19 Burst results for "Arthur Burns"
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"To say that we're joined by the Richmond fed president Tom barkin alongside the brilliant Bloomberg's mark the key, you're happy with that introduction, Mike. I think that worked for you. Tom great to catch up. Thanks for being with us. Yeah, thanks for having me here. So we get some fed speak. 60 minutes after the inflation report. So let's start there. Your response to that CPI print we got a little bit earlier. It's about as expected. Inflation is normalizing, but it's coming down slowly. And I just think there's going to be a lot more inertia a lot more persistence to inflation than maybe we'd all want. Part of that is still COVID factors, excess money and people's pockets. Supply chain issues in places like cabinets and switch gears. Part of his business factors, there are businesses out there still trying to recover lost margin. But I think the biggest thing is that after the experience of the last couple of years, businesses have now understood that pricing is a lever again. And as I talked to the folks in my district, I'm hearing people still out there pushing price and trying to see trying to test for the levels of inelasticity really are. So one thing we've heard from fed officials, including the chairman, is that the disinflationary process has started. Is that something you agree with? Do you see much evidence of that and where do you find that evidence? Well, if you look at the 12 month numbers, you can see they peaked several months ago and they're coming down steadily. But that's one part of the puzzle is inflation coming down. The other part is actually hitting our target. And so it's going to take a while to get to there. To the latest data that have come in, not just today's CPI, but the jobs report, et cetera, change your view of how far the fed will have to go beyond perhaps what was in the SEP for December. And does it change your view of inflation dynamics? Well, I try not to get too wound up in any particular data read, particularly a January data read, large seasonality factors, all that sort of stuff. But I do think what we're now in a position to do is to react to multiple months of data as they come in. We may or may not choose to take rates up further if inflation continues to persist, but we'll have to see what happens. Well, based on what you're seeing right now in terms of the path of inflation. The dot plot said 5.13% in December. You think that's enough? I think we'll see. We're going to get a PC at the end of the month, another CPI before the next meeting. And then I think as the meetings go on this year, we'll see what happens to inflation. If inflation settles, maybe we don't go quite as far. But if inflation persists at levels well above our target, maybe we'll have to do more. Do you think that maybe you and the markets are on a different time frame, you're going meeting a meeting and they're looking out at towards the end of 2023, saying you should be cutting rates by then. I'm not sure I understand markets. You guys are much better than I am. I'm very focused on what's happening in the demand in the economy. I'm very focused on what's happening to inflation. And I think the way to think about my view on rates is we're inflation to persist. We might have to do more. If inflation doesn't persist, maybe not. Had a financial conditions factor into that call into that view. How do you think about financial conditions? Well, there's lots of definitions of financial conditions. What would you define it? I think that as we raise rates, the market and all markets respond to how we're doing things in the path that we forecast. There are people who are out there saying financial conditions are back where they were a year ago. And I said, I don't know. It looks like rates are higher than they are a year ago. Certainly if you're trying to get a mortgage, that's what you'd think. And so the financial markets make their forecasts and lending conditions whatever work off of that. I think you can try to manage it. But I'm in the world of trying to define your response function, try to live to your response function. And I think markets will catch up to what you're doing. If we can dig a little bit deeper, we've had a decent equity market rally here today. Credit spreads, and I think something like 200 basis points tighter than the wides of last year. Do you see that as complicating your ability to tighten financial conditions and bring inflation back towards target? Is it something that's on your mind a lot? I think trying to manage markets at least for me is a fool's errand. And so I'm in the world of trying to manage what we can control. If demand stays hot, if inflation comes in elevated, have rates move more. There are lots of other scenarios of what happens to the economy. And we'll respond to those. Well, one of the questions that people are asking is, does it make it harder? As the market pushing back against you and do you see inflation maybe stickier because of that. And is it a question of you have to raise rates higher or leave them in place longer and wait for the cumulative weight of tightening to hit? Well, I think there's a very good case for leaving rates higher for a longer period of time to allow that tightening to hit. I do think the lesson of the 70s was very clear, which is don't give up too early. And anything I've read and I've talked to lots of other people who seem to have understood that market and they say, you know, if you go back to the Arthur burns years, it was raised rates, economy, weekends, lower rates, inflation comes back stronger. Raise rates, economy weakens more lower rates. That doesn't seem like a path
