news. The good news is is that protects margins, it protects the cash flow, and the government is really stepping in here in a way where you could argue they are allowing companies to take those costs off their income statement and put it onto the government's balance sheet. So it's not gonna be seamless. It's not only there's not going to be damaged in that transition, but in many ways you're transferring the risk of shareholders to the

federal government. Mike, this sort of supports the sense that you're giving out there a couple of weeks ago that we're starting to get to a place where you feel comfortable buying, and in fact, uh, you're more bullish and you have been in a while on stocks. At the same time, if you look at Targets, Chief executive officer, he said this today, it's difficult to provide guidance with any precision in this environment. America is largely out of business.

There's no playbook, and we are writing the script each and every day. How bullish can you be? How much upside can there be at a time of incredible uncertainty and companies laying off workers, the psychological impact of that demand and supply destruction destruction, Well, I mean, it's always a continuum of risk reward, right. So the way we think about it is, you know, it's it's hard to get bullish, you know when when all these bad things

are happening around you at the same time. You know, if we're thinking about an investment horizon of twelve months or longer, which is the way we think about our process, then you know, this is the best risk reward we've seen in quite a while. You know, it's ironic. I mean, market like, markets top on good news and they bottom on bad news. And that's where we are. We're at a period of you really really bad news that the

stock markets crashed. It's crashed in a way like we've early seen maybe twice in history nine okay, and it's crashing because the economy is crashing, so you know, you have to put that all into context. And when we step back and we say, okay, we don't think we're going to go into a depression. We don't know that, but we have to have a view. We think this is gonna be a really steep procession. There's gonna be tremendous policy response on the other side, and then by

next year we'll be recovering to some degree. And that's what goes into our models and our thought process when we think about the twelve month view. So you know, that's that's the thought process, that's the math, and you know we've done the work. We've pretty presented for people to look at, and we think it you know, this is this is where it makes sense. You know. One last comment on this, which I think is important. You know, people don't think about risk reward much when they invest.

I mean when I say people, I mean the average person. I think a lot of you know, strategic strategic as allocators do for sure, and when we do that, that's one of our jobs here. And if you think about the risk reward today, people in December felt like the risk reward was more attractive than it is today, and that just doesn't mean that the math doesn't compute on that. And this is just a remainder that price matters, right, Price matters and the upside and price matters on the downside.

That is the final arbiter of when you should be committing capital or removing capital from investments. It's strangely count of intuitive, but it's something we keep going back to on this program, Mike, that risk appetite seems to be positively correlated with the direction of price. Risk cappitite goes up as prices arising, goes down as prices are going lower. The drawdown we have seen has gone through several phases

over the last one month alone. The more recent phase has been a really ugly one, the liquidation phase, the sell everything face. Can you identify some points Mike, which kind of signal to you at the moment that we're working our way through that we're working our way out of that ugly face. Yeah. I was saying credit is one area where I mean that's to me that you know, the bigger issue over the last three months for markets, Uh this you know, I want to sell the wrong way.

But the bigger issue for markets was the oil price collapse. Then it was the virus because that's when the credit markets really came include. And the credit markets, you know, are incredit critically important for the economy and how kind of markets function overall. So they became completely dislocated over the last month, and that's when the FED really got active as they should and they now have you know, intervene and the funding markets in particular. Uh, they've got

that under control. And then of course they injected capital directly into the credit market the Monday, and that you know, allowed investment grade credit to start to heal. So the credit you know, liquidation looks like you know that that could continue in the lowest quality credits, but that's really important. So I think we've seen you know, people basically selling what they can sell. The other thing, I would argue, you know, there was a period of about a week

or two where it didn't matter what it was. Everything was for sale gold right, Uh, you know, high quality bonds, low quality styles. I mean, everything was being sold to raise money into that liquidation phase was quite clear. What I would remind listeners of is that we had the reverse situation last Paul. So when everybody, you know, when the fed came back in and did que four right. We had basically systematic strategies and risk seekers basically putting

