There will be a new conservatism, Lenkner says

at two fifty. Sort of story sentiment just whip storic, first by Treasury Secretary Steve Manuchin, who for some set the States race softer approach towards China, and then by economic advisor Larry Cundlow, who suggested the US wasn't backing down. Joining me here in New York is Kate Moore blank Rock, chief equity strategist. Good morning to k Good morning, So what do you site to clients? What on earth is

going gone? Well, look, I think it's very difficult for any of us to predict what's going on in the White House. The White House has difficult predicting what's going on in the White House. So outside people can't really forecast exactly how trade will evolve. Here's what we do know is that this back and forth in this uncertainty is starting to have an impact on how companies are

talking about taking risk. And that's something we're really focused on, especially because the expectations for spending and investing we're very strong going into the beginning of this year and then got supercharged after the tax cuts. So any kind of change in tone we get from companies as the reporting second quarter earnings, particularly around guiding for investment and if they're sighting trade issues, which we've heard a couple very

high profile ceo s do over recent days. UM I would hope that would have an influence on the way that the trade discussions evolved. So tell me how you see the balance of risks around CAPEX improving. Is the balance of risk now tilted to the downside or to the upside? Look, I was always in the camp that Capex was going to be a little bit more conservative

than some of the initial surveys suggested. You know, you had a lot of companies either because they felt explicit political pressure or implicit or because things were finally feeling a little bit better on the regulatory environment. They felt like they had to say they were going to spend

more money. It's not a bad thing, but you know, the follow through has been you know, um, you know, not necessarily as strong as some of these surveys would suggest, and in fact, looking back at the historic data, it

almost never is. There's not a great relationship there. But very importantly, the companies that are spending today or those that already have had a lot of free cash, Yes, sir, some of them are getting benefiting from the tax cuts and repatriating money um back to the US, But we're not getting a lot of the riskier companies all of a sudden changing their investment plans. And I certainly you know, see the policy environment and the trade environment make not

a difficult switch right now. It's funny, it's hard to reconcile west sentiment is at the moment on Wall Street with the numbers that were expected to get from the second quarter in the US economy. We're expecting a big second quarter GDP figure. Yeah, Kate, how do you reconcile those two things, sentiment and the fundamentals on the ground in the United States at the moment, I know, it's a little bit difficult radio, John, but for the I

was just nodding my head as you were speaking. It's not just the GDP figures for the second quarter, but it's also second quarter earnings. I think we're going to have a big bucket of strong data in the US over the next couple of weeks, that we're going to have not only strong consumption and strong overall economic growth, but actually quite strong earnings across a huge variety of sectors. And you know that doesn't seem to be playing itself

out in prices across risk asses at this moment. Within all this is new cash. Cash has a yield. Now is cash a new asset class for cape more? Cash is definitely an asset class that it hasn't been for a very long time. I don't see it as a great substitute for overall equity risk, but it certainly does change the calculation on the fixed income side, and across a lot of the fixed income portfolios within black Rock, we've seen a rotation towards holding a shorter duration instruments

and more cash. You know, it's a prudent thing to do, even for you know, a multi asset investor. Who's thinking about waiting for even a further pullback or looking for opportunities and with a slightly higher risk premium. Here's a headline out just perfectly time for ms more Walgreens Dow component third quarter beats estimates make America ready again, and they announced a ten billion dollar share buy back. The thousand employees they got free cash flow the generating per

year of six billion dollars. So they're gonna buy back off the top of my head twenty months. Yeah, free. Look. I would be very surprised if we didn't see a whole swath of new buyback announcements coming after earnings. It makes sense for companies if they don't have perfect visibility into future demand. I mean, this is one of the other things with challenging. As we talked about the Quebec story as well, you need to if you're gonna engage in a multi year investment plan. I feel like you

can predict the cycle. But this is critical. And this goes frankly back to Mario Dragging and Chairman Poule and the rest companies that you look at every day are managing for a low nominal GDP, low revenue growth environment. That's they're they're going out there buying revenue growth. Good morning everyone with Pinnacle. They're going out there buying revenue growth, and they're buying back stock because they don't know what

to do with the money. I don't even think it's just they don't know what to do with the money. I would just suggest that you know, companies are at especially US companies, record level of profits. They've had this boost from the tax cuts, and what they're doing today is saying, I will make some investments for the future,