Bitcoin Magazine Podcast
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bitcoin Magazine Podcast
"A risk that's just going to be kind of checked off and I ignored because it didn't unfold. But the analogy of the 70s or Powell being Paul bulk or Arthur burns. And for those that aren't too well versed in fed chairman history, Volker was obviously a guy that rose to 20% and stamped that inflation. Burns was the guy that kind of prematurely eased off the gas and inflation kind of reignited back in the face. And so I think there's a risk of that, right? Where this thing is still piping hot by thing, I mean the global economy, U.S. economy, China just reopened. We're not draining the SPR anymore. We can't do that again. So what does that mean for the year over year inflation rate? Well, I think inflation is a lot stickier than maybe some people would like to believe. It is becoming somewhat entrenched in the minds of consumers and the labor market is still extremely tight. So I think the 2% kind of disinflationary era that we all kind of were present for the last decade. I think that's over. And even if we do kind of hit that 2% arbitrary target again on a year over year basis, I don't think remains there for long. And I could be wrong. But I think probably in that sense, if that is true, if that is a risk factor, and you're going to see those rates in the long end, reprice higher because the rate market is pricing in a pivot in 2024. At least not a pivot, but an easy. So if that doesn't unfold, then there's certainly going to be to be a repricing of risk in the risk free rate. So just something to watch for. Am I trading Bitcoin based on the rates chart on a 30 minute basis? No, I'm not. But I'm actively increasing my dollar position. I'm actually really increasing my Bitcoin position on an automated basis. So yeah, how I think of it. Just something to watch for. I don't think the I don't think the worst of it has unfolded yet. Maybe for Bitcoin asks, I very well could see 15,000 being below. And if I didn't deploy everything then, that's fine. But I don't think we see just up only again without any pain being felt. I don't think that how this all plays out, but it could be wrong.
WLS-AM 890
"arthur burns" Discussed on WLS-AM 890
"Discounts of any, so if you have to program terms while supplies last points expired and the calendar year is at low dot com slash MVPs bonus points. A second man has been charged in connection to the fatal stabbing of a Chicago chef at a CTA station in the loop last fall. Darnell Rawls 25 was extradited from Louisville, Kentucky, and charged with killing Michael burns 41 as he headed home from work on September 6th. A week after the attack, another man, Anthony Rawls junior 28 was arrested and charged with the murder. It was not known how the two were related. Both faced murder and armed robbery charges. Burns had worked at a chef at tri state catering and crop hills steakhouse and patio and worth. A woman was killed last night when she was struck by two vehicles in north suburban wheeling according to police, the 53 year old walked onto wolf road near Manchester drive just after 9 30 p.m. where two vehicles were traveling north and struck her. Police said there is one northbound lane and one southbound lane separating a median in that residential area and there are not any pedestrian traffic controls. The drivers of both vehicles stayed on the scene and are cooperating with the investigation, neither showed signs of impairment, according to wheeling police. WLS news time 1132. And things still move it along really well. Kennedy is 20 minutes both directions from O'Hare to the burn Eden's no delays either direction, Eisenhower inbound from a three night to the old post office is 25 minutes, 25 on the outbound side as well. Stevenson inbounds my three 55s of assault lakeshore drive is 23 minutes. You are slow between Ashland and the Dan Ryan expressway. Next update in about 15 minutes. Follows her by blinder dot com. Hi, I'm Kyle. It blinds to dot com. I sell custom made blind shades and shutters that are easy to install at prices less than big box retailers. Blind