on too much leverage. So these things work both directions, and I would I would continue to go back and argue at the fourth quarter rally really should not have happened to the magnitude that it does, and so it cuts both ways, like where he can work both ways, and in many respects, this you know, liquidation phase we're having is happening because people got two levered and the fourth we're on the premise that you know, nothing bad was ever going to happen again, Mike, always send my

best of the team, won't you? And my best of you and yours as well, Mike Wilson, that of Morgan Stanley, the chief US equity strategy. Now let's do this right now, let us bring in our esteem guests. He of course uh served his India is their central bank governor, and of course is at the Universe of Chicago. But that barely describes the social contribution of Rob and Roger and his book fault Lines was definitive twelve years ago in a financial crisis. And now the third pillar was my

book of the year last year. The third pillar is a primal scream for a return of community. Professor, thank you so much at this historic moment for being with us. Where is the community known as America. It's it's struggling, I mean, like every other country in the world, to find the resources to deal with this totally unexpected and unanticipated disease uh pandemic. Um. I think we will emerge

from this stronger. I think you know, people are talking about the isolation that this uh pandemic creates, but it also creates a sense of togetherness. The package that was put together, I guess the word cares is in it. It's a way of telling people everywhere in the country that you belong in one big hole and that that big community the nation cares about you. And of course, what would be nice is if that when down to the local level and we've got far more local action

once this pandemic is defeated, Professor. In an audial world, we'd have the fiscal support package before we get the shut down, to make sure that some of these companies don't start folding, don't start laying off people before they have a chance to get the money. And that's the story in the United States, the sequencing, it's just a

little bit messy in your India. With one point three billion people lockdown for three weeks, what are they doing on the fiscal side, on the monty policy side to try and cushion what will be a massive blow to the economy. It's worse. I mean, governments simply happened to come to terms with what is happening. I think in India we've got the lockdown first and now they're contemplating what they will do on the fiscal side. It's also harder. How do you get money to a worker who has

no formal bank account? Uh And what we're seeing right now is the first phase where people are trying to come to terms with not going to work. There are lots of poor house holes that have absolutely no income, no savings, and they also aren't necessarily better off by being locked down at home because home is a slum where everybody sort of really lives on top of each other. So I think India will have to see over the

next few days whether this is sensible. It can't go the same way as the West, but will also have to work very quickly in getting money directly to households, especially in the urban areas where you know the lockdown is going to be far more problematic, and also on small and medium sized firms which are already hurting because of previous the previous demonetization which reduced informality, as well as the rollout of a goods and service tax which

put great streams on small businesses. But now we have the third blow, which is coronavirus, and I don't think many small and medium enterprises are prepared to handle it. Professor Rice, a really excellent point and something I'd like to dig a little bit data on. Hind, every single data point we receive in the next month will be

real economic pain and real psychological pain as well. You've brought up the issue of the unbanked, the individuals in society that don't have a bank account that one be able to cash that check in the same way as well, especially in the developed world, what can you do in a country like India, in an emerging market where so many of societies still do not have bank accounts, Well, you you will have to find some way to get money to them, and this is where you might have

to use community resources. Of course, bearing in mind that getting a bunch of people together as dangerous at these times. But perhaps funnel money through the post office. You will have to accept a fair amount of leakage money going to people who don't actually deserve to get that money because they've manipulated the system. But that is the price you have to pay to keep people from starvation at

this point. So, I mean, India has many people banked, that was one of the achievements over the last few years, but there are still some unbanked people, and the way to do that might be through community institutions. Professor, India and a lot of the developing world have really relied

on fast growth for their entire ecosystem. I'm just looking right now at the growth in the GDP of India over the past few years eight percent, eight point three percent, seven percent now coming out of i n G saying that India's economy is plaised to shrink next quarter and the full year expansion is supposed to be perhaps uh significantly lower than it has been in a long time.

