Surveillance: Pandemic Recovery With Stiglitz

nine unemployment down to seven percent unemployment. That indicates the inequalities of a strange, strange economy. How great is the inequality in this two thousand twenty one Well, the the pandemic both exposed and exacerbated UH the inequalities. UH we were slated for a very K shaped recovery, with those at the top who had done well doing even better

and those of the bottom doing more poorly. The kind of numbers that you cited suggests that that the kind of very strong economic Recovery Act that UH was passed at one point nine trillion dollars is beginning to have some effect and mitigating at least UH some of that fear of this very K shaped recovery. It's still there.

It's still very clear that in terms of wealth, uh, those at the top have done very well and those of the bottom are more in debt as not only the visible debt, but the invisible debt that many of them have not been able to pay their rent for year. Professor Stiglets, I quote you often and the acclaimed Stiglets essays of long ago on the little G that what matters is the growth rate. You're acclaimed at this within your teaching in many different spheres. Great, can we grow

our way out of these debts and deficits? Should we have confidence and rely on the Stiglets little g to help us get out of this fiscal mess? Yes, I mean one way of looking at it is just a

little bit of history. At the end of World War Two, our debt GDP ratio and then there was a bipartisan consensus led by President Eisenhower Republican, that we ought to spend heavily on infrastructure, education, R and D and low and behold, in a couple of decades our debt GDP ratio was down to under fifty So, yes, you can grow out of the high uh levels of depth that we have, and you know right now we're expecting to

have very strong growth for this year. We're actually uh most forecasts suggest that at the end of this year we will be better than we were projected to be before the pandemic. Yep, And Professor, we're talking about the U. S economy, of course, we're not talking about other parts of the world like India, like Brazil. You've advocated for the i P waiver that this administration is pushing through at the moment of at least trying to achieve with partners over the w t O. Why do you think

that's the right approach? Oh, well, we this is a pandemic. The definition of a pandemic is that it's global, and this particular pandemic is a kind of uh uh danger because it keeps mutating and we don't want that those more a fertile few field for those mutations. Say in India, we want this disease to be put under control. We're not nowhere is going to be safe until everywhere is safe. And that's why, uh, it's really important to get the vaccine out there as quickly as possible. Now, a major

impediment is access to the intellectual property. A whole variety of of UH access is needed. The principle has been long established. It was established almost two decades ago in the midst of the HIV AIDS epidemic. UH. The question is how to facilitate it. There's an urgency here and that's the waiver is about. It's not changing the basic framework. There was always the right to compose three licenses since

that h A I v as. The question is how to happen make it happen quickly, and that's what the temporary IP waiver is all about. Doctor Fanci has doubts about that. He thinks that this could be an unwarranted, unwelcome distraction, that it could take until the end of twenty two early twenty three to transfer the technology, and then Professor, we'd have to talk about expertise as well. The starting position of this debate, everybody agrees with what

you said. We need to help the rest of the world, and even the most selfish individual has to acknowledge there is positive externalities associated with that. So before we even have this debate, it's done. That's done. We need to help the rest of the world. But Professor it's how we help them more quickly. Do you acknowledge there are other issues that need to be tackled and that this could become an unwelcome distraction for the other nations that we could could be doing more to loosen up the

strings our swear. Well, UH, there's something like the talking points from their drug companies. But the point is that the drug companies in the developing countries emerging markets do have a capacity. UH. A barrier to their expanding their comp capacity is the concern about intellectual property. You know, as several companies in South Africa and in India are already producing even the more advanced UH kinds of vaccines, let alone the simpler kinds of vaccines, And it is

really intellectual property that is one of the barriers. Now, another barrier that is related to the UH w t A waiver is allowing it UH companies to more easily export UH their their products. Under the standard w t O framework, you can get a composory license that allows you to manufacture for domestic use, but it makes it more difficult to export. But in today's world of global supply chains, where even the ingredients in a vaccine may

be made in several countries. The barriers to export are a major barrier to expand in the world's globe supply. So that's why it's imperative to have a temporary waiver all these Professor, There is a question though about the economic incentive for companies, and yes, there is this concern by pharmaceutical companies that this removes the economic incentive. However, there are some who argue this could pull them back from innovating, from working harder to come up with new

drugs to combat whatever new disease comes our way. What's your response to this, that the economic incentive is that much lower for the pharmaceutical companies. That's absolutely nonsense. I mean, first of all, let's let's be clear the basic research on which UH these vaccines is based was financed by

