Surveillance: U.S. Economy Really Coming Back, Kudlow Says

that drop in eleven minutes time. I was thinking back from the slim pickings in February unemployment study, and you know what, Actually, I think we're sort of in the middle of a transition. To your most people who want a job already working, so we're gonna be seeing hiring slowing down. And that's why I think the most useful information is going to be from the weekly jobless claims that tells you something about layoffs and the trend in

the unemployment rate. I think we're at cruising altitude and I think we're going to see job growth slow down, but everything sort of hold up pretty well. I'm really intrigued by the trend and jobless claims because we've had a lot of noises winter layoffs did pick up a little bit earlier this year, and now they're right back down to extremely low levels in every single state. So, Jim, the story you tell, the story you tell makes a lot of sense, made a lot of sense last year

the year before as well. Why is it different this time? Why will payrolls finally start to de sounded right a little bit? Well, I'll tell you what. You know? What what what we look at the numbers for the last couple of years. What you know is that there still

are these pockets of hidden unemployment. But what was really intriguing last month, even though we were all sort of taken aback by the payroll numbers, the household surveys telling you that the number of people who are having to work part time involuntarily has backed down to normal and the number of young adults who sort of dropped out, the participation of folks is getting is really moving back

to where we were in two thousand seven. So this idea, I think, what we it's it's hard to know how long it's going to take to pull out people who were in these hidden pockets of unemployment. But I think now you could say we're much closer to where we need to be than we've been in the last couple of years. So I don't know when this is going to happen, but I would I would be shocked if

we don't see payroll is slowing down at least by summer. So, Jim, there seems to be a d emphasis this time around on the wage growth, with the idea that the FED will be more tolerant of wages accelerating without having to raise rates. Do you think that that's true? Yeah, I think it's bigger stories than that. Actually, I mean, I think I think they're learning that just because wages are

doing better doesn't mean that translates into inflation. Uh, businesses are very profitable, so there's no real pressure on businesses to be ramping a prices. In effect, the inflation news have been very tame. I think what's making the FED more patients is they believe that inflation is very cyclical. They know that it tends to go on the high side when the economy strong, and then fall off in recession.

I think they're trying to take a longer view about inflation and try to target the average level of inflation rather than at any moment in time. So I think that's a that's a new idea to me, that's a really innovative idea. That we'll hear more about the summer in their conference, and I think it just makes them more patient. That must be one of the reasons why they're willing to sort of sit back and watch how

things play out. That said, for corporate profits, certainly higher wages means lower margins and that could potentially weigh on equity valuations. Do you expect us to start to see a greater degree of wage inflation in this report and going forward? You know, we're already seeing a pickup. I think it's just returned to normal three and a half percent three or three and a half percent wage growth. In my book, there is normal diff inflation is running

two percent um. I don't think there's no sign yet that this is putting pressure on wages, and I think we're living in a different era. Frankly, I don't think business is are going to be forced to raise wages to the point where they become less competitive. I think they're constrained also by the competitive markets they're living in. So I think it's going to work a little differently than what we all grew up with, that that it's

not wages aren't going to be driving inflation. It's going to be more of the strength of global demand and technology and things like that that are going on that are constraining inflation. We still haven't really got our hands around why inflation has become so muted when the economy

is doing so well. Jim, it's really hot to reconcile, really hot to reconcile the conversation we're having right now about the strength of the labor market with some of the forecasts for a recession, as some of those recession calls are quite near term as well, reconcile those two things for me if you can, Jim, can you at home? Yeah? No,

I don't think you can reconcile them. I think I think what you're hearing um when you have when you listen to people talk about recession, they can't tell you what's going on right now that might be a red makes them think this. What they really refer two is that you should look at our history books. What people have noticed is that when we get back to full employment, we just never stayed there more than a year or two. Jimmy, that's the sole reason why this conversation is coming up.

And frankly, I mean, you've got to respect history. But frankly, I don't think there's anything that any of us economists see on the inflation side or on the financial balances that should make us be talking about recession. It's really just based on this history that somehow, for some reason, we just never seem to stay at full employment. I think that's a pretty weak argument myself, and I look

around the economy. I think we're all struggling to understand tame inflation, and the financial system seems very balanced, the banking system is very strong. Um, I don't think there's anything that you can really point to that tells you this is really kind of unprecedent. This has the potential to cause a recession. So I think we're I think people are slowly beginning to ignore this conversation. Jim Glassman,

JP Morgan Shase, Commercial Banking Head Economists. We can catch up with Mike Zanta now mkmpan as chief economist and macro strategist. You've had a couple of minutes, Mike to have a look at the data. Your first rate place. Yes, absolutely, John, So you know it's a decent number, but as Jim said, bounce back from the prior month, which was a big disappointment.