How much does that challenge the financial structure right now of India and it's just an incredible economic engine in the longer term, Well, I think it's a challenge for all developing countries which don't have the kind of resources than industrial countries. Have remembered that industrial countries are putting enormous amounts of wealth to work in questioning the blows

from this this crisis. Emerging markets and developed in countries don't have that spare cushion, and especially when you're running already a large fiscal deficit, your debt to GDPs at levels which markets already start worrying about, and your inflation is not zero, so the printing press can't start up as we see with the central banks and industrial countries.

So e ms and developing countries have to keep in mind that they have to maintain some sense of fiscal and monetary responsibility even while dealing with this unprecedented crisis. And that means that you know they many of them are at this point facing capital outflows. So you have you can't cut interest rates to zero. You have to main interest rates and maintain interest rates at the reasonable level. You can't blow out your fiscal depths. That you have

to be very careful about where you apply resources. And of course you really hope that you have the medical resources to cope because your medical resolve, also the refraction of the ones in industrial countries, and everybody at this point is looking for those resources ventilators that are premium

across the world. So what I think at this point emerging markets and developing countries they're looking for is certainly trying to make the best of their own situation, but also more global cooperation and Professor, I mean, this is such an important issue for the entire world because the developing nations have been the engine of growth for years and I'm wondering what this means extrapolate out into what the scenario is given India's precarious situation and frankly that

of all developing nations right now. Yeah, no, I I think for for the next month and a half, countries will have to try and get ahead of the of the virus. And this is where India's lockdown comes in, and it's an attempt to prevent the surge that's happening in an variety of other countries and to prepare their medical resources for the eventual rise in cases. So this is something that every developing country now understands it has

to do. But of course it would help if there were more resources available, especially for the poorest countries in Africa. What we know from this virus is there's no point eliminating it in the West or in East Asia. If it comes back from some other part of the world where it's not controlled to some extent. We can't have an open world again until we will eliminate this virus everywhere. Professor, which we shake its hand this morning, I'm gonna have

to leave it there. The secret sauce for Lisa Bramo, it's John Farrell and I Paul Sweeney Francine liquid is we lean over the desk and we actually read the research. This is always problematic with Karl Weinberg of high frequency Economics, because he has the audacity. At least it tore right an international peace, a United States peace, and a China piece.

I read every word of them on Sunday, and Karl Weinberg, what stunned me was, after a mere thirty two years of doing this, you decided you couldn't make a forecast. What does that feel like? It feels like sailing on the ocean without a sale or a rudder. You know, we are in unschowed territory as far as the economy is concerned. Great example of that is tomorrow's number on initial claims for unemployment. Absolutely no idea how that number is going to print. It's going to be big, it's

probably going to be a record. But more than that, more detailed than that, no precedent to move on. And that's a really important number because we're coming up on the employment report in another ten days or so, and and that's another number we don't know anything about. We really do not know the true state of any major economy in the world right now. The shock of this is the shock, as Alan Ruskin of Deutsche Bank says, of depth and to ration. Is Karl Weinberg more concerned

about the depth or the duration of what we're living. Yes, I'm concerned about both the depth and the duration. And it's not a lessing matter. I apologize for lessing at it all right. The shock itself, the lockdown is unprecedented. The complications of it, you know, no historical precedents to agd against them that I can think of making. You know, maybe you spoken to someone who has a precedent, but

I don't. And of course the driving factory, the driver is the disease, the virus and nobody really has a handle on the medicine or the science of that to tell us how long this is gonna last. So we are very much a wrong for the ride right now and um trying our best just to keep up with the news. We're looking forward to some we we're looking forward to the survey data for March, but the surveys we're seeing seemed to have been taken too early in the months to be able to give us a good

bead on what's happening. So, for instance, markets MR yesterday, which are flawed indicators anyhow, but if you just say that even they couldn't use a big moves like this. They showed that the climb manufacturing activities for the month of March, said that you expect that, but February had

blipped up the levels of the industries. Tell us that manufacturing in Europe and Japan and the United States as we were was down and marched from federately, but no worse than it was less small and last summer level. And that's just ridiculous. Well, Carl, No, I mean I want to break in and get a sense from you. You know, we're talking about how it's unprecedented and how We just don't have a sense of of how long, how deep. But it's it's it seems like it's really bad.

