Surveillance: Jobs Day Miss With Walsh

on Bloomberg Radio. Joining us now is the U S Secretary of Labor Money Walsh, Secretary wild always greater cash up with you, sir, demanding this economy. Just had this conversation on this program through the morning on Bloomberg TV and radio. Demand seems to be pretty good. Still, it's labor supply that's been out back by what Secretary Walsh, in your mind and from the view of the administration say that one. I'm sorry I missed that question. What's

something labor supply, Secretary Walsh? What it is holding back labor apply? Well, I think what's happening here, and I listened to you the previous panelists, and you know, I pretty much agree with almost everything that was said. One of the things that we're still dealing. What's particularly in the month of August was the delta variant. Granted, we've

seen a level leveling off of the delta variant. UH, this in the last couple of days here, the last couple of weeks, But in the in the beginning of at the end of July, early August, we saw increase in delta variant. If you look at these job numbers and you look at just look at take the hospitality number, in the restaurant number, we had almost zero game this month in that area. Meanwhile, the last three job report

that was leading the way. So I think that that's part of what's going on here, and it is a long game. We're looking at the long game here. You know, we've added four point five million jobs since President Biden has taken office. UH. This job report, the one thing that I would highlight is we had strong growth in the private sector, and I think we've seen growth in the public sector and previous reports so and we've seen some growth in manufacturing and auto related uses. So again,

this is a long game. There is some other tools that we have to use here. We do have to it is the legislation right now that we're moving through infrastructure bills that we need to get through. But but this is the long game right now, coming out of a worldwide pandemic. Well, let's talk about those bills right now.

Secondary worlds. This from Senator Mansion and the Will Street Journal yesterday placing a strategic pause on this budgetary proposal by significantly reducing the size of any possible reconciliation bill to only what America can afford and needs to spend Seconty wh what's the response of the administration to that? Our pad from Senator Mansion, I think America needs investment. American people need investment. American people need the investment in

job training. Uh. The American people need the investment in the care's economy. We saw again uh in nursing, home care, and del care loss of jobs. Again this is a second consecutive month. We need investment in childcare, we need investment in schools. Uh. These are good investments moving forward. And this will just continue to move our economy forward and continue to prepare us for the future of America.

And I would ask you know, I would hope that we'll be able to they'll be able to work their differences out in Congress and move these two legislation A one. Do we need taxes on excess CEO pay to pay for that? Yeah, that's one of the one of the plans that the President's been talking about, a plan to pay for this. He's made it very clear that that anyone who earns under for over founder under founder thousand excuse me food dollars a year will not be paying

any additional taxes. And we're looking at adjusting some some some of the tax policy in this country and then using money and spent money from the American Rescue plans. So that's that's what the President's plan. As far as paying this with something but directed specifically a corporate executive sexty wolves, that's a story we have out at the moment that Democrats are discussing that. Have you been discussing that. No, I mean, that's a conversation that that's that's above what

I'm doing right now. I know that this this conversation is happening in the halls of Congress, It's happening with the leadership, and that that's they will ultimately make decisions on on how to pay for the spell. Marty, have you spoken to Senator Mansion and talked about your thoughts on this labor market and what this economy needs. Do

you pick up all those conversations with him? Yeah, it's actually with the senator a couple of weeks ago and we went to a coal mine in West Virginia and we had a great day and a great chat, and we talked a lot about a lot. You know, in the offously center has his ideas and and and in recommendations and opinions, and we just need to continue to

have dialogue. I think the beauty about all this is that we continue to have these open conversations as long as both do you have two sides willing to have conversations.

That's a good process and moving things along. Do you see it's two sides though, considering you are part of the same party, and the reason I asked you this, Secretary Walsh, there is a narrative in the meter as you know that the administration and your administrations that gender has been held hostage by a single senator may be accountable. To be kind, it is that how do you characterize

the situation? No, I mean, listen, I'm a former legislator from Massachusetts and there's often times where I was debating a bill in the in the Massachu's House representives with the other side being my Democratic colleagues. And and you know, as long as you have the dialogue, you can move forward. I mean, listen, lots of people's have lots of concerns and opinions on what we need to do moving forward. Uh. And I'm supporting President Biden's plan and President biden as

American rescue plan. And what that resulted in was over two hundred million vaccination shots. With that resulted in was investment into childcare. With with that resulted in is moving our economy forward four point family and jobs. You know, the President has a plan. The plan is working. Uh, and we're going to continue to move down down the road on that plan. What did Senator Mansion say to you, Marty?