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Miller. Yes. Or Arthur Arthur burns. Who wants that sort of next to their name? Yeah, totally agree. And I guess we'll see. I've noticed financial conditions keep getting looser and looser. With three and a half percent unemployment, it seems like they have a long way to go, although we do see insurance inflation coming down. I want to ask about hedge funds. And I guess only your wealthiest clients get access to the Citadel as the Bridgewater is the DE Shaw's. But if you get access to the biggest hedge funds, the biggest multi strategy hedge funds, you still knock the ball out of the park last year. It doesn't matter what happens to earnings. It doesn't matter if we're in a recession. It doesn't matter if stocks go down. Right. What do you think about the shift that we're seeing from long only hedge funds? You know, you could be a single pick a single name of superstar and ride it with them to now multi strategy multi manager hedge funds that are doing well. Yeah, I'm a skeptic of hedge funds. And I think you're right. That top 1%, that's where to be. And you're going to pay for it, too. Right. The top 20 made $22 billion last year. But the lost 208 billion. There you go. There you go. And I just think you can replace a lot of that market exposure with other vehicles at a fraction of the cost. Again, there are always exceptions. And the citadels and the like will always stand out in the elements will always stand out that way. But they are the exceptions. The rule is much more disappointing. You know, I noticed last year international marks we talked our international Bloomberg intelligence people like Tim Craig head over in London and pointing out throughout the year how international markets have outperformed the U.S., how do you think about that in 2023? Yeah, I think that's probably going to be the sleeper story, right? The sleeper market of 2023, which is we expected the worst for Europe. In many respects, it did not happen. It didn't have a cold winter. They didn't run out of energy. The pipeline infrastructure didn't collapse. Inflation seems to be abating there. And those markets have performed exceptionally. Well, if you're an American investor and we're right about the dollar that we've essentially seen peak dollar in this cycle, then international markets of all flavors are going to look pretty interesting this year. So I think that's going to be the sleeper story. I mean, when you're most exciting tech company is SAP, that's definitely a sleeper story. That is, right? But that maybe is the good thing. You know, they made their long still on like Siemens and big manufacturing and the kind of stuff that's energy. Look at the rotation that you've seen in both the S&P 500 and the MSCI acqui. So some of the darling stocks fell out like teslas, the
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"About all the time that delta between what you think the fed should do and what you think the fed will do. February 1st is the next meeting and until recently I've been thinking 50 is a slam dunk because as you said, they're obsessed with the idea of killing inflation and they don't want to be thought of as Arthur burns. They want to be Paul Volcker, I've heard though more and more people say they're taking 25 basis points into account now. What do you expect they will do on February 1st? I think they'll do 25 basis points. The numbers have been showing economic numbers economic data inflation data have all been pointing to the downside. I think what they should do is nothing but what they will do is 25 basis points. Simply to maintain what they've been saying, there's not one fed representative who's even begun to talk anything but we need to get raised higher and we need to get retired and we saw it from the ECB revenue this morning rates need to be restrictive. I'm not really sure where central banks are coming from where they feel like they need to choke off economic growth. But they are in that camp. And that's what they believe they need to do to squash inflation. And willing to overshoot the runway to not lose credibility. I mean, Ollie rain is looking at an economy with 10% inflation still. So that's why they want to grow. I do, but you're looking at inflation coming from places I think that central banks can't really control. It's still coming from energy and food and there's not really a lot they can do about that. All right, Vince, great stuff has always been Cinderella global macro strategist with a Bloomberg news coming up Liz and Saunders chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab coming up next. That's going
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"From Bloomberg radio. In mid December, we saw Wall Street hopes for loosening monetary policy take a big hit. The Federal Reserve did dial back a bit when it raised interest rates by 50 basis points that followed four consecutive 75 point hikes. However, fed chair Jay Powell saying officials were not close to ending their aggressive campaign of rate increases and signaled borrowing costs would head higher than expected in 2023. J Powell also saying that the Central Bank would not cut rates until its confident that inflation is moving back towards its stated 2% inflation goals. Higher interest rates and rising prices have been the prevailing economic themes in America over the past year and really throughout much of the world to help put it all in context as we head