the governments around the world. Secondly, the expansion of the production and the development of these particular vaccines received enormous government support, not only from the United States but from other countries. The amounts of money that the drug companies are going to get on these vaccines are going to be you know, uh enormous returns uh well in excess of any normal return. What we're talking about here is whether they'll get say, percent return on their investments, uh

or a thousand percent return. Uh. You know, a thousand percent return is enough incentive to make them undertook that research. I don't worry about that. Well, there's also a question that dovetails into the larger infrastructure spending that Joe Biden has proposed. And just quickly, here are you in the camp of Janet Yellen that taxes should be raised substantially on companies And if so, why is it not just sufficient to do deficit spending, which does not seem to

have had a problem for this country. Well, I do agree that eventually we need to correct our distorted tax system, which, in terms of the percentage of GDP that is raised in taxes, is insufficient to finance uh a century economy where you need infrastructure, research, education, a whole host of

public needs to make a well functioning economic society. Uh. We also have a distorted tax system which is less progressive than other countries, less progressive than than it should be, particularly given the enormous increase in equality over the last four decades. UM. So the question is really when of timing, uh, you know, basic uh law of economics is uh scarcity of resources. Uh and uh we've have we've not we've

we've underutilized our resources. We have some capacity to expand production, but eventually we will reach capacity constraints and then we will have to decide how our resources get allocated. And that's when the issues of taxes becomes your Maine. I won't get about the efficient allocation of resources with a Nova laureate, so we'll leave it there, Professor, Columbia Business School, University. Professor used the arrogance in the past term, but I'm

not gonna take it that far. This morning, Okay, we halt here on our economics financial investment and try to figure out what this vaccination program means. We've gone out and found a token grandfather who will actually see his grandchildren for the first time since time began. David Blanche Flower joins us grandfather hanover, New Hampshire. This morning, Danny, the kids show up here in the coming days, absolutely first time in fifteen months. There, My grandkids are coming today.

So you know, things are starting to get back to normal. And that's the story we're hearing on the economy, of course, but it's you know, but it's slow progress. I mean, we've seen fast recovery, but never back to where we were before this awful pandemic. Hid I want to go back to the distinction of your book, The Wage of a Million years Ago, David blanche Flower very simply here there's a mystery here to what wage dynamics will do as we bring on millions of service sector lower wage employees.

Are you worried about why rising wages and benefits? Um? No, I've been. I've been worried about the lack of rise of wages and benefits over the last fifteen years or so. And obviously the big puzzle in the data is that we've actually seen wage growth which is so strong it just makes no sense. So when we saw the unemployment rate in the US go from four to fifteen, we saw wage growth go from three to eight. And the reason for that has been obviously the dropout at the

low end of the wage distribution. So folks like me trying to understand what's happening to wages, it's pretty complicated. I was looking at the same data for the UK today that the Bank having are going to look at, and it's just this confusing. There there's an election going

on in Scottland. And if you look in Scotland today, the unemployer rates Scotland is lower than it was in March, and so that the data in the labor market are pretty puzzling, and a lot of it has to do with furloughed workers bottom of the wage distribution dropping out, and in a sense that certainly the argument that I'm gonna worry about wages really picking up seems most unlikely to me. People talk about shortages, but there's plenty of

labor out there. There's many firms that haven't recovered and probably going to close. So I think adjustment is going to be complicated. But the last thing in the world I really care about is that wages are going to explode. They are not Danny for regulatory reasons. Let's avoid the domestic politics talk over in the UK and focus on the labor market here in the United States if we can. The world has come to you every single Payrolls Friday used to come on Bloomberg Radio with Tom and I

and we talk about the labor market. And you were the class clown. You were the guy that came out and said, look, you're wrong, You're all wrong, and everyone said, Oh, here goes Danny. Danny going at it again. The labor market's not tight. Look at where unemployment is. The guy's an idiot, Danny. Everyone agrees with you. Now, So I want to ask you, when you look at the labor market and months and quarters to come, what's the data point you'll actually be looking at. If it's not the

unemployment rate, what is it? Well? Yeah, well, I've certainly looked at other measures of labor market slack. So I like the employment rate, unlike the under employment rate, but particularly parts on for economic reasons. But I think the adjustment of wages are really the big story. I mean that Shocked just talked about the curd in the US.