What was your take on Secondy Walsh, We didn't get too much into the We didn't get too much into the conversation about about the particulars of these bills. But again, I know, I know, send the Mansion cares for his constituents and cares for American people. And again, we just need to continue to have dialogued to to move these bills forward. So you think that that is not a hard now a red line from Senator Mansion. Secondary Walsh in your opinion, Well, I'm not going to speak for

sender Mansion. I mean, he certainly is his own person. So we'll see as we move forward here over the next couple of days, and imagine you devoid that question as well. Secondly, well, so allow me to put it in different words for you your interpretation of his stance. Currently, for some people, they might interpret his words yesterday in the Wall Street Journal as a red line hard no. Was that your view? I know I wouldn't say it's a hot no, But what I would say is that

we just have to continue to have conversation. Listen, lots of people have different ideas on how we move forward on these infrastructure bills. Some people think that these investments are expenses and we shouldn't be paying this money. All I know is that the investments that that in these two infrastructure bills, particularly the Kids Economy Bill, are very

important about moving moving our economy forward. We've seen now here in America we're talking about people that are not returning to the workforce, and part of that is lack of opportunity, lack of experience for different paying jobs. People want to get good paying jobs. We need to assist them by making the investment there. It's just like building a brand new bridge in the city or town in America. You build that bridge to get people connected to other

other locations. We need to continue to build that bridge by investing in job training and other important cares. Economy issues these secretary flame but Marti well, secretly, well, you can't with your times. Thanks for joining us this morning, right now victory lab in, folks, in the game of economics, it's awfully tough to do this. We suggested surveillance at three hundred sixty nine thousand to thirty five plus a revision that is the new four hundred thousand. Mezra absolutely

nailed the call. Today it's seven and fifty jobs per month over the last ninety days. How will that affect the Powell calculus night, Tom, Thanks for having me back. So yes, it's a weaker report, but if you look at the three month moving average or look at the other data, you know it's it's suggesting that the recovery is continue. It's going to be in fits and starts. The reopening we knew is not going to be in

a straight line. So we think tapering is still very much on the table, but we're calling for a December taper, not a September taper. I mean November as possible if the next couple of reports are very strong, but later this year they taper and then we see inflation next year. We don't think they're hiking well until the end of two thousand three, So that's why I think the curve is stupid. Just to be clear, period, are you actually pushing back your expectation for the startup taper to December

today based on this report? Now we've we've been calling for December because we were looking for a week report today. So just looking forward, Preyer, what are you going to be looking for to get a sense of just how quickly they could potentially readjust their expectations. I mean, we know that wages are somewhat skewed by compositional issues, but are there other aspects that have you concerned, like the

labor participation right exactly. So, I think labor participation is a key one, particularly for the next couple of reports, because we know the supplemental unemployment insurance is running out. We know that schools are reopening. So we're really hopeful that people re enter the labor force. And that's gonna tell the FED, particularly the doves on the FED, I think, will feel vindicated that there is a lot of slack

in the labor market. And until wage inflation properly picks up, you know, not because of composition effects, which is what we think held the number up, um, you know, or or has been for the last few months. Um. You know, When it's true underlying reage inflation picks up, that's when I think some of that transitory narrative falls off. So that's really going to be key the next few months. We need to give a very careful shout out to James O'Sullivan as well. Jim Sullivan, working with Priam, is

doing all the heavy lifting here. When you talk to Jim O Sullivan about Q four, what do you argue about? So we argue a lot about the pace of deceleration. Jim's are a great call, great call on the number today. You know, I'll be decelerating from a seven percent first half GDP to a you know, three or four percent. And what's the next step? Are we going down to one percent or two percent? And you know Jim is in the camp that things are decelerating. Reopening is feeding some,

the fiscal stimulus impact is feeding. But growth is still solid and well well above potential, which will allow the fact to exit. It's just the inflation question where Jim has a slower or slow down in an inflation So that's that's the keep out of extent of deceleration and what's the longer term impact on inflation question. Link your bond world, your full faith and credit world to the equity markets. We don't do that. We do that clumsily. I would say within the media. Does the yield mystery

now support equities or create greater uncertainty for equities? I think so I do. I don't think there's such a big disconnect between the two. I think the FED is telling us they're tatering, but very slowly. The end point of the hiking cycle, the market has taken down that number significantly. If the fans only hiking to one and a half percent, that's a very bullish environment for risk asses.