into the new year. Let's bring in Bloomberg businessweek economics editor Christina Lindblad, Christy and I feel like it's been the story that keeps on giving. We just constantly talk about monetary policy in the U.S. and globally. How do you think about the coverage that you guys have done over the year and kind of where we are ending up? I think about a word that Paul used a lot at the beginning, which is humble and how the macroeconomics profession has been humbled. Because nobody really saw this coming and the persistence of it. A few people, I guess said they would. But here we are. We have a cause like a glimmer of good news this week with the CPI print. We're core inflation. I just .2% in November. That was the smallest print we've had since August 2021. So maybe the medicine is starting to work. And I think that's what everyone's hoping. I think that's going to be the big thing to watch in 2023. Well, speaking of themes, right? Like I do feel like the fed has for the most part had one message of it's about getting inflation, guys. Down and that's what we're focusing on. But at the same time, another theme has been consistently when it comes to the U.S. economy, is the strength of the labor market. And that, I guess, gives the fed some wiggle room, but is also kind of worrisome, especially when it comes to the wage pressures. Worries. I think it's one of the parts of the puzzle that people who can't really figure out. I was saying to somebody that when after the COVID recession, every job support was amazing, you just couldn't believe how fast it was coming back, especially compared to the previous recession after financial crisis, which we had a long, grinding recovery, right? Jobless recovery was called. And this was just like boom. These jobs are coming back. And now though, we're in this place where when those Friday report come and they're strong, you're avert your eyes and go, oh no, because you know that it means that rates will stay higher for longer. There is still a really, really high level of job openings. Companies are still creating jobs that they say they can't fill and wage pressure is strong. And at this point now, we're seeing real wage gains because inflation is starting to trend down. But wage growth is still strong. So that's also going to be one of the things that everyone's going to be looking at going into next year. It feels like there's data points for everybody. Meantime, strong job market that's out there. But we've seen housing slowdown. It's just, it's very difficult to make sense of it. Having said that, I do feel like you mentioned the last recession coming out of the financial crisis. I think about how the magazine business week and you and your team have covered kind of going back to the past. And we have talked a lot about Paul Volcker during the 70s and his inflation fight and what that might mean for what J Powell has to do and the fed. I think that has been a big shadow, a larger than life shadow that has loomed over Powell in the whole FOMC. There are many similarities, but also many differences in the way everything played out then. I think now what haunts them is the ghost of Arthur burns really who was the fed chief who thought he'd beaten inflation. And then started loosening too fast. And you know, we see that Wall Street is currently hopeful at this pivot will come. And they want the pivot to come in 2023. They want the fed to start cutting rates. Push back on that, saying that most likely, we see from the new economic projections that the cuts will not happen until 2024. Well, I know we're going to be talking about this a lot in the new year. No doubt about it. I want to get to another critical development that took place in 2022. And that was the major setback for women's reproductive rights. We saw take place with the Supreme Court's reversal of roe V wade. It's a very personal story, but it also made us take a look more broadly at women and their place in their economy and really just kind of the setbacks. Christina, you've been one of the key voices as we unpack the sweeping economic implications of that decision. As is Bloomberg news equality team leader, Rebecca Greenfield, and Rebecca, I want to bring you into this conversation as well. Tell us about this issue where you guys did some really deep diving and some deep coverage of what had happened. Yeah, you know, the Supreme Court made a huge decision and overturned what was almost 50 years of president and roe V wade and it really felt like a very big moment. And U.S. history is specifically for women who have made a lot of progress economically and otherwise in the U.S. that seemed to be slipping and this moment that decision really felt kind of like a big turning point in the wrong direction for rights and the economy. So we put this breaking point issue where we took the moment to step back and say, what is happening to women in the U.S.? Well, I have to say, you know, you guys included in this coverage in the magazine. This was back in August. Some numbers, 33 million women of childbearing age, living in 26 U.S. states expected to