We know the virus will eventually be stopped, whether it's by a vaccine or whether it's just by herd immunity after everybody gets it. This does have an end point, we don't know when it is. And the question is how quickly can people get their jobs back? Can the economy get back up to steam? Is there a precedent with the job market destruction and then recreation? And how long are short of a time that could take? Well, I can't really think of a good one to tell

you the truth. I need to tend to elevance. You want to think about the Japanese uh tsunami in twenty eleven, and there are all kinds of things out there that are similar, but nothing on such a global scale. The really big anomies say, it's not only the duration. If you told me the date when this was all going to stop, I'd be happy to know it. But what

I don't know is what's going to break in between. Okay, if you shut the economy down for a month or a week or three months, and it definitely turns out to be some firms are going to sell, and are they going to be big or small firms? Are they're going to be systemically important? Are they're going to be financial system and regularities that they're going to banks that fell? Uh is they're going to markets that fail, But we

don't know what breaks. And that's what I'm going to determine the question of whether they're the jobs for people when this all ends. Tom, You know, I been thinking and talking a lot about this with people. How will the world look after this is over? Are you still going to go to the Irish pub downstairs from you? Of course you will. Will you still come to the one up by near me by me? Yeah, of course

you will, you know. But I do wonder about how things are going to change permanently when it comes to office space, when it comes to just the landscape of what people need to desire. Dr Weinberg then along that line, one final question, Carl Weinberg, what does business investment do? I mean it's going to take quarters to get that inherent confidence back, isn't it? Absolutely? Tom? I just want to go back to Lisa's common just now. Tom would like to go back to that Irish poke downstairs if

it were open, and that's really the question. Will be Irish probably open. After this will be enterprise called bankrupt. That's the key to the future. Well, I don't know the answering. I just saw it on Twitter somebody saying Department of Labor just issuing some documents to help out

businesses moments ago. Carl Weinberg, thank you so much and we value immensely your research pieces the Weinberg Global look about ten pages long, and his wonderful US work as well with John Sylvia helping out there, and of course the view of China from high frequency economics. It is

a labor economy. It is an economy of jobless claims tomorrow some estimating one million, one and a half million is a Bloomberg survey, two million, even three million, maybe not in one week, but spread out over fourteen days. These are numbers, folks, that no one has ever perceived. Academics think about this public that Cherniva is it barred. She's professor of economics and far more importantly an important book coming out, The Case for a Job Guarantee. That's

a controversial title professor as well. With this legislation, Are we any closer to a job guarantee? Good morning, Tom and Paul. No, we are not close to a job guarantee. And I am looking at the provisions and I actually don't see anything specific specifically targeted to the labor market. We have some emergency measures that I think you're trying to stop the hemorrhage, and you know there's good measures, but we need we need to keep a laser sharp

and focus on jobs. Right. We have we have atomized our labor economy over X number of years. I've said this on the show, Folks on Labor Day, I always try to read some labor chapter in a book. I read Paul Samuelson from another time in place on labor in America. I mean, it's gone, isn't it? Puffly? Now? I mean there really is no labor representation? Am I right on that this is true? There's no strong labor representation,

And we are putting labor on the back burner. And we will not come out of this uh moment without some bold, big programs to restore jobs and incomes. And we just can't think in the conventional ways. You know, we're looking at potentially quarter to unemployment rates of thirty if we listened to the St. Louis FED, that is greater than what we had seen in the Great Depression. And there is only one solution to a problem like this,

and that is direct employment, bold, big public investments. So publicly looking at the trade the fiscal stimulus plan just emerging from Congress, what are some of the key highlights for you as it relates to getting people back to work. What I am seeing is a lot of focus on income support, which is the right thing to do at this moment, some strength and of unemployment insurance and this one time payment which probably will go for rent and food for the amount of April. But that is it.

