Surveillance: Fed Path with Riccadonna

and we're always looking forward here at surveillance. Let's do that on the labor economy and on the view forward of the car wreck and Donna Chief Fosconist at BNP Pariba Markets three six, Carl, I want to slice and you do this in your research note, you slice and dice the confusion that's out there. I think the financial media is way too simplistic about the labor reports plural and the debate Friday was at a good report or a bad report? Which part of the complexities of labor

matter to this confusion. Was it a good report? Was it a bad report? I would say it was a good report, not a great report, and not as strong as the headline would have you. Believe because when we start parsing into the details, not only was there a big negative net revision to the prior two months, you

should lop that off of the top line. Also the decline in the work week, So one tenth decline in the work week is equivalent to about two hundred thousand jobs, So you take that off of the number, and you're really talking about a labor market that is showing signs of weakness. So we have all these different labor gauges. What I think we need to do because the most important thing is the take home pay for workers. And when we look at that number in aggregate, we can

absolutely see that the trend is decelerating. It's heading uh below the rate of inflation at the moment, and so this is a big problem for households. The the rocket fuel for consumer spending is coming in and you know, dramatically slower fashion going forward, and that has big implications for how consumers look later at this quarter and especially internet. Part of this is the microeconomics foundations of this. You were so fortunate Princeton to have a guy named H. Rosen.

Harvey Rosen held court on look at the minutia you do that in your research. No, what you're doing, Harvey Rosen one oh one, and you're saying, look at labor supply, what is the distinction of the American labor supply right now? The supply simply isn't there. And it's not just a story of early retirements. It's happening across a broad swath of the labor base. Uh. And this tells us there's

less slack than meets the eye. And if we're printing jobs at a pace of two hundred thousand plus per month, this is continuing continuing to amp up the pressure in the labor market. And we saw that in the latest average. Not to correct you on there, but I think it's Harvey Rosen one oh two, not one oh one. Okay, excuse me. That's not very late. How fast this fed kinda because another band paid code. It's a little bit out that compared to maybe the consensus. Sure, well it

is now. We'll see what happens after the press conference next week, but we do think that there's another fifty basis point tightening in December. We expect another fifty basis points in February and then finishing it off at twenty five pips at the March meeting. So we're a terminal rate of five and a quarter, consistent entirely with what we're seeing in terms of the upward surprises on labor GDP. Consumer're spending uh and uh, you know, we're slowing, but

we're not slowing quite fast enough. So the Fed has a bit more work to dr rica. Don It's like take to Aspurn. He doesn't talk the same as when he was here. I mean he's quick, he's he's like, he's like this this this why kind of got kind of got back to the office now. Is there're upside risk to that col what's the balance of risk around that coal? I think it's a pretty balanced risk at this point in time. But you know, the story has been over the last few months, the resilience and in

the labor market. So we jokingly put a subtitle in our right up of the jobs report. Uh, more Rocky Balboa than Rocky in terms of the labor markets alone. O Rocky in Philadelphia. This is wasted on you, isn't it. It's Philadelphia. I haven't seen the movie actually, but the point is that can see whether three tail sales labor data. Uh,

you know, GDP figures, etcetera, etcetera. So you know the FET is going to keep at it until the job is done, and the latest data suggests they may have to keep at it a little bit more than previously entist. We're seeing a shift from cham and Pal from the news conference to Brookings. What did you think about I think we're seeing a shift just because he didn't talk about the financial conditions, the point you were highlighting earlier

today on the program. He's there's a big difference between where we are now compared to where we were between the July A form C presser and the Jackson Hole uh speech where he ripped up the script and delivered this very hawk ish message. We see a turn happening in the inflation numbers. We see that the housing sector slowing down. We see the impact of a stronger dollar

and tighter rates in the factory sector and manufacturing. So the Fed feels less behind the curve at the moment, and so there's less need to aggressively run out and try to stage manage of financial conditions and staid they can let the markets react to the signaling from the updated dot plot in summer Summer of economic projects I'm gonna move to nine o'clock hour looking at you know, different things with Stephen Roach, and I want to start with him with wage spiral. Help us out here define

what a wage spiral is? Is it slips into our conversation, well, wage price spiral is when workers are demanding higher wages to keep up with inflation, but those higher wages are than providing the fuel and the funding to sustain those price increases. It's too early to say that we're in that dynamic at the moment because the economy is undergoing a massive deceleration. Right If we look at real GDP was about thirteen percent year on year in the middle