institute abortion bans 24 out of a 100,000. The U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rate ratio of any industrialized country and then a $1 trillion projected increase in U.S. GDP over decade resulting from narrowing the gender divide in labor participation rates to levels prevailing in Europe. Roe V wade, very personal, very individual in terms of the impact you think about it. But it's also there's business implications, economic implications for the setbacks of women that we've seen as of late Christina. Also equality. We did a piece in which we looked at decades worth of economic studies that looked at the impact of abortion access. And people have been able to get some very granular information and they looked at women who were not able to access abortion, you know had higher chances of being poor, falling into debt, children that were also going to be poor. So it's the impact extends across generations. The Supreme Court decision came at the end of two very trying years for women, right? We had something that people called the she session because when schools and child care closed, some women had to quit working, right? And then we had lots of other things. We had this year, we had a formula shortages in the U.S.. I mean, who thinks that a major industrialized, one of the world's top economy, you can not get formula for your child. There were just kind of these like drip drip drip drip and then came the Supreme Court thing, which is something that people had positive for a
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Bank is the way I would put it. How much money we have in that piggy bank and how quickly we're going to spend it all. John, welcome. It's great to have you back and help you have you healthy again. So John, take us, take us through exactly what is going on here with the so called recession. It's one of the most talked about recessions ever that seems like godot. It never quite gets here. It's a chronicle of recession portal. I think it's right. When it finally happens, it will be the least surprising recession in history. We've all been briefed in the late they tell you in the videos on them on planes. We're all in this in this crowds waiting for the waiting for the crunch. I think what is important is twofold. First of all, economic policy almost always acts with a lag. And even though as markets get quicker, events work their way through to their logical economic conclusion quicker, it's still takes time. You still need to mediate the economy through the decisions of lord knows how many different people. Second thing is that fiscal policy matters and operates with the lag just like monetary policy does. And fiscal policy in terms of giving people a lot of money two years ago and a bit more last year has been incredibly expensive. So that means that Americans do have an awful lot of money saved up where it can easily be spent. That mitigates what would otherwise be extremely recessionary developments because they've still got money in the pocket to keep spending. You can still hide yourself through that cell point of having savings. And unlikely therefore that you see the worst of a recession until that money has finally found its way out of the picture. And the graphs I was quoting in my PCS day from Deutsche suggest that moment might not come until the second half of next year. There are certainly others who think it will come quicker than that. Yes, there's a wonderful graph in here on exactly that question that shows the excess savings going way up and coming down and then projects it out if it keeps going down at that rate. So these excess savings that we're all enjoying, I guess, in our piggy bank, does that explain things like the ISM services number that came in much stronger than we thought? I suspect, but yes, in general, people are no longer restricted from paying for services by the pandemic and they've still got money in their pocket. So they are spending more on services that actually go into that ball game or that play or that going out for the night whatever in a way that they might not otherwise have done if they didn't have this big bank if they didn't have this nice big question of cash. And on most conventional measures, you wouldn't expect the economy to start slowing down to drastically until that's also on the ISM. It's also worth pointing out prices paid, which is a very nice leading indicator of inflation came down sharply for services. Services companies were saying about the prices they had to pay. And it stopped coming down. It's still historically very high. Which again is an indicator that somehow or other the prices services companies charge are being supported at the moment. One of the things that we have heard from a chair Powell is in deciding and this is my words obviously not his. If you're going to err on the side of tightening too much or too little, you're better off taking too much because we can back off. We have the tools to back off to redeem the situation. Is he right? I'm not sure I am inclined to think that he's right given where we are now to be prepared to on the