but realistically, this is a very long cycle. And they are the same people who are kind of cautious about whether or not the bull market can continue, who are also managing these companies and saying, I don't want to spend too far, too much, too far into the cycle. I want to have some dry powder, and buying back shares also provides them with a little support and dry powder as well. Okay, speaking of a sector that buying

bank shares the banks. Now, I don't want to let you go without talking about the financials in the United States. We're on a thirteen day losing streak. We just did that. I'm glad you're doing it again. It's worth doing. It's a record losing streak on a daily record forever. It is a record daily losing streak on financials. Doesn't amount to a big, big slide, but it's a record daily losing streak. Okay, what do you think of that? What's

behind it? Going into stress test results that should reveal the banks have got the green light to go ahead with buying back a lot of stock. I find it

a little bit puzzling. I can come up with us a bunch of micro explanations for why the banks have underperformed, but you know, in this environment where we're expecting more cash return and we're expecting very good results today, where the regulatory environment is easing, where rates are going up, with the macro backdrops strong, and you know, I think some of these micro explanations shouldn't hold a lot of water after today. Why did Denmark beat the Republic of

Ireland five to one last fall? What happened that? Tom? You know, we'll have to take that offline because I'm afraid the viewers are not ready for my explanation. The listeners on radio as listeners, John again, I'm surprised Anie took you white minutes to bring up the World comp Well, we're gonna get to it a minute here. You know, the England Belgium today is like a big deal. Is Ireland a soccer force? John like at a decent same that just didn't mike it. They didn't. I wouldn't call

it false, but it's a decent tang. They beat whales what nothing in October. You're fascinated by this, I am. I it's the highlights. Last night I was almost interested in Germany losing. I mean it was like really exciting. Yeah, I mean I was. I was doing my radio show in London. It started at mid day Eastern time, and the game was literally bumping right up against the start of the radio show. So I watched the game at my desk, then sprinted to the radio show for London. Yeah,

and just made the start of the program. I think the last time I sprinted Nixon was London listeners. They take some satisfaction from Germany's exit from the World Cup. Yeah yeah, okay, well very good, Kate, Kate more, thank you, thank you, Kate, thank you for tolerating this. I feel like Tom at the moment, I'm thanking all our guests and saying thank you for tolerating. Well, that's true, but

she's optimistic view of the market. I have an optimistic view, but I think a fairly balanced view in terms of corporate activity. And actually that's why I'm more optimistic. Look, I'm just one last point on when you look at

the performance of World Cup. Okay, when you look at the performance of companies that have done, you know, the highest levels of cat bas not just since the financial crisis, but over kind of a thirty year period, they've underperformed those companies that have been more conservative and have returned cash to shareholders. So you know, this this big hope that we were going to get a spending wave that's going to lead to our performance of all these companies,

I think it's overdone. We don't have the same veterinarian. But I take vet bill to the vet and I write. When I write a checkout to the vetinary, and I just write it out to a prep school. I don't even write it out to the damn VET. I write it out, just make it out to this prep school. I just write it directly. It's amazing. I could fund a small country with my vet bill. You could, you know, we could fund an island nation. Tom, we're still on live radio. You know when what you can do this

in a commercial break? Oh no, this is people care about vet build. They can about the vet bill. No, that builds the name of the dog. Yeah, like your family. Foreign exchange has been a tough place to live over the last couple of years. Seventeen people called for a stronger dollar, We got a weaker one. Eighteen people called for eight weeker dollar. We got a stronger one. And I still haven't heard the dollar bears capitulate. Well, I can tell you we've got a bit of a dollar

ball here. David Wood joins US now of Bank of America Meryl Lynch, head of Global Rates Effects and e M Fixed Income Strategy and Economics Research. David, when did your title get so long? I know, it's crazy, absolutely crazy. Well, welcome to the program. Helped me out with the US dollar call because I keep talking to dollar bear after dollar bear that refuses to capitulate and believe in what we're seeing on the screen. So far this year, you know,

it's amazing. You know, I've been traveling on the West Coast in the last two or three days. L and Cisco Seattle's decramental. I'm telling you, I could not find a single claim that was long the dollar. And it's amazing because this probably must be of a record of some sort because we've just had a total person dollar rally. It's amazing. I cannot find a single person or either professor to be longer dollar for that might have been