So I'm less concerned about the fat aspect. I'm more concerned if global growth slows down, then that is something that the bond market is somewhat priced for, but the equity markets not. I seem more as a growth concerned rather than a fat concern. One final question, tell me about the X access duration here of all these moves that we're going to see. I mean, I know we go out to December on taper, but do you begin to really extend out yield angst if I can to

the middle of two thousand twenty, if not later. In terms of when we think rates will rise, yeah, when price down rates up right? Um, So I think it also depends on the fiscal site. Do we get a three and a half or two trillion or if send a mansion saying nothing without an offset, how much of the offsets are we going to get? I think that's a that's a key comportant as well. But if the FED starts to taper, there's a lot of supply that

the market is to take down. So I think a gradual rate right in, you know, starting at the end of the year continuing next year. I can see that consistent with tapering. To you and Jim O'Sullivan, congratulations on just simply doing market economics. We greatly appreciate your return

this morning. Standing to see things change at the long end of the curve though, tom So, let's have a look at that and push through that two thirty five, that big down side surprise on a payrolls report against an estimate of seven thirty three yield tire on thirties

now by about three basis points on tens by two. However, way you chop this up right now, there is a view on the September twenty two meeting that that number will just anchor the hawks a little bit and stop them flying away and causing too much stock for chairman Power. Let's bring in Jeff Rosenberg on that of black Rock

black Rocks portfolio manager. Jeff, I want to start straight there, so with a down side surprise and your first interpretation, your first read, Yeah, the first read is definitely this has some delta variant on it. The mix shift here is retails lower leisure and hospitality, which had been contributing you know, four hundred five hundred thousand, doesn't show up at all. The wage increase that you guys were talking about.

That really looks like a mixed shift here. And the disappointment is in those two sectors, in particularly leisure and hospitality, which speaks to you know, potentially this delta variant impact now, because that's the fingerprints, that's a temporary impact. And John, as you just highlighted, you know, the initial bond market reaction was lower yields, but now you're starting to kind of push higher in the back end. To me, that says the market's looking through this and seeing, hey, this

is temporary. You know, we talked about transitory inflation. We're gonna talk about transitory uh, delta variant impact here at least with regards to the market reaction. Uh. And you know a little bit of disappointment as well in terms of the labor force participation rate not budging again. You know, I think that's more of a temporary factor related to the delta variant. So I think you know, you know, the market was already you know, pushing back in terms

of expectations of when the tapering announcement would happen. This solidifies that in terms of the folks who were expecting something sooner or the hawk ish viewpoint, you know, we'll at another month. Everyone will look for that, look for the delta variant hopefully you know, to come out of the September and even the October reports as we wait

into later this year. For the Governor Bryant has been on the money here for many people waite for the September night, to waite to see if the supply side of this economy will hail. Do you think they have the luxury of time on this side to waite for that. You know they do in the sense that you know they're really going to be focused on the longer term implications.

And you know they have talked over and over about the necessity you know, particularly Powell speech last week, Uh, you know, the need not to react and overreact to short term developments. And so you know, from that vantage point, they don't need to rush into it. And the most important thing not to lose sight of here is the

emphasis that that tapering is not tightening. And and once we get past this tapering announcement and they go on kind of an autopilot of each monthly reduction, you know, then we're going to shift this conversation and it's going to be about, well, what is this due to the

path of future tightening. But that path of future tightening doesn't begin until maybe late in two so they've got a lot of time here before we get to that how important is the revision upward for the prior month, the idea that was revised from two more than a million, the idea that there was momentum and that perhaps this blip really is just a pause due to the delta variant. It's a It's a good point, Lisa, And that's another part of this report is it reinforces how strong the

labor market was going into this delta variant impact. And I think you know that maybe what the market is looking through you know that this is this is a one off slow down and not the beginning of a new trend, and that the strength in the in the labor markets will re emerge as the reopening re ours equity features. Just finding a little bit here. Someone changed on the SMP five hundred, basically unchanged the negative on

the nastack. Now I'll be catching up with Rick read at Jeff's colleague at the Tompany alongside Anastasia Amarosa and Mike Collins. Will do that on the Open so in about twenty minutes time. Sounds good. Lots to talk about there as well. I just did the three months moving average of where we are with the double revisions, and I think away from the gloom of the moment, folks, this is a pleasant survived. Jeff Rosenberg to five zero jobs over ninety days and that comes out to seven