It's a it's a big puzzle. And I think if you look back, if you look back at what happened in the US between two thousand and fifteen and eighteen and what the Fed did in essence, they didn't listen to what I said. They said, oh we're going to raise rates, there's a full employment coming, wage growth is about to come. That didn't happen. J Power has sort of given them mere culprat. But I think what we

have to watch is what happens to wage growth? What measures really are there suggesting that the labor market is very tight. And I think the story I've said to you many times or along period, which other people disagree with, was the unemployment can surprise on the low side, and basically we should sit and wait and I'll allow the economy to adjust. And I think that's where we go.

So I'm going to really watch wage birth. I got to see how it progresses, but I'm gonna watch it come down as people come out of furlough, as they come out of lockdowns that they've been in, and and see and see what recovery comes. But but I think we just sit and wait and watch, and that's the right strategy of the FED. I listened to j Cal

I thought he was fantastic, absolutely got it. But if you like he's just been saved what I've said over the last five years, which people disagree with but essentially turned out to be right. You need to understand what's happened in the labor market, and that's where the adjustment is. But you want to look at multiple indicate and remember that the employment rate never has got back to where it was in two thousand and eight never did, and I think that was a mistake. Most people made it.

Lots of commentators on Bloomberg I spoke to him anytimes, just got it wrong. Well, Danny, There's also a question about what policies could materially increase wages going forward, and we hear this increasingly from the Biden administration with the taxes that he's proposed, as well as the support of unions.

What policies traditionally in your economic research have effectively raised wages, increased productivity, made a fairer labor market goal a tough I mean, the first answer is you move towards full employment, but also you give incentives for firms to hire people. I mean, one of the stories about capital and labor is why firms invest in capital is because it's relative prices lower, so you try and make the labor price lower. Um. I mean the story about unions. I mean, unions are

fine if you can generate raises in productivity. So I think helped to make workers more productive. Help share in profits are available, And I think one of the stories we have to think about is for a very long time firms were able to pay higher wages and chose not to and the question is why not they paid salaries to executives as on, so you can encourage firms

to hire people. You've given tax incentives to people, and one of the big stories is you can give wage incentives to people, earned income tax credits, the kind of thing. But essentially you you start to say it's very important to have a ship from labor to capital. Perhaps because the balance moved to far in one direction, but I like the idea moved towards form point and perhaps the

balance between labor and capital has to adjust. And I certainly think the levels of inequality you sound like administration is doing. With my friends Janet and CC. You sound like a professor from Dartmouth. Danny. Let's cut to the chase, and we don't have enough time to get into a lecture you want. I earn a classroom up in Hanover, New Hampshire, and we're talking about the unique politics of

the Eiden Democratic Party. How alone is Joe Biden and wanting to get back to a labor vision from another time. Is it a one off that evaporates when he's gone, or is there a real new substance here for a new labor vision in Centrist America. Yeah, I mean, I mean, I think that's a really good question. I mean, I think in a sense that I always thought the last decade was the decade of the Central Banker. Maybe what we've seen now is a new decade coming of the

labor commist. Well why do I mean that? Well, Janet Yellen labor economists at Central Banker. But basically in her in her acceptance speech, talked about the importance of, you know, improving the labor monk, improving wages, improving jobs. C. C rouse Um, chairman of the Council of Advised, another labor commist, members of the Council of Economic obviously labor colms. And the recognition is you've got to do something about the labor market, not least those people who have been essentially

left behind. You've got to do something about real wages in America, and especially do things about people with high school education and high school proper, something about those folks. So I think there's a recognition politically, a recognition, but in terms of the labor market, we have to do something about those people who have not who have not benefited from the American dream. And I think the Biden administration has recognized that. Look at who they have appointed.

So my I think Janet's talked a lot about that. So I think the new recognition has to be we really messed up what happened in the labor market. And I think Biden's right, and he's moving in that direction and looks like quite a lot of public support for it. Danny, the world came to you on the labor market. It's great to catch up, Danny Blanche flat downmouth professor of economic right now in the dynamics of the market, the correlations of the markets, Alanker joins us with Janice. Really

just a perfect time to talk to him. As you know the mathematics of correlation, I would suggest the media is pretty naive about its complexities. Discussed the complexities of the odd correlation now between yield and equity. Yeah, um, that that is. I think you've summed it up in my opinion, that that correlation is the largest riff that

we believe investors face. And why I say that is if you think about why these balanced portfolio, say these strategic fifty fifty portfolio, the strategic sixty portfolio has done so incredibly well over the last forty years. Has everything to do about correlation. Um. Every single time equities over the last thirty years has suffered a significant loss, bonds have stepped up to help offset that loss. So that correlation in recent times and thirty years is in a