bullish per dollar. It's pretty crazy. This also leads me to think that, you know, there's no question of this dollar, Railly is probably gonna keep going. So David, that's what I've been looking at this morning as well, and I fold em into this too. You know, despite the price action, I really haven't heard that much capitulation from e M bulls or dollar bears, and at least me just concluding that I just don't have any conviction that this trade

is totally exhausted. And it is that pretty much where you are as well, David, just folding the forces. They are really going to drive this dollar through the back end of the year. I think so, because you know, especially when it comes to e M, because a big difference between this game self off. First of all, we saw that in two thirteen, the two dozen thirteens, you saw a big correction in prices, but we also saw a very significant positional adjustment. This time we've seen a

big correction of prices. We haven't seen anything like what we saw in terms of positional adjustment. Tells me there's not aquidity for one thing. I mean, certainly, the average age of market makers in e M on Walster right now is probably ten years younger than they were five six years ago. There is absolutely north door to even get out. So from that point of view, this, this is a very very worrying thing to me, David, this

is right where I wanted to go. I'm glad you brought this up and that I would suggest into this cycle, whatever happens, we're dealing with a wildly a historical street and that they really don't know the history. How close are we to the correlations and the behavior the emotions that you get with strong dollar weaker e M. I mean, Tommy, I think jobs right, I mean this is why in any ways I mean this, this, this is why e M gets very dangerous when cross over investors start to

basically give up. I'll give an example. Incredibly right now, not that incredible. Do you know right now you can buy a one year JP Morgan paper or Bank American paper that pays you three percent and more. In other word, is the first time in at least ten years you can earn three percent without thinking a duration risk, without taking any credit risk, just being lone the US dollar? And why if you can earn three person by jating working paper, why the hell would you want to buy

Brazil six percent? This is what I think a lot of crossover investors started to ask themselves. And this is the reason why I think if we just get ten percent, a crossover investors mean investors were not bench points EM started basically pulled out. I think you're gonna see a shock wave three EM that we haven't begun to see yet, David. In the limited time that we have with you, I've already got to get your thoughts on on China as well. If we're going to see a shock in am, what

are we about to see in China? And just what is going on with the Chinese currency? Unpack? What is driving this currency lawa waka? I think you know what last year my worst call was that I thought Chinese commun was gonna slow because of the de leveraging. But a gains what last year, global growth was so strong, you know, Chinese textbook growth is so strong and more than offset of deal leveraging. This time around toy first, boy,

they're confused. The leverage. Global growth was definitely not as quite as strong. So basically there's no question Chinese group this swimming, which means that they need easier credit conditions and monster conditions which I'm killing now they have to will I'm willing to give because they were under pressure to prop up the R and B. Now I think it's very clear they have now a gun pointing at their head and they have no choice. They're now starting

to let the R and B go. Notwith getting the fact that the under pressure from the US to basically reach your agreement on trade, but I think you know, in some sense the arm by weakness is actually very concerning. David, what is your calling yen? I just want to frame how big a move you see? What's your twelve months? I'll call in dollar yen dollar again? You mean dolling dollar again? I think yeah, I think we're going to one fifteen, one seventeen. Just because I'm so incredibly bullish

about the US. Isn't so much move isn't that like a disruptive move to see seven big figures? You know what? You know, I've been doing this for twenty years, then you know me. I've been a doom and gloom guy far, but I've never been this bullish the US economy in twenty years. I've been doing this well, I am absolutely It's a liberating, basically feeling every morning I wake up,

you know what? And that's that's the fundamental story here, which is that this economy is growing gangbuster and for all the reasons in the market remains in denial that because this times reform, it is absolutely changing the way people think about the economy. In my new special in Corporate America, David really emphatic, and we have a real limited time left. So just one quick final question. I just wonder whether Dolly and is the cleaner rates play

in G ten at the moment. And the reason I asked this is what is the global dividend of a really strong U S economy? And if we get the dollar that really starts to rip in the way you think it will, aren't we gonna need to buy a little bit of Japanese? Yeah? Aren't we going to see a bit of risk aversion internationally. So that's why I

still like selling euro dollar as my favorite based. The dollar interesting because I'm telling you, whether there's there's no tree war, the economy is gonna go crazy, and I'm telling you the dollar is going to search because we're gonna see a massive reproaching of the terminal five months. Rade's going to go down. The toilet in Europe is much more dependent on Ian than is the US. So it was very simple, David, We're going to leave it there.