of last year. Uh, it was six percent a year end, about two percent middle of this year. It's heading close to zero this year. So with that kind of deceleration, you know that the way age trend is going to decelerate as well. UH. And therefore there's a good chance that we break this dynamic before a real, uh deleterious

feedback loop comes about. How is it broken? What's the actual your study of history and how we do we have wages deflate or we will have wages deflate, But what will happen is that as the labor market starts to loosen up, then you'll see that bargaining power quickly eroded from U S workers. So we're not there yet. We're printing north of two hundred thousand on jobs, but I think by the first quarter of this year we

could very well see our first negative payroll print. And then as the loosening starts to come about, we are in the recession camp for next year, probably starting in Q two. That loosening of labor conditions, as the unemployment rate moves from a low of three and a half towards six percent at the peak, that will erode the bargaining power and prevent the feedback loop from that's the trajectory for gross Can you give us the line paths

for inflation? Maybe a sneak paken next week and beyond sure, Well, the first bid is easy. So getting the eight from eight percent c p I to four is something that can probably happen in about two or three quarters. Getting

from four to two is the hard part. And and so you know that requires the rent story to change meaningfully and also really the core inflation metric we have to be watching at the moment UH is core services X rents and not to be too cute, but now we have to strip out medical services as well because of these UH this accounting dynamic related to insurance payments and COVID and whatnot. So if you look at that component of the CPI, that's where you watch for your

wage price spiral dynamics. Interest, we're saying no improvement on that front yet, right, So that that tells the Fed they have to keep hammering away at the problem. It's easy to get from eight to four. From four to two probably takes till about the end of twenty four. So this is a question more along the lines of reaction function question on the fat. Yes, so if I put the two paces together, you've got growth, recession, inflation kind of sticky, difficult to get from four to two.

It's the hold an interest writes that your five as the economy rolls for a much longer period of time, John, And this is something that the markets haven't fully come to appreciate. Powell tease this in the November press conference when he said, shift away from the pace to the level in the duration. The market has refocused to the level, but I don't think they fully incorporated the duration, and the FED won't be the white Knight riding to the

rescue as it normally is in the recession. Instead, the FED we expect to stay at this five and a quarter level basically through the entirety of next year, and they could start up easing but not moving into accommodative territory. This is sacrilegic bmped very conservative shot. But the zeitgeist now is old Carrenco at Virginia Commonwealth University over to the giant Olivier blond Chard at the Peterson Institute, which Paul Krugman wrote about four or five days ago, of

the new two percent. As you mentioned four percent as a challenge, the new two percent is going to be elevated our in the vicinity of three. Can we would stand that is, you know that theoretical chit chat of people like you, can we withstand a new inflation level above two percent? It's going to be hard to get to that two percent level. And I know there's a lot of discussion right now. I'm fielding lots of questions

why not change the inflation target? Uh? And the FED officials, presidents and governors alike are of the same view that we have to achieve two percent to to prove that

we can't hit the two percent target. If there is a time to relax the inflation thre threshold and whatnot, they have to do it from the other side of of the new threshold, and so they have to get to two percent prove we can stay there if they have a compelling reason because of demographics or energy costs or otherwise why they would then need to maybe re evaluate what the longer term target could be. They can do that, but you can't. You can't do that when

you're this far off of the target. To the highside party of Carl Saturday morning, France, England and now you're at being page. You have to pretend to like you have to we the world coup. We just fluent French now as well walk around with French flags for the national team. Is that it works? Just that if you seriously never can we clear this up? Because people want to know if you never watched Rocky, I have honestly never watched the movie. You've never watched Rocky. It was

a show. I walked off set. What t K come with? What? Seriously, you've never watched Rocky? I'm leaving the car you are Have you never watched Rocky? Has that even happened? I don't know. Let's do this right now. And we really think Rebecca Patterson for being where this was Bridgewater. She had every reason to cancel after the shock last week of their performance. She is a chief investment strategist for Bridgewater which was doing so better than good and ran

into challenges. Rebecca, without getting into the nitte gritte of Bridgewater, what were the challenges you faced in the last ninety days. Well, we take views that are usually six to eighteen months out, and so as we're looking at the world, we continue to be quite cautious on assets. We think that the market is discounting goldilocks, that the FETE is going to be able to start easing in the second half of next year without any material hit to earnings and only