side of going too far rather than not far enough. I'm not sure he's right that we've got the tools to avert a recession. Or something bad. Happening, but when you have inflation psychology getting out of the bottle, it's really difficult to put it back in and I think of all the mistakes the fed has made over the years and plenty of other institutions making mistakes is just we care about the fed. But in the 70s, Arthur burns raises rates inflation comes down without ever really getting back down to a normal level. He starts easing again because it's beginning to hurt the economy and inflation takes off in a big way because the psychology has never been stamped out. That is very present in the minds of everybody at the FOMC. And so I think that that is the sort of big caution retail that will likely mean they carry on until they whipped inflation and at least at this moment they think they're prepared. Risk what that does to economic growth. It's always possible. You never know counterfactuals in actual history. It's always possible that we will now discover that maybe out the burns wasn't such a fool. But if we try to do something different, but that's where we are, I think. I suppose my question or my point, even if I have a point, is this we know without any doubt now that if you just send checks to people on the fiscal side, you can get the economy going pretty quickly. How long a lag is there if you start cutting rates. Suppose that you do go too far, you're going too deeply in a recession. How long a lag is there before the economy responds to going too far. It looks coming back into Vogue for good reason at the moment because inflation has taken off in a way that he would have predicted us to the money explain. I think he would similarly say you would expect quite a long lag. It's not as though B streets the base rate comes down by 25 basis points .25% that we're immediately go out and buy something that otherwise you wouldn't have done before. It's real life is lumpier than that. It probably needs to take longer. It's hard. It's hard and soft landing and all the various spaces you've been using. There's going to be something that everybody in Potter Stuart terms can they know it when they see it. There's going to be a recession of some kind next year. How bad is how long it goes on, however, is very difficult to tell because there are just so many imponderables about how people will have people will react to the different stimuli that are out there. It is an article of faith at Bloomberg I've discovered that the markets are always right, basically always right. But do they know what they're doing this time? And I don't blame them if they don't. It's so confusing we have another situation before. But sometimes it looks to me like maybe the markets are sort of hoping their wage is success. Indication of backing off from the fed, they go wild. And they don't quite listen to the parts that say, no, it's really going to be tough. Okay, now I have many question nice
Squawk Pod
"arthur burns" Discussed on Squawk Pod
"New Jersey governor Phil Murphy on what consumers need. I'm on the side of aggressive behavior because otherwise a lot of inflation is sentiment to feed that positive sentiment in the economy. They've got to take some more steps. Plus, China finally, backing off harsh COVID restrictions. The fake blue checks wreaking havoc for some companies, and, FTX continues its crumble, investors scramble to cash out. The big question is, are we going to see some customers getting their money out or not? It's Friday, the 11th day of the 11th month. Happy Veterans Day. Squawk pot begins right now. Stan Becky bye in three, two, one, kill, please. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to squawk box here on CNBC. We're live from the NASDAQ market site in Times Square. I'm Becky quick along with Joe kernen and Andrew Ross Sorkin. First up, today on the podcast, have we peaked? Wall Street saw a huge rally Thursday, major averages having their best day since March, 2020. What else happened around then? The Dow jumped more than 1200 points, the S&P rose 5 and a half percent, the NASDAQ 7 four following some good news on inflation, a smaller than expected rise in consumer prices for the month of October. Now, prices on everyday items are higher than a year ago, but the rate of increase itself is down. A hopeful sign that maybe, just maybe, the Federal Reserve's aggressive rate hikes have started to cool things down. Now, it should be said that the 7.7% rate of inflation in October is still above the fed's 2% target. The goal on the horizon for the Central Bank to ease off hiking interest rates. On squawk box we've heard from many guests about the path that fed chair Jay Powell has laid out with his clear march toward that 2%. No matter the potential pain to the economy or to investors. Market historian and professor at the Wharton school Jeremy Siegel joined squawk box earlier this week. This is a really big issue in terms of how you interpret inflation for forward looking policy. I think the market says he's got to flip some time. He will see