David would thank you so much on the West coast greatly appreciate what a trooper to get up this early. This is, without question, our interview of the day. Travis Langner is in Chicago. He is out of the academic combine of Kansas, but he is a person of immense uniqueness. He has clerked both for Justice Kennedy and also for Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who is on the short short list to replace h Mr Kennedy. We are joined now by

Mr Langner in Washington. Travis, wonderful to have you with us, no effelments with us yesterday from Harvard Law and spoke of the moment of Justice Kennedy help our audience with how Justice Kennedy practice Supreme Court law? What was he like in the chambers? While in chambers and with his colleagues, he was just incredibly collegial. You know, the Court presents in its written work as sometimes fairly a combative place

among the justices. In fact, many of them have very close relationships, and Justice Kennedy really was a part of that fabric friends on both sides of the aisle, as as we would would think of it from outside the court. And I think you saw that in the statements from his colleagues yesterday. Who really will miss his personal presence on the court and in chambers as well as his legal mind and his work critically as we move to Brett Kevanaugh and the other candidates. To me, it seems

like a generational shift. Noah and others, Cass Sunstein and others speak of Justice Kennedy's interpretation of dignity is his broader view of making law. Is that a generational shift of the past, And what will the new law be, whether it's Justice Kavanaugh or someone else, Well, I think I'm not sure if it's a generational shift in legal thinking, it's certainly anytime there's an opportunity for a president to

make an appointment, a nomination to the Supreme Court. It's usually a generational shift, just in the sense that Justice Kennedy will be eighty two this summer, and all of the folks who are mentioned as possible replacements are in their their early fifties or maybe they're late forties. In terms of his jurisprudence and what the future of the

Court looks like. If Justice Kennedy really is at heart a conservative, but someone uh, you know, if you trace his roots to California and maybe think of a of a western a US Western libertarianism, and that's really a streak that runs through all of his opinions, and there is a there is probably a new type of conservatism whoever is nominated to replace him. From where you sit, what is the distinction between the present Justice Gorsuch in a candidates such as Kavanaugh or is it almost a

cookie cutter modern conservatism? Well, I think to contrast Justice Corset and and Judge Kavanaugh, Uh, there are probably some differences on the margins and the way they would approach certain issues, and certainly in the types of experience that

they've had. Uh. Judge gorse It's now Justice scor Such sat on the Tent Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, which is a circuit that is a little different from Judge Kavanaugh's Cortner in d C. For the types of issues where they have expertise, but in terms of their legal thinking, uh, their their work as a mainstream conservative in the law today, those are two very similar. Name your voice and the heritage, and Professor Felbon at Harvard

captured this and Scorpions beautifully. Your voice and heritage out of Kansas and Chicago is critical, and that it's a Midwest voice in whether it's Wizard White from the past and the rest of them. There is an American view that the Supreme Court is controlled by the elites of the East and a few selected liberals that got lost on the West coast. How mid continent will this Supreme Court become? How Kansas like will this Supreme Court be?

I'm not sure it will be terribly Kansas like. But I would say that of of the potential nominees that are listed now, all of them, regardless of their current geography, share an academic background and a background in the law that looks very similar and is fairly elite, and UH Professor Feltman and others have have rightly pointed out that this is not a court made up of Byron Whites and Tony Kennedy's and UH folks from Minnesota, California, all

across the country. This is an East Coast court, regardless of who is nominated and even if that person happens to sit now in the Midwest, Travis. We often talk about politicians getting into power and changing a little bit in how they view things and trying to find either more consensus or being more belligerent. Is it the same for justices to do p People change when they get

appointed to the Supreme Court in their beliefs. I don't know if they change immediately upon appointment to the Supreme Court, but we've seen historically changes while justices serve on the Court, and of course the Court is a legal institution, but but also in many ways of political institution. Justices read the newspaper. They know the issues of our time, and as the balance of courts shifts and as members come and go, you do see changes among the remaining members.