And unemployment insurance is not a pro job creation policy. It's a policy that stops sort of the floor from you know, falling from underneath us. And so what we need is to start thinking about how to return jobs back. Uh. Once unemployment developed, it has this terrible, terrible way of self perpetuating. Because um, we tried this last time during the two thousand and eight Great Financial Crisis, we strengthen

unemployment insurance. We could have done better, but we It took us ten years to bring unemployment down to its historic lows. So we cannot afford to wait this long or potentially longer unless we do some direct job creation. So, Professor, a lot of Wall Street economers are scrambling to come out with GDP forecasts, and I think, you know, many of them kind of I think incorporate kind of a V shaped recovery, a sharp sharp decline in two q GDP followed by pretty you know, solid bounce back in

queues three and four. How do you view how this might unfold? Yeah, Paul, I think you absolutely correct. All of these provisions right now now are designed to patch

us over for a couple of months. So whether these a loan guarantees, you know, various all of the various policies are with the short term under the assumption that people will happily return back oh work, but that that ship has sailed in some sense, because even if if a lot of business is reopened, we already have plenty of off and loss of income which will kind of ripple through the economy, and folks, even if they get alone to pass them over for a couple of months,

if the customers are not returning in big numbers, we will see the problems down the line, professor, one final question that it's too short a time to talk to you. Would love to have you on again. Is the basic idea of an individualistic almost Lackey in America. And as somebody said brilliantly in essay this week, this is a hobbsy in crisis. We've gone back to natural man and natural law and all that of another time and place. How do we recapture the collectivism of labor? I don't

see any evidence the mood is out there. No, you're you may be right, but I fear that the economic pain is ahead of us, and we will be once again engaged in this conversation. What we do, we would do wrong? Could we have prepared better? Can we stabilize the foundations of the economy and the foundations of the labor market? Working people? We need good jobs and good incomes. And I hope that we start this conversation as em as possible so we don't have to go through yet

another very very protracted downturn. Polinare pablinnatured, thank you so much with Bard today with a really out of consensus view there for so many on global Wall Street right now, A gentleman who is expert at labor economics, and he has the ultimate accolade of a polarized Washington. He writes for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Of course, has been iconic in his public support of Vice President Biden the last go around. UH And Jared Bernstein joins

us right now. He is a liberal who Conservatives are compelled to read at each and every moment. Jared, wonderful day. Have you with us today? Can you explain the reticence of Senate Republicans to get this bill done? I mean, it seems like the compromise is supposed to benefit eleven pages of America, two trillion dollars in all. Explain the Washington reticence to assist their electorate. Yeah, I think I can do that. It took way too long for members

of Congress to recognize urgency. That was clear to any of us who've been watching markets and other economic indicators. And unfortunately, one of the things that happens in this kind of situation is that you have the Christmas tree problem. Members of Congress see a big bill coming down the pipe that has to pass, and they think they have leverage to put stuff on it, but doesn't belong there.

I will say though, that for this Congress, it looks like they did ultimately act pretty quickly, and uh, the deal should be perhaps later today. The Senate and the White House are in agreement. Now it's all about the House, and what I'm hearing on the ground is that the House is uh are going to join on pretty quickly. So Jared, it's interesting here. Do you think this deal two trillion dollars, obviously a huge number, really jumps out

at people. Is it enough? Or do you think this is just the first in a series of fiscal stimulus plans that will be needed to keep this economy, you know, from going too far south. It is the largest stimulus I believe we've ever heard of. It's of g d p uh and it's uh. And yes, we will definitely need more trips to the well. Uh. This is actually the third trip there. There's been two other stimulus bills so far. The first one was a narrow one directed

at health crisis. The second one was a small stimulus. This is a big stimulus, but we're going to need more trips to the weather. At least two things left out of this bill. First of all, it has nothing on state fiscal release that turns out to be critically important. It was important last time in a shallower down turn. And secondly, uh the uh the bill um has just one time payments to households. Those are going to be very useful, but I think we'll have to do more