What I like to do here is to take a three month moving average because as you know, the standard deviation in these monthly figures is too big to dry sweeping conclusions from. And if we do that, we still see about a hundred and eighty thousands. So that's good. You know, that does suggest some cooling, but that's what the Fed intended, right. They didn't raise rates and reduce the balance sheet for most of the last two years

to boost the economy. They're trying to restrain it. If they have the restraint they want, then you know, no more FED rate hikes and and we can debate you know, potential easing. But you know, I think this is this is right in line with an economy moving to trend. So, Mike, every analyst that we spoke to ahead of this number, so that it's all about the participation rate, it's all about the headline jobless number. I would argue that the

market reaction shows that's not the case. That actually still it's about the wage growth, which was disappointing. The headline number beat the actual wage growth disappointed, and you've got a bid for bonds. Right, So yeah, that's a good point. Um. You know, the wage growth number coming in a little cool with a with a pretty strong headline figure tells you, I mean, that's about as good as it gets for the market, right, because job growth is strong, so we're

still going to have income generation. Yet you know, you don't have this light flashing red on the inflationary pressure. Right. If the wages are still modest or you know, still in line with the underlying productivity growth rate and the FEDS inflation target, then it doesn't look like there's any really any evidence of overheating. And so this is what the market on solid job growth but you know, no evidence of an inflationary problem. So this is a goldilocks report.

Now it's a goldilocks report. Do we have any sense of the participation rate and who is coming back into the market at this point because we were speaking earlier with Jim Glassman and he was saying most of the people who wanted a job and who are employable already

are employed. So this is on the peripectly, this is sort of raises some questions about who's left and what it's taking to bring them back in what's your sense, right, Well, what's interesting to me is that the prime age participation rate people twenty five to fifty four has been moving up.

So if we just look at the overall level of unemployment, it's essentially been flat for a year really right around you know, we were right at these levels three eight percent last May, and so job growth is stronger than what you'd get from working age population growth. Then that's been fulfilled by a rising prime age participation and rate, which is really good news. And these are folks that were not counted because they had not been in the

you know, count it as in the labor force. So in the feeling has been that either through disability or opioid addiction, um, you know, that they weren't going to be able to come back. But they're coming back, and that's that's a good story. One big question that I've bandied around with a number of people is how does this job's number account for people working multiple jobs? Well, you know there are some statistics on that. Um, you know, I think I did it write up a while ago.

I can send you guys but you know, there's been this focus on the so called gig economy, that's where it was going to work. But yeah, it's not. It's interesting because it's something that you know, we see every day when we use uber and so on and so forth, but it's not really in the statistics. You know, at least people working part time for economic reasons. That number has been essentially plunging ever since the labor market recovery started.

So could be one of those situations where what seems obvious, you know, maybe within the context of a you know, the quite large labor market really just isn't as significant as it seems. So I want to go back to wages for a second and sort of what it says that we're not seeing inflation accelerate even to the degree that many people were expecting, which still wasn't that much, Philip Scarf dead, is that basically the big takeaway again and again that we're beating over the head with every

single job support since the financial crisis. Yeah, it's really for the Fed, you know, that's sort of their base model of inflation, and it's certainly been a moving target, right they seem to just adjust there, you know, their estimate for the sustainable unemployment rate down this based on what's been happening with you know, very little inflation pressure. So it's a it's a problematic model, um, you know.