a very moderate slow down in the economy. And we just don't think that adds up. And so as we've seen this bear market rally in recent months, the market responding to increased hope that the feeble pause and then start actually cutting rates next year. We have seen growth assets, risky assets performing well um, but we we still believe that as we go into three, while there is going to be this tug of war, how much will the Fed accept inflation versus force inflation to its target? How

much growth pain will we get. We continue to believe that there's another shoe that has to drop, and that is the economy. It's resilient today still with the exception of housing, but we think the feed is going to have to push demand lower to get that wage inflation down, and they're not likely to ease next year. With your years A Champ Morgenvessemer now with Bridgewater tell us about the dollar is the litmus paper of the system? Suddenly

weak dollar? Did that diminish the Bridgewater total return and lead to those quarterly losses? And what is a weaker dollar signal? Now? Well, the dollar, as you said, has been giving up a lot of its gains from earlier this year and in the last year or so. We think as long as liquidity conditions remain tight, and remember the feed is still raising rates. They may slow the pace,

but they're still raising rates. And we've got quantitative tightening, which is of all the pace of what we saw in plus we have rate hikes going globally, with the exception of maybe Japan China, and so these tightening liquidity conditions tend to support the dollar, the dollars the world's

funding currency. So yes, you've seen this sell off, this technical um profit taking if you will, on the dollar in recent months, but we don't think we've seen a major dollar top along the lines of what we saw in Night five their early two thousands. Maybe we're going to be in a bit more of a range over the coming months as we play through this tug of war of China reopening and the and central banks how much will they tighten, But we don't think we've seen

a sustained turn yet. Rebecca, what you have the terminal right at least Federal reserve. Well, we're not trying to predict specific numbers for the stock market or the Fed funds. We're trying to understand the degree of pressures on the

economy that's going to translate into market outcomes. But certainly, if we need to see wage inflation, which by the Atlanta FEDS measure is still running well over six percent, if we need to get that down two or three percentage points to get us inflation closer to the Fed's target um, then I think we're going to see the FED going at least to five percent on the FED funds, with a probability that's not not di minimus that they

may have to go higher. The trick is, if they get to the spring sometime and maybe pause to give time for FED hiking so far to play through the economy, maybe inflation comes down to three four percent, But if the Feds not happy with that, then they may have to do an additional round of tightening. And we saw that before in the nineties, seventies and early eighties. You needed three rounds of tightening for the FED to actually get inflation under control. The market absolutely is not discounting

that possibility. We're not saying it's our base case, but it's certainly a risk that we think is is something people should consider. Your base case sounds like five. Is that fair? From what I just heard, there's five fair. I think I think five is certainly plausible, and it is very possible we could go higher than that. So five s the base coats. That's largely what's been priced in the market for quite a while, largely expecting the

Federal Reserve to put that in that projections next week. Rebecca, I think a lot of people might sit here and say, well, that's priced, We're done with that, and to get that extra leg of dollar strength, I need something else. And Rebecca, I guess the question is what is it in your base case that delivers that something else. I try not to interrupt you, because I'm dying to answer the questions.

It's easy. What's not priced is the FED going high and holding the markets anticipating right now that we get significant rate cuts starting in the second half of next year. And we think without severe economic weakness to justify that, we're going to get the Fed pausing but not cutting, and so as that is changed, and what the discounted, what the market is discounting, we think that it add

a layers or to the dollar. Again, don't forget we're not talking about an end of quantitative tightening or rate hikes around the world as well. You know, I just want to point out miss Patterson never is dying to interrupt me. It's only you she is dying. Do you think that's what? What do you think that is? Because you know, I don't know. I'm just saying, uh, it's a good response about a persistence of the facts staying there and back against this view that we get these

right cuts from the front of us a time. So back and I remember when you made a six month call if you were really you know, an eighteen month call was now we got we're gonna pivot in January. The fourth week of February, we're gonna pivot again. And then by the first week April, we're gonna do this this this forget about it, Rebecca, Cash is trash. What is the value of cash to our listeners and viewers

into two thousand twenty three. Well, what's so interesting, Tom, is that we're really seeing the market move into a new paradigm. We haven't had short term rates this high in a very long time, and so it is interesting to think about how our investors are going to position for the next decade versus the last decade. The last decade was all about um low and stable inflation, low