the light. It just taking him a little longer. Last month, hospitality entrepreneur Barry sternlicht warned that rate hikes are rising the risk of recession. I feel like he's the captain driving the Titanic into the ocean and these consumers in the U.S. are still spending, but it's inevitable, but they can't keep this up. So the fed has to stop and just look at the data. So does yesterday's blowout on Wall Street mean a possible change in course. Let's get back to Becky. You know, the move we saw here yesterday, obviously an immediate reaction to that CPI number being a little softer than had been anticipated. People thinking that this was going to be a fed pivot. Willie? We were upgrading the swivel. Yeah, it's kind of interesting. We got to test, we tested the July lows. Did we make new lows 35 88? Does that count as a new low below 3600? In bull markets, you get really scared by sharp breaks. In bear markets do the same thing does the same thing happen with really sharp short covering rallies, whatever you want to 7% in the NASDAQ. Unbelievable. Is a big move. In a single day, Carl icahn was on yesterday with Scott Wapner and was talking about how Carlton bears for 30 years. He has been bearish for 30 years. Nothing new with this, but he was just saying, you do see things like this in bear markets where you get really volatile days. It doesn't necessarily mean they all clear is there if you're looking at the longer term. But I am still very quite bearish on what is going to happen. A rally like this is, of course, very dramatic to say the least, very dramatic. But you have them all the time in a bear market. And I still think we're in a bear market. But man, if you missed that rally yesterday, you got to be hurting. If you were not invested, if you were waiting for the pivot if you were waiting for the turn. And it matters what happens with inflation. I can see we'd go to new lows if this is a brief sort of a head fake about things cooling, like a 70s type thing where a bunch of times Arthur burns or whoever Montgomery burns, whoever it was, that was running the fed thought we had it licked. And they didn't have it licked. But if they do have it licked and Jeremy Siegel's right Barry Sterling, so many people, Elizabeth Warren, all these people are right. I think it's very possible. I mean, I think it's more for I personally think it's more probably to go to 75 points. I just do. I've been thinking that. I do. I'll be consistent with that. I'll stay there, and stay there. And so when you say you should be fully invested yesterday, yeah, if you're in for a day, God bless you for beef. I've been wanting to be around for longer. I think it's a longer term. Not just my 401k, but I've been hopefully for the pivot for a while and thinking if you're so wrong about transitory, how do you possibly think you're right about that you have to go higher than most people think? Because they don't know. I think the transitory talk was also something he held on to a little longer than I might have had conviction for because he was waiting to see if he was going to get reappointed. And we should be in sitting in different places because you're basically saying that all the money that the Biden administration spent and that the fed printed really did cause systemic inflation. I'm saying reopening after the pandemic briefly is causing this dislocation in the labor market. Which makes it look like, but it's not. I'm saying something totally different. Why? Why is it? Why do you think inflation? You're bad. Because I'm not even thinking about it the way you're thinking about it. I'm thinking about it as here is a guy who's told the market one thing who believes that his credibility is on the line about what that is, hold on. And I believe as a result is going to continue on that path until it is super clear, not just a little clear, like super clear because he does think about it like antibiotics and he does think that you don't want to stop the medicine too early and I think he believes it is worse to stop the medicine early, get caught out again and then it has to go back. Stopping stopping the medicine. I'm 50%. I look at it together. I'm going to tell you that said chairman's legacy can be ruined in one of two ways. It can be ruined by not being too easy. Or you were so strident thinking about inflation that you sink the economy into a much harder landing than when necessary. And that's what people on the left are saying. That's what many people are saying. Well, why are you trying to kill the job market? What if he does kill us? Suggesting to you that I think he's looking at this and saying, this is actually still a remarkably strong economy. Well, and what leishman said yesterday at the table is that Powell himself has said that one month is not a trend that it's going to take many months
Stansberry Investor Hour
"arthur burns" Discussed on Stansberry Investor Hour