And we also have this issue. We just were talking about prime age participation moving up, and so you know, if you're looking at it just too narrow of measure of labor market slack, then you can, you know, you can also come to the wrong conclusion about spare capacity, even within the context of the Phillips curve model. So for example, the prime age employment to population ratio is just finally just finally getting back to the you know,

the two decade pre crisis median level. But we're still you know, unless i'm you know, I haven't been able to appraise all the numbers so far today. But you know, at least recently, we were not back to the high scene um during the last cycle, are certainly the cycle before it. So if there's a bit more slack out there than what most people believe just looking at the unemployment rate, then that could be one reason that the

so called Phillips curve isn't isn't working. Another reason is that it just might not be a very good model of the inflation process. So so yeah, we don't have we don't have much inflationary pressure to to write home about. It's one of the reasons the FED paused right the last press FED press conference, Paul Powell was talking about the idea that you don't want a situation where inflation

and expectations permanently ratch lower. And so there's just this ongoing expectation that the FED you know, continues to undershoot or fail on its inflation goal. Yeah, just want'll take a look at markets. The TAO in particular, is extending gains following this report. Green across the screen on the equity side, on the bond side, also a bit of a bid. Just real quick up, Mike Darta of mk M Partners. Is bad news good news? Or is tupid

news good news? Again? You know, I think it's a situation where, you know, the Goldilock scenario is good news, right. I mean, I don't think risk markets are going to like the idea of a potential recession and the business cycle. We saw that obviously play out late last year. At the same time, you know, the data is so strong that it's going to be pushing the fed into continual tightening, and then we have to worry about the FED over doing it. That may not be so good for risk

markets either. This is about perfect right, and the yield, the yield curve is sort of disinverted on its own and defends just sitting there watching the data, and you know, the data is in line with the modest growth economy with not a lot of inflationary pressure. It's about as good as it gets for equity markets, about as good as it gets. Michael darda chief economist, who market strategist and partner at m k M Partners, for the Trump Administration's views on the job report now in very place

to say. We joined on Bloomberg CV and on radio by Larry Cudlow, National Economic Council Director. Larry always great to catch up with your body. Let's just talk about the payrolls report to begin with. It looks solid, it looks like a bounce back. You first read, yeah, it's a good number. It's a very good number. One plus when you put the revisions and you get up to two hundred eleven. I like that number a lot. I think the wages are still well above three hours worked,

are rising and you know. Even away from that, I just want to note it's been a tough you know, between government shutdowns and lousy winter seasonal adjustments. But it looks like the economy is really coming back now and we'll be better than two P and Q one at least that's our hope, and then I think you'll get back towards three percent for the rest of the year. What's interesting here, last point on these numbers. This is very similar to what happened last year. You had a

week first quarter. We've had week first quarters. I don't know, bad seasons three years, but then the economy snap back. We've got three percent growth. It's a repeat and I like it very much. And I think President's Trump's rebuilding of the economy from the supply side with tax cuts and deregulation and trade reform. I think we're still very much in place. Labor market looks solid, lottery. That's your view, you expect to see three percent GDP growth. Some people

do share that very optimistic view. This is what I struggle with. How do you reconcile that very very constructive assessment of the US economy with coals for the FETE to cut rates Larry, how do those two things work well? I think the issue on that is a precautionary issue. A couple of points here quickly. Number one, we are facing a worldwide slowdown, you know, recession. Arguably, I don't want to make that call, but Europe is not doing well.

Germany itself may be in recession. That troubles us. Okay, that's point number one. Point number two, There is no inflation. There is no inflation. I mean we're talking about maybe one and a half percent max. And productivity rising at one point eight percent last year. So wages are rising at whatever three point two percent that's being covered by

productivity without inflation. Why raise interest rates? And look, we just don't want any threats to this rebuilding, reviving, growing economy and um looking at the yield curve and other market based measures. I think on their time, the fet is independent. Not emphasize that if that is independent, but the President has said and I concur that I think that we could do at some point with some reductions in the FEDS target rate letry. The Federal Reserve is

operationally independent. That's a matter of fact. You're allowed, by a matter of process to nominate who you like to the Federal Reserve. Your administration will do it. Previous administrations have done it as well. No issue with that whatsoever. But when you call for rate cuts, can you see how that puts the Federal Reserve between a rock and hard place. Well, I don't know. You know, it's a free country. President has a lot of well informed opinions.

As a successful businessman and investor, I've been covering this bid for a long time. We're not pressuring, We're not going after their independence. We have our point of view. I think a lot of people, by the way, the markets have a point of view. The markets, as you probably know better than I do, have actually been starting to price in a federal funds rate reduction. So that's all it is. We're all entitled to our opinions nowadays.