hundred and fifty thousand exactly per month. I'm sorry, Jeff Rosenberg. That's not a bad number, not not bad at all. And you're reinforcing the broader point, which is, if you look through the noise, this is a very strong labor market, good recovery. You know, is there more room to go? Sure, you know, And that's what some of the points, uh,

many of the more devilish members have been highlighting. Uh. And that's I think the broader takeaway is that the reopening is happening, that the recovery in the economy, you know, the thing that that this isn't talking about, and that the Fed is is also going to be concerned about it. And I think our focus will shift towards is the impact of fiscal policy. You know, we're going to have a fiscal tightening, even with a three and a half

trillion dollar stimulus plan. You know, that is not the same kind of stimulus as the stimulus that is rolling off. That's long term stimulus over ten year period and so the FED is going to be concerned about the impact on economic growth of that fiscal tightening. Are you managing then twelve months forward, twenty four months forward to a

three percent American economy or something. You know, we're getting back to where potential g d P is is that is that your overlay here as you manage bond money. That that is tom and and and it's it's in most of the longer run forecast. You know, we've had an an incredibly uh impactful impact on short term growth from the combination of reopening and historic amounts of fiscal stimulus.

That's going to roll off. And so what is really the underlying debate is is or the overriding debate is what's the underlying capacity of the economy and the strength of the economy and its ability to deliver. And most of the consensus views have you going back to that level. And the concerns on the downside is that you'll you'll you'll press even lower. And that's the argument against moving too quickly and overreacting to what might be transitory impacts

on inflation. Now, of course, the other side of the argument is that we've done some serious structural damage to inflation, inflation expectations the supply chain. The fet is admitted, you know, they've underestimated the degree and length of how long the restart economics would impact on the supply side and so all that. You know, that's the growth side, but it's also the inflation. Some interpretation, here's markets reverse nastac one with a spike up earlier comes right back around to

a modestly negative statistic. The vix out to a sixteen point five three lesa three the ten year yield excuse me higher now one point three. Yeah, it seems like people are looking past the huge headline mess and to really reiterate what Jeff was saying, they're looking more at

the upward revisions. They're looking more at the momentum heading into what was a delta poked month that really saw zero net jobs in the travel, leisure and hospitality sectors, which is really shocking given where we are in the reopening. But Jeff, this really goes to the question is the FED getting this right and does this data confirm that that basically there is a lot of slack in the market, or are we starting to get some concern with respect

the wage data. Albeit you have to pass through it. You know, honestly, it's it's too early to know. Um. You know, there's a lot of critique on both sides of the debate as to whether the FED is is making mistakes or not. You know what, what obvious concern is, there is a tremendous amount of inflation, but it's not in goods and services prices. It's in assets, and you see it everywhere, and it's the acid inflation and the financial stability concerns, it's in the minutes. There are folks

who are concerned about it. You know, if that ultimately shows up in a negative way, then you know the argument will be the FED ministic. But you know, given what we know today, it's it's hard to argue that is the case right now. And so the Fed's focused on what's right in front of them, which is they don't feel the need to move preemptively, and that's the change in flexible average inflation targeting. So they're going to be reactive and that's the kind of FED response function

that we now live with. Jeffrey Rosenberg, thank you so much for black Rock. Market economics will interpret this and they will make their tweaks. Of course, big news yesterday with ellen zetn are bringing in Q three to two point nine percent. Pretty prescient. There is well and then there's a wide market economics disparity. If you're on the by side managing money, you have economists to take a

different tack. That's a good thing always to speak to, and that would be Tiffany Welding joining us from PIMCO the bondom at least, this is the Pacific Investment Managing Company. You looked off into the distance and I thought maybe you could kind of see it's like a religious experience to talk about PIMCO, what they've done over the decades as well, Tiffany, if we're off a boom economy, what

kind of economy is it now? Well, I mean, we look at this and we think this is more of a soft patch instead of you know, the beginning where there's a phrase from a long time ago. Are you it's just the new transitory that well, I mean, so I think on the on the you know, kind of on the more worrying side, it does look like the slowdown that we're seeing as a result of the increase in cases the coronavirus as and and as a result of some of these um supply chain bottlenecks, which appear