than one round of that. So Jared, there's you know. I'm going to ask you to look into your crystal ball, your g DP crystal ball. How do you think g d P is going to play out over the next several quarters. I think Wall Street, many on Wall Street are looking for a V type, some are looking for a U type of recovery, and some are just flat out saying this is an L type recovery. And we'll get back to you whether you know this thing turns up. Well,

here's how I would explain that. You think think of the V or the U or the is having two parts, one part down in one part either upper sideways. The down part. Economists can explain to you, and I will. The up part epidemiologists can explain to you, and they will, or at least they will when they have the data. The down part is baked in the cake and it's going to be double digits, and it's probably happening as we speak that has double a double digit GDP decline

with a negative handle. Uh. And then the up part, whether it's a v is a matter of when containment occurs. Uh. No question. There will be lots of pent up demand, you know, air airplane trips and conferences that many will be rescheduled. People will go on vacations and back to restaurants. So I I think Trump is correct when he says there's pent up demand. The question is how intact will the economy be on the other side of this such

that it can absorb and reflect that to men. I mean, Jared, this is all well and great, but I want you to explain. I want you to go all Dean Baker on me right now. And so there's a whole left feeling that, you know, life will go and there's a conservative ethos which many of our listeners and viewers share. There's this conservative ethos, Oh, no, we're giving it away. Isn't anything we spent now paid back in ongoing g d P over quarters and indeed years. I mean we're

going to get the money back eventually, right, Yes. And I think the notion that you can somehow pivot from where we are now to a better economy by easter is completely nonsense. I mean, as I've said, the second quarter is a deep recession baked in the case. That's not just me, that's everybody. And uh the idea that you can um punt on containment efforts only means a

much larger economic problem down the road. So yeah, I think we're going to have to just do what the uh what the health experts are telling us and recognize and keep that the key to your questions, tom if making sure that we have an economy that can bounce back at the other side of this. That's why the eight hundred plus billion in this in this bill we're talking about to help preserve small and large business is very important. But I remember this is really important, folks.

In A E. A and two thousand nine, the American Economic Association Olivier Blanchard, the giant of French economics, working with the I m F, working out of M I T. Professor Blanchard got up Jared and he put up a chart and he said, you know, there's been a real crash, but here's the run rate to get back and someday we'll get back. I mean those laws are still in place. If we spend ten percent of GDP now and seven percent of g d P in eight weeks or eight months, whatever,

we're gonna get it back down the road. Right Listen, Tom, Yes, right, I totally agree with you. But here's the thing you have to appreciate. I'm sure you do. You think, and I think medium and long term. Sounds like you're thinking

long term. Politicians think in very very short term. Uh So, when you're talking about Trump, who feels like his and I think correctly, feels like his electoral prospects are very much damaged by what's going on, he's thinking in terms of weeks, not seven eight years to make up an

outcoat gasp that, yes, eventually we'll make up. So, Jared, I guess the one of the next issues is as we pass through what's coming out of Congress right now in terms of the two trillion dollar fiscal stimulus plan, what is what does Congress need to focus on next? Do you think from a from a stimulus perspective, Well, that's a great question. A couple of things. First of all, state fiscal relief is essential, and it's not in this bill.

American states have to balance their budgets, and given the demands on their unemployment insurance system, UH, they're going to be facing a big time. Secondly, there will need to be another trip to the well to help support households

who are losing paychecks week by week. And also it's important to note that in this bill, it is true that low income households are eligible for these checks, but many of them don't file federal tax returns just because their income isn't high enough, and that means that they won't get those checks unless they file. That's the way the thing is set up, so they're going to need to They're gonna need to file in order to get their checks. Jared Bernstein, thank you so much for the

Center and Budget and Policy Priorities. Can't say enough about his work. Really compelling reading always from Professor Bernstein. 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