That certainly happened with Justice O'Connor, particularly when Justice Scalia joined the court. Some would say that it happened a bit with Justice Kennedy after Justice O'Connor departed the court in two thousand six, And it could be something that happens that we see potentially with Chief Justice Roberts, who many are saying now becomes the center of the court, regardless of who is confirmed. But you know that center will have moved slightly to the right if it is

the Chief Justice now who occupies that middle position. I What exact effect will this have on social issues facing the court? Is there one social issue that that will really be in the limelight. Well, you know, there's discussion about several social issues, abortion probably being the leading one, but it's not clear what exact effect a new justice will have. You know, many of the justices, or all of them really on the shortlist, of course, come from

the more conservative school of legal thought. That doesn't necessarily mean that all abortion decisions are potentially overturned or or reversed. There could be some narrowing, but frankly, we've seen that over the last ten or twenty years, narrowing of the abortion opinions, even with Justice Kennedy frankly at the center of the court, Mr Leonard, what is the difference between a five four in a six three court? If we get to a six three, I mean I can't even

fathom getting to seven two. But what's the difference between five four and six three? Well, I think internally at the court as well as x sternally just from a public awareness and uh trust in the court as an

institution standpoint. There certainly, you know, for all of us externally watching the court, when you see a six three or seven too, and you see broad consensus around an opinion on a controversial issue, that probably means it's a more narrow opinion, uh, And for many people that's a comforting sign that the Court is being more incrementalist as opposed to taking some broader steps. I don't know that replacement for Justice Kennedy changes the number of five to

four decisions on this Court. And it's interesting actually, in the term just concluded, Justice Kennedy never joined the four more liberal justices to create that classic five to four that we've seen in previous terms. So it could be that next term with a replacement for Justice Kennedy looks a lot like this term in terms of how the vote stack stack up, excuse me among the nine of them. Mr Langner, thank you so much for joining us today

with Keller Langner in Washington, Travis Legner. This is beyond well timed with bearings yes of olden time and Bearings asset management joining us now. It's Christopher Smart and that is a name some of you in international relations will do. Oh, there's literally no one in international relations who was linked to finance as Christopher Smart has his work at the Kennedy School, among other places, as public service to the nation, but also as a c f A and working within finance,

including with Pioneer Investments of Boston years ago. Christopher Smart, it is an opportune time to rip up the script and speak to you of the Helsinki's of the past and the idea that Mr Putin will meet with Mr Trump in a new Helsinki. Our Eli Lake this morning is scar you think about the idea of an uncontrolled Mr Trump meeting with Mr Putin? What should the administration

fear with the president one on one with Mr Putin? Well, I think these things, as you say, are normally very well scripted, very well prepared, and the meeting outcomes are usually well determined and planned in advance. Having two leaders go into a room together is something through history I think we have seen as not a formula for success, partly because when they come out of the room, it's

never clear what has happened. Um. We had a similar example, I think when President Kennedy with Chairman Kristoff, and they both came out with very different reports of that meeting. So that's at least one thing to fear. The second thing is that it's very hard to know what the next step is in the US Russia relationship. As important as it is, we are at a point where we just don't like talking to each other about anything, and for a lot of reasons that I think on our

side are very well founded. But the Russian reject the facts. The old Daniel Patrick moynihan line about you have the right to your own opinion, but not your own facts. The Russians are working from a different set of facts, even though they're wrong. Within this is this template of international investment. John Farrell and I have spent days and weeks were the new international politics. How does that fall

into international investment? I think for an investor, as much time as we spend looking at the politics, and as important as those things are, when at the end of the day you're buying a stock or you're buying a bond, you're looking to discount the cash flows you're going to get back, and while you wonder and wring your hands over the future of the Korean peninsula, it's very hard

to price that back into an investment. So I think investors up until now and for the last several years and for years to come, will focus on the economic data more than anything else. Um. But I think they have to start pricing in things like trade wars, where the flow of goods and services across borders will become more expensive, and that will have an impact on markets. Does that diminish global nominal GDP, diminishing damp in the animal spirit, and does that lead to the mergers like

we saw yesterday with Pinnacle and Cannagra. We're basically the only way you can grow is to grow out and acquire revenue. I mean, we end up with a new m and a well. I think that will drive the

economics and the technology. I think you're driving you towards globalization, larger firms, more cross order scale at the same time as you see the politics are working in the other direction, where where populist uh elected officials around the world they're trying to take more control of their borders and um

make you know, throw up walls that weren't there before. Christopher, is this going to force the mainstream to to wake out to what the electra ultimately would like to see, Because what I see from many guests that come on this program on trade, it's a very sort of china apologist stance from a lot of people on the trade issue. On immigration, they're like several years behind what the election has been calling for. UM. So the rise a populism

is only going to get a whole lot worse. UM, so long as the mainstream political parties don't wake up to what is actually happening. Well, I think it depends on which mainstream parties you're talking about, But I think you're absolutely right. You know, there is change of foot and we have seen that in elections that have shocked, um, the establishments in the United States and Europe and elsewhere.