macro volatility, low commodity prices. And now if we're in a regime where there's more uncertainty around the level of inflation, more uncertainty around where where interest rates should settle, what's the right portfolio to construct? Should you stay overweight the U S. Should you stay overweight tech? How much private assets did you have in your portfolio. We think there's some tectonic plates that are shifting right now, and assuming that they can be sustained, and we think there's a

real chance they can. I think we're gonna get a lot of more structural, bigger market changes, portfolio allocation changes in the year two ahead, as people realize this is a different world we're moving into. Not that inflation is going to settle at four or five, but um, it certainly could settle higher than where it's been, with rates higher than they've been as well. I gotta squeeze this in.

This is great, Rebecca, Just one final question, what's the biggest change that you're expecting the South On the conversations that you're having with clients that push him back on still, what's the number one change you think we're gonna say? Well, I think the structural change is inflation. I think the cyclical change. The biggest thing to watch for three is growth. I think we're gonna have to see growth weaker for central banks to hit their targets, and that's not yet

reflected in earnings. Rebecca Patterson thank you, Bruin riche Water. Just fantastic because we celebrate and I mean truly celebrate accidental conflict America, China and the clash of false narratives. This, of course was Stephen Rod. You've heard me in the recent days say essentially he invented modern market economics at Morgan Stanley and of course now at his Yale University. Dr Roarge, thank you so much for joining us UM

this morning. I do and ask one American question before we celebrate your informative book, and that is, simply, do we hearken back to the fears of the sixties and the seventies and a wage price spiral, well wage price spiral. Back then, Tom was heavily impacted by cost of living UH indexation clauses in labor union contracts. And two things have happened. Uh labor unions are a much smaller share of the workforce, and these coal adjustment clauses are less

prevalent than they were back then. And nevertheless, you know, wages are Labor is a very important segment of overall business costs, and tight labor markets are certainly boosting the compensation piece of that. And weak productivity is reinforcing it. So it's it's important to stay focused on this issue. Steven Ros to China, Sir Howard Davies mentions of your book that it is is is a way to a new framework, a new discussion of both parties. We need

goodwill among the United States and China. How do we find that goodwill? Well? Number One, we have to recognize that the current approach that we've both been wedded to over the past twenty years is an abysmal failure. In the last five years, we've had the beginnings of a trade war, at tech war, and now the early stages of a new Cold war, so an accidental conflict. I propose a a new approach based on three key pillars.

One UH rebuilding trust by going after the low hanging fruits of reopening consulates and restarting exchange programs, taking pressure off of NGO's. Secondly, abandoning the zero sum bilateral trade framework, which makes no sense and has not worked at all, embracing a market opening pro growth initiative framed around a bilateral investment treaty. And Thirdly, UH really making an effort to establish a new architecture for engagement. These summits like

the one that Shi Jumping and Joe Biden had November fourteen. Uh, they're long on the photo ops, but they accomplished nothing. I'm in favor of a new full time organization that I call a U S. China Secretariat, which is detailed in the book. But after the Party Congress and what we see from the leadership in Beijing, a leadership perhaps forever is the idea. As you mentioned in one of your chapters of China with American characteristics, there seems to

be zero desire for that out of Beijing. Well, China wants to do it its way, and that's been an affront to us. We had this rather naive presumption that we let China into the w t O, they would play by our rules and become more like us. They had the facade of presenting, uh, that similar appearance, but they've certainly gone their own way, and that that remains

a worrisome part of the ongoing conflict. See if you live this, I mean some would say with you the next day as you you actually were the first one to write about this. Within market economics. You're sitting with James Gorman now having a cup of coffee. Does Morgan Stanley move from Hong Kong to Singapore? Well, I'm no longer employed by that firm where I worked for thirty years, so I'll leave that up to them to comment on. But certainly Singapore has benefited a lot from the shifts

that have occurred in Hong Kong. But Hong Kong, to its credit, is trying to reclaim it's a position as the major financial center uh in non Japan Asia, and we'll see if they can pull it off. How do you react to the bipartisan nature of this in Washington, Steve? I mean, it's one of the very very few ideas in Washington where there seems to be common ground. And you know there there were waves of this going from