It's a great country. The larry where your opinion becomes original, and it is original, is because the rate market is predicting a forecasting price in a rate cut, because it's simultaneously forecasting the rapid deceleration in US growths. Most of the people that I find that agree with you that the Federal Reserve is gonna cut twice in the next year, they're also forecasting much much like a GDP growth in your three percent. That's where it becomes original. And I

think the optics really really matter here. When I ask guests from the street whether they think the perception, not your intent, the perception the optics of federal reserve independence, whether that is being compromised, the answer I keep getting is yes, Larry, we're treading to fine line here. Well, look, I respect people may disagree with this, but let me make this point. Let's go to a broader measure, not real GDP, but nominal GDP, which is related to monetary policy.

So nominal GDP is real output plus inflation. I think overall nominal will slow, but the slowing is not gonna be in real It's not gonna be output. It's not gonna be business investment or jobs. The slowing in that measure is from lower inflation. And I think that's a big surprise, and I think that's something everybody has to consider. So I as I look at the Eel curve and I look at other measures of the dollar and Golden commodity index, is what I'm seeing, you know, take the

tip spreads. I'm seeing a reduction in the expected rate of inflation, and I'm seeing a reduction in the actual rate of inflation. It's disinflation, if you will. And therefore, I think in that sense, we have room to lower the FED target rate at their you know, on their speed, on their dime. I'm not pressuring and going up against the independence. I just think, you know, let's go back. I'm not exactly going to break news here, but a long held Cuddlow view. More people working and prospering is

not inflationary. And in this particular business cycle which we have started as president rebuilds the economy, this is supply side expansion. These are lower tax rates and regulations right, better after tax returns for investment and hence productivity and hence labor force growth. So you see what I'm saying. We're pushing the supply curve out that actually lowers inflation, and I think the authorities have to keep that in mind as they go about their business to set interest

rates and the balance sheet. I want to raise that point. Uh be great. I think to freeze the balance sheet and then stop the reduction of the balance sheet. What's the appropriate science of the balance sheet, Larry H. I don't know, and you know, that's a very difficult question. I don't know what I suspect though, is we don't want measures that will restrain the economy or financial market conditions. Okay, we don't want that, so I would tread very cautiously.

And I think in this new environment, with the supply side growth take off and rebuilding an economy, I think some people have to rethink some of their assumptions. And by the way, by the way, I'm not sure the FED really has much of a disagreement with the sorts of things I'm talking about. I think we're reaching common ground here, Larry. I agree with you. I mean, I've got rid of a blank rock next to me who also thinks that wage growth won't lead to consumer price pressures.

I don't think what you're saying is outlandish, but I think your assessment of Federals serve policy is a little bit difficult. The FED funds rate on a real basis is barely positive. Most people will conclude that this isn't time monetary policy at the moment, and people are trying to figure out the message that you're trying to send to the f O m C. If you nominate people like Steve and more and Herman Kaine, what is the message you're sending to the FED if you follow through

on those nominations. Well, look, these are very capable of people, and I think what you have here is a philosophy that strong growth is not inflationary, especially when it comes from the supply side of the economy, which is where it's coming from, you know, as you look at the

jobs and the hours work and the business investment. So these are people that would like a steady dollar and they don't believe that growth causes inflation, and therefore they will reflect those views to balance perhaps some of the other views on the Federal Reserved. Again, I want to indicate that I don't think the FED right now today is very far away from these points of you. Yeah. I mean, I've watched the chairman speak, I've watched the

vice chairman, Richard Claren to speak. Uh, I'm not sure we have a big disagreement here. Maybe one of timing. I don't know. I don't want to get into that because the FAT is independent. But for heaven's sakes, strong growth is not inflationary. More people working can't be inflationary.

And that's a point of view that I've held for three or four decades, as you probably know, and watch the market indicators, and I think that's what those two candidates that haven't been vetted yet, but those two candidates believe that, and I think that's a good balance to the fete. So Larry, you and I can have a back and forth on this in the future. Now, you want a little bit of time to talk about the trade story, and I want to provide that for you.