long period of dabt uh um. That correlation in recent times has been extremely negative. And the correlation I'm talking about is the downside correlation. Now is it an equilibrium or is it too good to be true for bonds a to always hedge or ensure against equity risk and be at the same time for bonds to yield tremendous positive carry. Most would say that's too good to be true because we all know insurance costs money. Insurance doesn't come for free. So the past thirty years was an

abnomen Was it an anomaly? Um? If you look going all the way back to the eighteen fifties, eight six, that yeah, Unfortunately a lot of it, well unfortunately a lot of us. I mean, it's a good point. A lot of us don't remember periods of time where the correlation between bonds and equities was not negative, where bonds failed to diversify equities. But that was the norm, right, And this is having ishe, And I mean, it's so important to get away from the assumed exactly. And then

that's that's the complexity when it comes to correlations. And just a quick empirical point which I think you might find fascinating a lot of listeners might find fascinating. Ignoring the period from night from the two thousand's to now, the average returned to fixed income when equity suffered a monthly return worse than three percent, So worse than minus three percent was actually minus one percent, so that tail correlation between bonds and equities was actually positive. Bonds did

not diversify equity draw down risk. And that makes perfect sense if you're collecting yield and gaining risk premium by holding bonds. Bonds shouldn't act as a hedge against equities each and every time, um and and so going forward, the resiliency of these balanced portfolios, of these strategic portfolios has to be questioned, um which brings us to to a very difficult period of time for acid owners. What

do you do, all right? Ask, so, now that the winter skiing season is coming to an end, your portfolio managers are actually coming back to the office, is what are you telling them to do right here and now. As we look at markets that are rich by many measures, that have had a great run off the bottom, what are you suggesting they think about in their portfolios? Great question. So what we believe is the biggest risk out there

is what may unfold in the sixt income markets. UM. We're big fans of using forecasted risk implied by option prices to give us a picture into what may unfold. UM. We use the option market estimates of both future upside

volatility and downside volatility as our crystal ball. UM said crystal ball based on the collective wisdom of the markets, and what this crystal ball is telling us, UM, and it's the most single, most interesting observation that we see today that there's great inflationary pressures, that there's great pressures to increases and interest rates going forward. UM. Given that we are telling clients and potential clients asset owners, you really need to rethink the role that bonds play in

your portfolios. Bonds may no longer a hedge equity risks, so you lose that diversification and be bonds given the environment of low yields, given the environment that the central banks have sucked out risk premium from bonds. Given the richness you see in bonds, to carry on bonds maybe non existent. UM. So one obvious way and direct way

to hedge that risk is to lighten up your bond exposure. UM. There's ways you can lighten up your bond exposure but at the same time keep the risk of your portfolio more at moderate levels. Our research shows one great substitute for holding bonds UM and say a fifty fifty portfolio is simply to hold the portfolio, which is equities. So you're earning and you're exposed to an asset which is delivering positive risk premium, which is compensating you for the

risk that you're bearing. But by equity put options to reduce that downside risk to a level more consistent with say a fifty fifty portfolio, and in many ways you then get get the best of both worlds. You're holding assets where the risk premium exists, i e. Equities, and you're buying protection to limit those losses so that downside risk is more in line would say a sixty UM A great alternative. Today where rates are low, bond risk premium has disappeared, and in many ways the enemy of

inflations at the gates. So the enemy of bonds dividend growth, I mean, is what we're talking about here is you know, take your terminal, you out twelve months or sixty months for that matter, and just lock in dividend growth and say thank you. Yeah. Um, dividends are a great alternative um to holding bonds, to getting that yield um anything which is offering nice positive carry um in in a period where you get inflation, you want to have that

money sooner rather than later. Hence you're seeing this great rotation which really started uh September. There's great rotation away from higher duration equities towards lower duration equities. Um. You're seeing these mega cap tech names struggle. Why the rotation into cyclicals and value names high dividend yielding names. Small cap names are doing much much better. Um. So there's just simple rules of economics you can follow to help

hedge inflation risk in a really simple way. You don't have to go out and buy break even inflation swaps, which are very difficult for anyone to buy, and you can do simple things just like you articulated, Tom. Okay, we're gonna have to leave it there, Ash, Thank you, so much. Ash. I think her there. If you look at the equity market price action, I've been pretty confused by it. If you break down a sector price action yesterday, Tom top of the pile, energy, financials, bottom of the pile.