to have also intensified. It does look like the slowdown that we're seeing an activity is a bit more pronounced. Having said that, though, um, you know, it still looks less than what we got, you know, at the end of last year when we had uh, you know, the kind of the rising new cases and of course, um, you know, in March and April of of last year,

at the beginning of the pandemic. So it does look like the economic um hit from this kind of thing is is becoming less and and and we think that that, you know, is going to create a slow patch instead of the beginnings of a of a bigger downturn. When is a soft patch or a slow patch become a bigger and longer problem for an economy that faces a

number of pressures. Yeah, I mean, so I think that on the on the at least on the on the COVID side, I think, I do think what you have to worry about a little bit is that you know, you have the longer that you have this pandemic, that's kind of at top of mind for people. The more are solidified their new behaviors become um and that obviously creates you know, economic reallocation that could create slower growth

as people want to just save more. You know, I think there's a whole host of potential issues that we have to we'll have to deal with if that, if that happens. Um. You know, I think again, you know, we're relatively optimistic still, um, you know, because you are still seeing uh people getting vaccinated. You know, of course we're gonna be talking about about boosters here relatively soon

in terms of people actually getting them. So you know, all of that again makes us think that, you know, this is something that we're we're still going to get over. But of course we have to deal with that that risk and and of course think about it. So we're talking about Ellen Zentner. Morgan STANLEYO joined us earlier, and another point that she made was that she expects two thirds of all the jobs lost from the pandemic to come back, and that means one third will not Where

are those jobs? Well, I think you have to be a little bit careful about that because I think it's very easy to kind of look at jobs and maybe look at some of the technology and some of the innovations that we've started to see, um folks implement and you can say those jobs don't come back. But I think what's more difficult is to sort of open your mind and say these are the new jobs that that

all of this is going to create. And I think that's much more difficult, um, you know, and I think you know, we're very open minded, um you know, in terms of of kind of the new jobs and the

new innovations that this is going to create. I think where we get a little bit worried is about a skills mismatch, you know, and how does the economy sort of manage a transition um that were ultimately going to you know, have to face and that we are currently facing, um you know, and we hope that that transition is smooth. But as we've seen in the past, you know what economists called the you know, the China shock of course, where US manufacturing came down. There's a whole coort of

people that were really left behind. And you know, of course that's really what we we want to avoid. You know. The FED uh you know, only has blunt tools to do that. Um you know. Of course that you know obviously is is fiscal policy that has to really step in and try to uh to you know, uh may image that transition and help it along. Tiffany, one of the great things here is the partition of the labor

economy that we talk about each and every day. And it does go back to John Edwards in two America's can a central bank affect policy to help people that aren't part of the modern labor economy? Or is this all going to be about public policy and private investment? Well, I mean, I think, you know, I'm pretty I'm so optimistic that you know, this whole idea of you know, running the economy hot to fed, being patient. You know, a tailor rule right now would actually suggest that the

said funds rate should be over two percent. Obviously it's well, okay, I looked at that the other day. You're dead on. Thank you so much. Folks on the Bloomberg terminal. You can go to t A. Y L To see Tiffany

Wilding's geniuses. Okay, discuss John Taylor Stanford's rule. Well, I mean, so, I don't I don't want to get too much into the tailor rule, but it does suggest that that should be raising rates as a result of the inflation that we're seeing, but they're not, you know, and they're again the reason why that we're they're not is because they do want to run the economy a little bit hot, because they do think that there are there are gains to that their benefits um, you know, and those benefits

can be people starting to come back to the labor market. Now, your question was, even if people are coming back to the labor market here your skills atrophied, are they ready to come into the new jobs that the economy needs? You know? And I think what you saw. The interesting thing is is what you saw in sen and nineteen when we're also running a hot labor market and a hot economy. Well you saw us folks were recoming. We're

coming back to the labor market. Not only that, but you're actually getting some of the employers retraining and reskilling them. So they're hiring people that maybe skills of atrigat but they're but they're making them better. So I do think the private sector can do this, um you know, of course, uh, you know, fund government educating government fund um investment in education, care's economy issues type that you know, that can also help. But to the tailor rule in a rule is based architecture.