It's felt like the end game for a while. Now we have this March first self and post deadline, it's come and gone. Just exactly what have the Chinese done to secure the extra time from the United States. What are the concessions that you've secured? You know? Uh, point of fact, we never had a deadline. Just want to make that point, We never had a deadline. What we need This came out yesterday in the Oval Office and

it's been well reported. We need a great trade deal for the United States, one which hopefully works for China. We need a great trade deal. And then when we get that deal, and we've come a long way, as President characterized yesterday, the talks this week which are still going on, they're still talking this morning. By the way, these are productive talks. These are talks that are you know, moving the ball in the right direction. We're making hay

on this. President also indicated correctly that we have been satisfied on a number of issues. We've come further than we thought we would get and um I salute my Chinese counterparts as well for doing this. So we're moving towards it. We're not done yet. We have some issues to get through. It's not so much timing, it's making a good deal. That's the key point. Well, let's talk about the sticking points, the fight of the existing tariffs

and the enforcement mechanism. You said we might progress have we might progress on those. Choose and define how, Larry, if you can. I don't want to get into specifics. It's not my role right now, particularly because the negotiations are ongoing, but I will just say this is the broadest deepest discussions in US Chinese trade relations history. Uh. Somebody said in the meeting yesterday is it's a forty year history. We have never come this far, We've never

done that much. We've never had these conversations before. That is a very good thing. Now we are making headway in a lot of areas, and you know that includes enforcement that includes I P theft, that includes force, technology, transfers, ownership, cyberspace, commodities, and all the rest of it. I'm not here to provide details. Uh, those are of course in the middle of the negotiations that are ongoing. But we've come further and farther than ever before. It's the point the President made.

I think it's a very important point. The talks around coming, Larry, are they coming through the weekend? I don't think so. I've not heard that. Just let me say I have not heard that. But in any case, I mean I think Mr Vice premierly you Hey has to get back to Beijing. Uh, you can expect is the next step after today's talks are completed, and you know, it's quite

possible we'll make even additional headway today. As regarding next week the principles, the top level on both teams will be in touch through teleconferencing and the professional staff will be hard at it. There's no let up here. This is an ongoing process. So letty just as a final question, there will be some people confused watching this because they thought there was a March first deadline that was somewhat self imposed. Then was what pushed aside looking forward expectations

for me? When is it realistic that these talks conclude that the two leaders President Trump, President She sit around the table together and sign a deal. I've tried to tell your folks that everybody else. We never had a deadline. You can't cancel a meeting that wasn't scheduled. But look um, the prospects for deal are good, and President said that yesterdays Premierly o Hey said the same thing. That's terribly

terry employing. The trick here is to get a good US China trade deal that covers the key areas and that is enforceable. That is a trick once we get If we get I should say, if we get a good President characterizes as a great trade deal, then the two leaders will hold some kind of summit and to sign it. But the key point is the substance, and we're working on the substance and we're getting closer. We're making headway. It's very productive. I don't know have many

ways to say that. It's never been timetable driven. And we wish you the best of a lot, Larry. We will take you thank you very much joining us now to talk a little bit about the jobs numbers as well as what we just heard from the White House's Chief Economic council is Tiffany Wilding of PIMCO. Tiffany Wilding, chief US economist. What was your take if you were listening in on the Cudlow interview from what he said, was there anything that really stood out to you? Yeah? Well,

thanks for having me. You know, so, I think that I think it's a policy debate right now. Is with respect of monetary policy as well as fiscal is really the extent to which you know, running the economy a little bit hot can engender some of the sort of supply side repair and improvement after we saw you know, you know, incredible damage after the two tho eight financial crisis.

You know, when I think if you kind of look at the economy and kind of survey the different areas where we've seen the most uh, sort of supply improvement from from running things a little bit hot, as on a labor market side. Um so, we've seen continued improvements in participation rates, in particular for prime age people, prime

age women. Participation rates have increased, you know, quite notably and I think there's been even you know, an encouraging you know, uplift in in prime age mail participation, and that's after some what look to be secular declines, you know. So I think that that you know, that's that's obviously very encouraging for the you know, the longer run growth prospects. But if you look at you know, the other sectors of the economy, productivity and productive capacity, I think maybe

there's a little bit of less evidence. You know. Now it's kind of the I think early stages, and we need to continue to watch this. It will happen over time. Um. But one thing to watch I think is UM is the I t UH in tech related investment R and D in the past that's tended to lead gains in productivity sort of increases in trend productivity. So that's something that certainly will be watching. And then the one last point that I would just want to make is, you know,

the FED. You know, I think I agree that inflation pressures are our our modest um and that allows the FED to be patient and sort of potentially allow these um improvements to run, you know, but you also the FED also have to weigh this against financial stability risks, um. And you know, while we would also say that financial stability risks are low, you know, this is something that you know, we also have to monitor in the context

of lower rates and easier financial conditions. So, Tiffany, the FED affears to be quite comfortable sitting on the sidelines. And I think what we just heard from Larry Cutlow speaking with John Farrow is that the administration is comfortable with the FED on the sidelines, if not maybe even cutting rates. Um. Was there anything the jobs report today that is likely to change that outlook in your opinion? Um? No,