You had second a mix, you had utilities in the mix. If I showed you that equity snapshot, you would think that real yields were inflecting higher. And that's not what's happening. Yeah, I totally agree. You and I have gone back and forth on this, and I think there's a lot of good work out there on it. I would say there's

basically a hysteria of gloom out there. John. When I look at standard of course five under coming from the trend of two thousand seven, we exactly kissed up two standard deviations and we've pulled back a little bit to our extended one and a half standard deviations. That's not a correction. It's not a bear market. It's stasis at new high levels. I want to bring in challenge Canser

now of new Berger Berman on this topic. Else, Can we just start there your thoughts and what's happening at the botom market and what you can reconcile it with what's happening at the equity market more recently. Look, I think I think the equity market is is the volatility driving the equity market is been driven by by ready speedbactors. I think one is just overall speculation with retailing of the market. I think it's more and more folks to

go back to work the retail thing or decline. And then you have you have inflation fronts and center, where where as you discussed, you have this debate around is inflation contentory or is it more likely permanent? And and for now, you know, a ten uere yields starting with a one handle. I think the bone markut remains reasonably calm that the inflation debate is more contentory. I will question that over time. I think I think the bottom market is going to move well before the Fed moves.

And then you have, you know, the volatility driven by the factors and and it's small versus large value versus growth and on a day to day basis, it's it's those are the factors robing the volatility. I think over time, as we've discussed before, it's just been an awesome earning season where we're company over nine of the companies have come to the beaten expectations, and as earnings goes, so goes the market. And that continues to be through this year. Charles,

Good morning time Keenan, New York. You know, Charles, I I look at where we are off a two thousand nine log chart on standard ports, and we exactly went up and kissed two standard deviations. Extended. Okay, the markets a little bit extended now. But when you know and Newberger Berman monitor corporate revenues corporate earnings, can you suggest we're extended out one year, two years, three years, or are we building an underpinning of cash flow that will

sustain this market? What will sustain the market is earnings driven by by economic growth. And we should all recognize that that the economy right now is experiencing a demand shark the likes of which we haven't seen since World War Two, and it's been driven by we have three factors in the economy all pedal to the medal at the same time. The consumer, the corporation, and both fiscal and monetary policy are all in it together at the

same time. And it's slowly going to be coordinated globally and and and as those factors continue to play through, you're going to get more and more earning. So we started this yet a hundred and eighty five, we're close to two hundred down SMP earnings. Next year, after adjusting for higher taxes, you probably get another ten percent growth. So I think, I think follow the earnings. I think we underwrite businesses hard to underwrite price volatility day to day.

But I think the demand shark is going to play out for far longer than people expect, as as as as corporations, consumers, and governments continue to behave in the way they behaved over the recent past. Charles, just real quick here. Leon Cooperman yesterday described himself as a fully invested bear. Are you on the same page. You've got to believe in innovation, prosperity and growth over time, and and and so guessing market direction is is not my

true north. I'm trying to be an authentic long term investor focused on businesses that compound. And what I do know is that when business if you can find a business that can grow fifteen percent here for three years, you have fifty more earning three years from today. That builds in an awful lot of protection on any price volatility.

So I tend to be a reasonable optimist. I feel emboldened by what transpired last year by innovation and governments and companies coming together to solve to solve something just awful and and and being optimistic has has always paid off long term. And there's nothing about risk assets today that suggests to me in total that that that that of that you know. Of course the parts of the market with speculation is rampant um and with stories are

so great that can't be validated nor refuted. But but focused on businesses with that aire solving real problems that have long term modes. And and I think investors are going to be just great. It's gonna see you and it's going to catch you up. Chiles Cancer that new Berger Berman Long short fund senior portfolio manager right now on this pharmacy upward, we get lucky. Jennifer Noozle joins us. She's been with us before with JOHNS. Tompkins Center for