Jeff Lacker joining us, the former president of the Richmond FED a couple of days ago. If we haven't had inflation, have we simply taken the price change architecture of a higher tailor rule clearly evident and moved it over to assets with the booming stocks and bond prices up. Yeah, I mean so certainly, you know, lower interest rates UM in a more accommodative FED certainly does impact a wide range of asset prices, you know. And ultimately that's how

monetary policy works, um, you know. And and you know on the in terms of the effects of that, um you know. Of course, the FED has models you know that that that that think about this and put it into context. But you know, we do think that that does translate into growth, you know, and inflation quite frankly, and that's ultimately why the FED does these policies, right, you know. I think there's another question here about you know,

because thus the Fed's tools are very blunt. How is the sort of distribution of of of prosperity, if you will, How how is that sort of distributed around the economy? Um, you know, And I think that's where fifthfical policy can come in and help the FED because it is such a funt tool to make sure that it's sort of directed at, you know, the areas in particular that needs to help. Lisa Apples Trading, Old Graham, Dott and Coddle.

It's thirty nine times price to book, seven times priced to sales, and it's slidely and rounded up to times price to cash flow. Yeah, this is what we have seen consistently, asked, prices go up regardless of the economy. And John Gallup of Credit suitez this morning discussing how there makes this you know, bifurcation between the economy and the stock market. The stock market is not the economy. This is blam meer surveillance. We are speaking with Tiffany Wilding,

PIMCO chief US economist, post this job's report. We are seeing red on the screen. Tiffany, you talked about wages and this to me is one of the biggest questions. And I feel like I've been just hammering this again and again, like it, you know, hammering a dead horse. What's the expression, um and Friday, you don't care what

the expressions are. Good. I'm so glad, Tiffany. I'm wondering how much bifurcation there is in the wage scale, how the averages don't capture some of the differentials on for example, the warehouse staffing picture and the retail workers that are getting pretty big wage increases. Are they disproportionately large in a good way for the economy on the lower end? Yeah, I mean I think they are. So We've seen research, um,

you know, from economists from the Atlanta Fed. Of course, they have their Atlanta Fed Wage Tracker as well, which you know, tries to get out some of these compositional effects that are impacting measures like average e really earnings. But the research that they've done basically suggests that the lower lower end of the wage spectrum, those jobs are the jobs that are seeing the highest wage gains these days. UM.

And I agree that is ultimately a good thing. Um. You know, we want to see measures broader measures um within you know the economy, UM, labor share of profits. Um. Of course, profits can be broken down into the kind of capital share, the stockholder share in the labor share, and ultimately you want to see that labor share UM, you know, start to rise again. Of course, it's been on a very secular decline. So you know, these these kinds of um, you know, wage increases certainly are I

think a good thing. Um. You know, of course, Congress has has sort of talked about raising the minimum wage, which you know has been uh, you know, underperforming inflation for quite some time. Um. You know, ultimately we don't think that will happen, but you know, of course states are are doing this. But I do think that that would also be be a good thing. Um. You know, so all of these policies are are quite good now.

But in terms of the FED and what this means for the FED, you know, I think there it's really a question of how broad based the wage inflationary pressures are because what the FED doesn't want to happen is for us to get in this sort of wage price spiral where you have inflation that's sort of accelerating higher.

And we don't think that we're there yet because again we're seeing it concentrated in the very lower end of the wage spectrum, which is a good thing, but we haven't seen it be more persistent across the wage spectrum yet, which would suggest that inflation expectations are still relatively anchored.

You know, But of course this is something that we're watching me and I think the FED is watching Sorr Tiffany just real quick here, I'm wondering if you think that the increases that we're seeing on the lower end get it done, to quote Tom Keene from earlier this morning, whether they're enough or whether there will be more persistent

increases as we try to bridge the gap and missing employees. Well, I mean, you know that your question of is it enough is a big one, right, So, I mean, for the last you know, over thirty years, we've seen you know, what it called labor share of of total economic profits in this country decline, um. And and that's the result

of structural issues that have that won't change overnight. So you know, of course we've had lower unionization transfward, lower unionization as a result of right to work laws across this country. So these are sort of solidified. Even this lower labor bargaining power is solidified you know, in the kind of law and in many states within the country.

So it's not going to be an overnight fix unfortunately. Um, you know, to get you know, kind of these the labor versus capital, you know, to get that more in balance. So I don't think, you know, is it enough? You know? I think we can always you know, do more, um, you know, and ultimately I think that kind of prosperity for everybody will be good for the broader economy. Tiffany, thank you so much. Tiffany Welding with Pimco. This is

the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to ten am Eastern on 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 key than This is Bloomer