Terry Haines, New York City, Jonathan Farrow discussed on Bloomberg Surveillance


60 minutes from the opening bell in New York City. Good morning to you alongside some keenly so grounded son, Jonathan Farrow directory market Shaping up as follows up 16 and we advanced by 4/10 of 1% on the S and P Bond market, just south of 1 62 on 10. Some headlines across the Bloomberg the I'm F Backing a $50 billion plan to help the world escaped the covert crisis on narrow the gap and access the lifesaving vaccines that's threatening the global economic recovery from the pandemic. So Tom that's the effort right now calling for a $50 billion spending plan. To narrow that gap that the I'm f with that story this morning. Part of that is the word proposal and it is a proposal. They've got to line up the developed nations. There's some really serious Action in there about the percent vaccinated the United Kingdom in the U. S. Call it all in 50%, 50 and John and Africa. They published 2%. Is the percent of vaccination. That's to me the lead quote. But John, this is a proposal. They've gotta line up America to fund an ambitious a bet of effort and ambitious effort to immunize at least 40% of the global population. By the end of this year, at least 60% or more. By the first time for 2022. The IMF's has been talking about this great divergence. The idea that a number of emerging markets have really liked behind and you actually see the middle class shrinking and just to quote the deputy deputy secretary general United Nations, This has become the inequality virus, The diverging world were hurtling towards a catastrophe. Can you get Developed world that is rebounding rapidly to get on board and help pay for some of these initiatives. That's unclear. Great just to recap the FBI math calling for a $50 billion spending plan to we protect the arrest of the world against Cove in 19. Narrow the gap and access the lifesaving vaccines. Tom the headline Just crossing No, the headline Just crossing It Does fold into what we see in Washington in the markets. John, help me here quickly on the date. I think it is important on a Friday. I see a persistent lift in equities, even though it's not that big a movie full 10th of 1% on the S and P. Donna coming back just a little bit stronger. I should point out a little bit later, we'll catch up with the IMF managing director Christina go together a little bit later today to Terry Haines joins us now with Penn JIA policy there found her here in a good student of the dynamics of Washington. Terry. There's isolationism in America. It's always been there back to the founders. Certain character, Let's say in the pre World War, two era, all sorts of shades after World War two. Ah, unique trump isolationism a sense there. And now with Israel, Gaza and even with this announcement from the I M F for a cash call a new isolationism in Washington. What does that look like? Tom. Good morning. What I think it looks like is a essentially a re balancing of international responsibilities with domestic responsibilities. There's ah I think there's a sense and there's been a sense for about five or six years that frankly, I think, predates Trump that we've been spending too much time and effort. Taking globalism is going to solve all our problems and instead understanding that it's exacerbated a lot. What I'll shorthand is the flyover country problem. And fried flyover part, bro. They should problem and and we ought to be spending some more time with that. So we're back to the old Rangel of exactly how much time and effort we ought to be spending on. On domestic priorities, as opposed to worrying about the international and, you know, frankly, that complicates policy making across the board. Do you ascribe to the tradition that foreign policy doesn't matter when people walk into the 2022? 2024 booth, Or does it matter this time around? I think it matters to them always. Frankly, there are there are always issues that differentiate candidates and, you know, we see a lot of those happening right now. You've already You've already hit on it with part of it with Middle East policy. China put China Policy, of course, is a very big and, you know, frankly, bipartisan initiative at this point anybody that wanted to change China policy at this point would be Looked at very skeptically. You know that Dr Eyeballs on Russia. Same thing just to name three off the top. But, yeah, it does matter. Toe does matter to voters. Sorry. Let's jump to June, the president's first big overseas trip when he's going over to Europe. What you think the priorities are The priorities for them. Are they want to show firstly, they want to show up. That's just their America's vaccine that they want to show cozy relationships across the board with the European Union number one number two. They actually want to show how there Moving the ball forward, and they're gonna have to get past this this Nord stream problem and put it into a broader context to show how that decision to waive sanctions there. His positive for other aspects of the European project, and third they want to show United Front against Russia. But more importantly China of that's where they go. I've got a Germany problem Having night with that in mind, Terry, not so much as a European problem is the Germany problem. Yeah, exactly. You know, some wags and Brussels always say if Hitler it understood that Dolly to do was to conquer everybody. Economically. Yeah, Azi Germany has with you, You know that we wouldn't have the second World War. But the more important part of this is that You've got a new government. You've got more instability in Germany for the first time in a long time. You've got a new government a new way of looking at things that some people say a loss of confidence. S o. That is that those roles variables that the administration is going to have to work with to resolve. So it's a higher mountain and it was just a few months ago. Meanwhile, here at home, Terry one reason why I love reading the reports because you actually assign probabilities to the likelihood of certain legislative addition, shivs getting past. Where are we, in terms of the probability of a bipartisan infrastructure bill getting passed in near term? Thank you. Listen, and you know, I've been non consensus was not consensus stuff about 60 65% for some time on that. I think that's coming together in a kind of 800 billion to one trillion range at the top. Was clearly a desire to want to do something there and on a bipartisan basis. It amounts to a plus up of about 100% over what we would be spending on infrastructure anyway, so it's not insignificant. But it would take quite a while to roll out. The bigger question is that you know whether or not it's going to be able to roll out faster. It doesn't sound like that's gonna happen, so the people won't see in businesses..

Coming up next