Health Security. And Jennifer, I want to go to that moment in organic chemistry where you realized that Rutgers an environmental organic chemistry. Oh, this my recurring nightmare question. It's hard. I mean method lethal keytone in organic was easy. And then I opened Morrison emboyed up and I said, these

people are freaking geniuses. Let's go back. Yeah, you know it all back, Let's go to the gross underestimation here of the geniuses actually manufacturing m r n A. They passed Morrison, and boy didn't they They did, they did, and thank goodness for it, because these vaccines are lifesavers literally, well their lifesavers literally. But I think there's an underestimation here of those intellectual rights of those drug companies. How do we move from intellectual rights to the crying need

to vaccinate India? Yeah, that's exactly the question. I mean, we completely understandable. Um, you know, I think in the case of Maderna that the good news is that you know, the US government, um, you know developed the vaccine. The I p on that, but it is it is an urgent situation for us to address because we do have a crying need and it's not just an India. I mean, the situation in India is just staggering. Yesterday they broke get another record of you know, more than a four

into thousand cases. We know that's probably a gross under estimate of the number of infections that are occurring um nearly four thousand deaths you know, in a single day, um. But we're also seeing staggeringly high case accounts in case acceleration, and a number of other countries um that are you know, ill equipped to handle it themselves as well. So we have to figure this out. There is an urgent need for vaccines across the globe, and we just simply don't

have enough. We need to make more. So we need to figure out whatever path is possible to making more vaccines as soon as possible. That's the only way we're all going to feel normal about this situation. Even as we roll out vaccines here in the US, We've got to make more. That's the conclusion, without a doubt. That's his stonic position. So doctor, let's try and ask the right questions. At least that's my job. What do you think is holding that vaccine supply? And do you think

IP protection is the biggest obstacle to that? You know, I don't think there's any one big obstacle. I think there's a series of small lots of small obstacles. Um. You know, it appears that IP protection maybe one of the issues I think we really need to have a detailed analysis of what the issues are. We also know that shortages of raw materials are an issue. We we urgently need a situation where we can track this at the global level to understand where the raw materials are

to get countries to stop hoarding whatever they have. I think actually more transparency in the global supply chain would help some of those hoarding tendencies. Um, but we need to do this in a concerted way. I mean this whole like each country go it's on its own in

order to vaccinate its own population. It's really not sufficient in the global pandemic because what we have now is a few countries that have more than enough vaccines for its highest risk population and most countries having not even close to enough to vaccinate even the you know, even its health care workers who are putting their lives on

the line every day. So we need to figure out something and just the current amount of vaccine we have is not sufficient to address the most pressing needs dr news. So let's try to strip out the political noise here. How much is the I P issue a distraction based on the length of time it will take to get through and actually affect the pandemic as we know it right now, versus looking at the stockpiles that places like the United States has and deciding how much the US

ought to be shipping out. Will also making sure that its population is covered. Yeah, so we need to do all of it is really the thing. I mean, we need to make more. But making more, even you know I P issues or not UM is going to take time. So we have to think about how we're going to use the vaccines that we have. And you know, I think it is great that we've made so much progress

in vaccinating adults here in the US. UM. This is bringing down our case numbers and I expect we will continue to continue to see case declines over the coming months. Israel in the UK, they're their case members are way down, and I expect that we will We will get there. UM. But the question is what do we do with the other vaccines? Do you know, do we keep it for ourselves? Do we start using it in our kids? These are tough questions when we have such urgent needs m across

the world. Maybe now is not the time for us to be vaccinating low RESK populations. Maybe we can share some and then and come back and do that. We need to figure this out. I don't have all the answers, but I do think that our failure to answer these questions is what's not ending this pandemic. Jennifer got one final question. I just figured out that Morrison Avoid sixth edition costs two y eight dollars, which is enough to

start drinking early. Look, look, Jennifer, what's so important here? Seriously? How do we move an m R and a vaccine with cold storage over to Mumbai or rural India? To me, that's a fiction. Um, it's actually not. And the reason why I can say that is that we have used vaccines that require ultracold chain conditions UM in low resource settings like UM, the Democratic Republic of Congo use a UM A vaccine that requires cold storage. UM. You know,

to to address the c balla problem. So UM, it is not It is not not a challenge, but it is one that has been worked on before. John, this is a problem. Every time Dr news os On, I learned something every single sign. I'll try harder next time not to do that. Before you run we go to town. Got an important domestic issue as well. Two point one three million vaccines per day. That's the average over the

last seven days. When are they going to shove a little bit of confidence about what vaccinated people can do? Let's do it now. I mean, I'm, you know, I was saying just before I came on, I'm fully immunized as a Friday, and I'm, you know, planned to take advantage of that and you know, go out and do more things that I have done for the last year. I think we have to talk fairly about vaccines, that there are pathway back to freedom for sure, and reclaiming

those freedoms seems to be the big objective. Doctor. It's gonna catch up, Jennifer News There, John's helped CONSENSI a house security Senia Scala. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to ten am 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 In. This is Bloomberg