I I didn't think so. I mean, I thought the report overall was was, you know, relatively in line with kind of our expectations least underlying details and the sense that you know, we are looking for some deceleration in growth over the next year. You know, our forecast is is two percent in an end of twenty nineteen. So that's a deceleration and that's really being led to some extent by by the good sector of the US economy and manufacturing, which is you know, has important links to

the global economy, which is slowing. So there's some spillover effects that will have an impact there. And similarly, we're seeing some slowing in the jobs in the jobs data on the manufacturing and good side. Um, you know, so that that sort of slowing was in line with our expectations. But you know, on the other hand, you know, obviously we've seen you know, wage we've seen some wage acceleration,

but it's largely following productivity gains. So we don't think that that passes through to a large extent to really accelerate consumer price inflation. You know, So this idea that the Fed can remain on hold for a prolonged period of time, you know, I don't I don't think really changed given today's report. One thing that I'm really struck by, and I feel like, perhaps is the unspoken headline of this whole thing, is that this report comes out better

than expected. Headline number. Sure, wage growth is tepid. The chance being priced into the market of a rate cut starting at the beginning of next year by the Federal Reserve has increased since this report, even though people are saying that it indicates it's uh pretty good strength in the US labor market. Economists are saying that bond traders are too pessimistic, but bond traders have gotten it right

and economists have gotten it wrong more frequently. So what is it that analysts are seeing right now that gives them confidence that we're not going to see a downturn and that it's premature to price in a FED rate cut? Um? Well, so I think that what's in terms of premature to price a rate cut? Um? You know. I think I think one of the things is that traditionally when we see rate cuts is it's usually because you see a

more pronounced downturn in the US economy, you know. And although we think growth will decelerate next year, you know, we we don't think that the probability of recession at least over the next year or so, um, you know, is materially high enough to build it into our kind of basic case outlook. Of course, it's always a risk, um.

But but so I think that, you know, and the reason why we don't think that recession is is you know, appropriate for the base case outlook, is because you still have, as others have said, the um the household sector is is still pretty strong. You never really saw the leveraging up in the household sector after the financial crisis, you know, which can cause those deleveraging effects to really weigh on growth and push the economy into a recession, you know.

On the other on the other side of that as well, the banking sectors is much more more robust. So if we do get you know, some additional slowing in global growth that does spill over into the US market, we think that would be relatively contained because the banks just aren't going to be the type of contagion agent um that that they were, you know, in the last financial crisis. So those things make us pretty you know, still make us pretty confident on the growth outlook for the US.

So just following up on that a little bit, Tiffany, how concerned are you that the weak growth coming out of the European Union and a slowing Chinese economy albeit still growing, you know, mid single digits admittedly, how much are you concerned that could weigh on the US economy maybe in the back half of this year into next year. Yeah, I mean, so we think that's ultimately going to be

a headwind for for the U S economy. I think it's starting to be so, you know, in an export growth to the to China, uh and and to to Europe, we started to see that decelerate. In addition, there tends to be UM, you know, a relationship between ups and downs in US investment activity with the sort of ups and downs in Chinese growth UM, and that relationship, you know, that kind of happens with the lags. So you see

those spillover effects of deceleration in China in particular. UM. You see that I think starting to happen now with some deceleration and equipment investment, heavy equipment investment and things like that in the US. And I think that continues throughout the better part of this year, you know. And I think the questions we've seen more recent stabilization or policies from from the Chinese government to stabilize their own economy fiscal as well as some credit easing policies, UM.

You know, and I think the question of you know, does that take hold kind of in the latter part of that this year, you know, and does that sort of help support the global economy? You know, No, we don't. We don't think that you get another synchronized recovery like you do Inen. But you know, by the end of this year, you know, those sort of headwinds we think will fade. Tiffany Wilding, thank you so much for spending

the time with us on this Job's Day Friday. Tiffany Wilding is US economist for PIMCO, joining us from California, and it really interesting to me to see just how much of this report is being digested as goldilocks. As many people have said, Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide.

I'm Bloomberg Radio