Shanghai Secon back to World War to in all. Is this just another wave of bipartisan anti China feeling or is there a permanence to this? Well, it's politically expedient for the the US to do it. I mean, the the sentiment is virtually the only thing, as you said, Tom, that's unanimous um uh within the Republican and Democratic ranks, and it's it's going to be hard to dislodge one of the big surprises for for me was the election of Joe Biden. If anything has not altered the Trump

UH anti China policies of anything, that's amplified it. And for a president who repudiated so much of his predace on popular policies like the border wall and the Muslim travel band to perpetuate what I think is a wrong footed US China policy is a disappointment and a surprise. Tim Cook reads accidental conflicts Stephen Roach, what does he do? I mean, what is the what is the approach for

multinational Americans led by Apple in China? Well, you know, Tim Cook has been leading the way in reevaluating UH, the commitment of US based multinationals to a full outsourcing bet in in China. Apple is obviously the quintessential UH A producer who's taken advantage of this production platform and m Guangdong province and they're now for a variety of

reasons understandable, but the conduct is part of it. Starting a diversified production of the iPhone into India slowly, but that's a move that needs to be watched very carefully for the future. With all of your experience, do you have a confidence they can get manufacturing process and other

nations equal to what they've invented in China. Well, you know, I think China certainly has made a huge bet in in terms of revamping its infrastructure and equipping its companies and workers with the latest in technical skills and new technologies. But by no means does that have a monopoly on that opportunity. And that's what globalization does. It It offers

similar opportunities for other offshore low cost production platforms. Steven, at the time that I've got left, I think we need to talk about one of your calls, and you've been very very candid about this and the idea of week dollar. Well, guess what it's been a Steve roach quarter. We had a resilient dollar and finally there's a new weakness with international investment doing utter with that week dollar.

Is this the great Rocchi In turn? Well, I don't know how great that that is for me, because it was one of my more humiliating forecasts. I promised myself. Yeah, I've had a few, but this was this was a bad one. Um. But you know, it's it's very much tied to the fed um. As I look back on the mistake that I made. Um. I think it was a fair mistake to make at the time, because the FED a couple of years ago showed uh no desire to be aggressive to tighten monetary policy to counter what

incorrectly presumed was a transitory inflation. The FED has gotten religion and now as it is a nearing not so much a pivot, but a sort of a second derivative slowing in the rate of rate hikes. Uh some of the bid has come off the dollar, but the dollar is still a good deal higher than it was when I made that seemingly dumb call. Well, Stephen, let me finish up with the optimism and accidental conflict is well,

where do you want to be in twelve months? I mean, short term for the Chinese and frankly short term for America as well. What is the to the to do list that we need to do to get to the goodwill? Howard Davies talks about, we need to re engage. There is absolutely not anyone, uh, in our political structure, Republicans and Democrats alike, especially in leadership roles, who's willing to make a bet in re engaging with the Chinese. There's a lot of things about China that are uncomfortable and

unpleasant that we have focused on. But the two most powerful economies, the two superpowers, UH, need a more constructive framework of engagement, and I propose that in the book with a very optimistic final chapter on on this new plan. You have to leave it there. Steven Rhodes, thank you so much in congratulations on decades of work on the thinking of America and China. Gabriel Knocklof is with the

Bank of Ireland. He is their governor. And can you imagine, folks in America if basically the Federal Reserve System to find a new chairman went out and did a worldwide search. That's what the Bank of Ireland did, with some controversy, the British economists of type moving from New Zealand to Ireland. And we're thrilled that the governor could join us this morning. Governor, what is the biggest challenge that Christine Laguard has just in the coming ninety days? Well, Christine and the thank

you for having me. Firstly, um and uh, thank you for describing me as the most interesting custom But that's for a separate discussion. I had Christine and all the members of the Governing Council um how facing the the sorts of challenges that I think many people across Europe, if not the world, are facing, which is dealing with

some extreme uncertainty. I know we've been talking about that for a while, but the combination of the recovery from the pandemic, the supply chain problems that we've had, the news about China that I've just heard you talk about, the ongoing Russian war in Ukraine, and so on, we have a constellation of um of issues that we have to navigate through to arrive at the right monetary political