And I think there is an important set of lessons that new politicians and new political leaders need to draw on China. I think you know what is absolutely right is that China has been a very difficult and um bad actor in many ways in the global trade system. I think the question is how do you best deal with China? Because it is going to continue to grow and become bigger and more influential in not just the

trading system but the global financial system. Uh, and that takes much more than slapping tarots on one side or the other. So what is the best approach? I mean, we continually have this conversation on Bloomberg Radio, and I don't necessarily subscribe to one approach. My question continually always the approach of the last ten years hasn't worked, So

why should we carry on doing the same thing. Well, I think you just have to keep at it is my short and not very dramatic answer, But I think it's one of those things where these are not transactions, These are not one offs or deals that we need to be focusing on. We need to be focusing on building a relationship because China will be here for a

long time. We just talked to David Woo, a Bank of America, Maryland, and he's on the cell side and he's out pushing a research agenda, which is a wonderful thing. You're on the bi side. Does the by side you have a dollar call? I mean, do you guys sit around the shop trying to bet the dollar? No? I think we look at the dollar is a very important determinant of value and markets around the world, and so we're always thinking, are you framing for a strong dollar? New?

I think if you look at the way things have been headed and the you know, we are raising rates here, the rest of the world seems to be moving in a different direction that, as you know, has been moving the dollar lately, and that seems like a continued direction.

But I think, um uh, it's a very confusing time in many ways because we don't have the synchronized growth that we've had anymore, just because of the time that we've got left with you in the news flow and with your unique focus on when did you first go to Moscow? Uh? Well, Peter the Great? Who was I mean? Within that? Is this the myth and the mystery? John? You may be better at this than me of what is our What do we get wrong about Russian capitalism

right now? When you talk to people in the West about Russia? What do we get wrong when we try to interpret it well? I think Russia is a very big and very complicated country that often we get wrong because we ascribe everything to Putin and to a single leader and to a single It is more complex than that. It is far more complex than that. It is a group. It is a country of a hundred and fifty million people. It's not just oil, it's not just commodities, even though

they dominate the economy. Uh. It is also a new generation that is come of age long since the Soviet Union fell apart. Uh. And I think we do ourselves a disservice to think of it in in monolithic terms. Dr Smart. Do we over emphasize oligarchs? I mean, John looks at them because they end up buying all the English soccer teams, but that's true. But do we overlook the oligarcs. Well, I think they're they're an important part of the picture as well, but they're also not the

only part of the picture. Um um. But that's uh something that we can you know. I think, just to get the World Cup in here for a second and Russia, I just wanted to put it for team Russia. They've moved on and there they look. I think I think we're going to have them in the finals, and then there'll be a huge investigation over whether or not they were driving referes. Just Christopher Smart, I'm so glad you're

here because we're gonna pick on Ferroll right now. Amphony from Sparta emails in and says, and they say American sports are hard to follow. John he insists that you recap why England and Belgium want to lose today, because want to lose because they want to avoid the better team in the next round. No, Columbia is who they're going to play. Why is Colombia one of the better teams. Well, Columbia are one of the better teams compared to say,

Senegalo Japan. Who would you rather play? Okay, you'd rather play keeping Sac No, I imagine you'd rather play Senegalo Japan the Colombia. I would have thought. So when we get a barn Burner zero zero tie in the eighty ninth minute and they add on all those and they might just play Columbia, what do do they all go? They all go to the don't they all go to the just don't think the middle of the field cannon. They go halfback. No, no, trying to play it. Stop

trying to get him to play it. I don't want to to play it. I don't want him to play it. What are you controlling the control? I'm fighting you and I really don't want Ken to play it, and he's gone with you. It's great to know where I stand on this program in the hierarchy of things. Isn't all We're playing the Simpsons here once again. I've got to thank you, Chris. Thank you so much for the wisdom

on Russian world coaps. It's with bearings, we should say, and on the international investment, of course, on the stronger dollar as well. 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.