for the new area. So it's a challenge the government, one of the great challenges, and I would not Ireland's leadership in growth for whatever reason is debatable, but the fact is it's been a growth engine. Everything is said and done, Governor. One of the distinctions here is a belief in the strength of technology, the nominal GDP of America versus a lesser nominal g d P in Europe. Do you push against it? Do you say we underestimate the potential of European growth forward? I absolutely do. I

think the potential there is huge. It's already a very very big economy, um, and it's ambitious for itself. So I think UH and technology is going to be a critical platform for the future. Digitalization, climate change, and demography are the big economic transitions that we're all going through right now, and I think Europe is has the potential um to to be at the head of all of those. Actually, and let's talk about the reality of the decision, Governor

that you face on December fifteen. Can I just start with your base case? Does it include a recession in the uros own economy? Now, I haven't seen the ECB staffs forecasts, which we're going to see next week, but my own my own view is that we're likely to to see the euro Area in a technical recession. I suspect that Q four this year, the one that we're in now, we'll see a very slightly negative m g P number, and we're likely to see that for Q

one next year. On the other hand, my expectations were not going to see three as a year of recession. The governor, with that in mind, how does that influence your view of how much tightening we ultimately need? Well, I in my view, um, you know, we started the normalization of interest rates. People have forgotten that back in June we were in negative rate territory and we're definitely

not there now. But I also think that next week when we meet, I think a fifty basis point increase is the sort of flaw that we've to be discussing. I expect us to go there, but I don't expect us to end there. I do expect us to continue in future meetings. And you've got an idea of how far you would push that. I was about to say how far, I mean, how far I will push that will very much depend on the data, uh and seeing where the projections are telling us, seeing what the latest

data are are telling us. But I think in my view it's pretty clear that we're inflation running at ten our target at two core inflation at five UM. I think it's pretty clear that next week's decision won't be the last increase that we make. Interest rate policy only one part of this. Of course, we've also got to

talk about the undwind of the balance sheet. Can you update us on how discussions are going, how your thoughts were evolving on what we should be doing with the balance sheet that larger the e c B, and how you would prefer to unwind it. I mean my uh, Well, firstly, my preference is to unwind it. I think the reasons for having it in the first place, the very long period of the rates and the risk of deflation, those reasons are gone, so we now need to look to

unwind it. My view is that it needs to be done cautiously and carefully, um and predictably. So my preference would be for us to start slowly, leave ourselves the room for accelerating if we feel it's warranted, but to do it in that order. I don't expect I expect us to set out at or to agree at the next week's meeting a set of principles which the President will for for winding the balance sheet down, which the President will announce. I don't expect anything to start until

next year. My own preference would be something towards the end of Q one beginning of Q two. The governors some important years your experience in New zeal And, where they has been a real idea of rules of the road in central banking. I think they've provided decades of leadership on that. Olivia Blanchard and others are talking about

a set above two percent in America. Combine your New Zealand experience with the idea that we may not bring inflation down to the comfort level, the anchored level of decades of theory. Can we live in America or in Europe with a higher inflation set? Let's use America as an example of near three percent? Can we live with that?

Can there be a permanence to that? Well? At d CB, we had a review of our strategy like the FED did before us at one we which we concluded last in July one and we concluded that two inflation should be the target that we focus on and nimful there's been no discussion within the Governing Council as to whether or not that target should be changed, and I unexpected

to that should remain our focus. But the other hand, I I am interested in the debates that academics and animals are having and it's I mean, it's interesting to observe um. Part of this is about in my view anyway, part of this is about communication. So in New Zealand the target was actually a range between one to three percent, with the midpoint being So it's about how you communicate and then explain what you're doing. But for the For the moment, the ECB is absolutely focused on two percent.

In the medium term, is England communicating in the World Cup? I think I think the English team have got an excellent chance to win the World Cup. One of the challenges you mentioned Christine Legarde has to maneuver over the coming weeks is making sure that all the members of the Girl and in Council who are supporting different teams can be managed appropriately. I'm not sure how your Irish colleagues might fish eight. Imagine there might be some French

pride coming on that time. I'm gonna wonderful to catch up with you said, let's stay this against saying Governor Maclift of the Bank of Islands some dublin. I mean, I've been saying, why is it always to trip them off? With you? This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to ten AMI Eastern. I'm Bloomberg Radio and on Bloomberg Television each day from six to nine am for insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,

and international relations. And subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com and of course on the terminal. I'm Tom Keene, and this is Bloomberg.