"We will stay the course until the job is done. I think we all know he's talking about Arthur burns, right? Arthur burns preceded Paul Volcker as fed chair and Arthur burns will go down in history as the guy who stopped too soon, right? The guy who stopped raising rates too soon. And then inflation really took off for the rest of the 1970s. You know, he figured, well, I've just tanked the market like 73 74. I've destroyed the market. So it's over, right? Yeah. Nope, it wasn't. Yeah, I think you bring up that point. It makes me think of, you know, these guys are actually human too. You know, the fed board, we don't like to think of them that way, because they don't really kind of present themselves that way. But Jerome Powell is human. I highly doubt that he wants to go down as the Arthur burns and would rather be thought of as the Paul Volcker, even though he wasn't necessarily a hero either. But I think they think about their reputations. I suppose agree and absolutely. I said this in Boston. I think I said it on the podcast once before. But he is the high school quarterback, the star Twitter at walking down the hall, looking at the picture on the wall of the hero from 40 years ago. And he said, I'm going to be like Paul. I'm going to be just like, I'm going to win the game. I'm going to save the day just like Paul. And that's, I think that's an adequate paradigm because, you know, high school is a heavily, you know, peer pressure is the big, big one in high school, right? That's the thing that influences every kid in school. And it's the same thing in Washington, D.C., which is where the fed is, right? I'm going to be, I'm going to, I'm going to live up to what all these kids around me want. And you better beat down inflation to do that. Got me thinking about high school now in the hallways. After school activities, this is very fun. Yeah, yeah, that's right. After school activities are the same, too, because these people are smoking some serious serious ganja. They want me to believe that they're the smartest kids in school, you know, 400 PhD economists. Okay, sure, maybe you are, you look like a bunch of suck ups to me, just the same way they did in high school. And I also know that you're getting high after school. Just to relieve the pressure or whatever. So yeah, maybe it's a better paradigm. Would you say getting high on your own money supply? Yeah, so high on your own supply. That's right. Well, I think we've just covered this just about as well as I think we've got the fed all sussed out. Two guys sitting at home behind microphones know a lot more about it than the PhD economists and the guy appointed as chairman of the fed. Right. Of course. Yeah. I think the main point is, you know, the fed is this story's not going away yet as far as the raising rate story and as much as some people might speculating over it ahead of every fed meeting. You get the complete opposite. Yeah.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Now Powell says it's got to go up. We don't know where it goes from there. So he's not telling anybody anything new here. They're likely to raise that rate to match. At least with the markets are saying, but that's the point they want people to focus on that. And that gives them maybe some flexibility to spread things out. They don't pause yet, he said that was clear. But they maybe come down so that they can get a little bit better read. The thing he said over and over again is that we've got a ways to go. And I think that's going to be the new watchword. I can make you and I know that every Central Bank and particularly major country central banks are haunted by how the Japanese got the rate call wrong a good 20 years ago, Justin wolfers wrote up on Twitter, the wonderful professor at Michigan about the asymmetry that was discussed today. Is this a J Powell who sang I'm not afraid to make the mistake the Japanese make? And if we overshoot and become too restrictive, we've got the confidence to turn around. Well, I think he's saying we're not going to make the mistake of ending too soon, which is more than just Japan. The ECB had that issue and of course United States Federal Reserve in the years before Paul Volcker under Arthur burns. So they've made that clear all along. They don't want to make that mistake. Now, the question is, as you and Michael gabin, we're talking about a few minutes ago when you get to a point where the unemployment rate starts to go up and you start to get the kind of political pressure that we've seen from democratic sub on Capitol Hill, do you feel maybe you need to back off a little bit and pulse try to thread the needle in saying
Stansberry Investor Hour
"arthur burns" Discussed on Stansberry Investor Hour
"It's kind of counterintuitive and it counters the very like what they're trying to do. Which is why it's important, right? Because it tells you that they don't actually have the guts for real pain. Right. And so I don't think the fed will either at some point. Probably sooner than we think. And so that would be my first issue. When the U.S. Central Bank, when the fed decides that it's had kind of enough, everything else can start mattering again. Until then, it's really just all about them. Right. So I'm going to push back a little bit. As I always do and the idea of an imminent pivot, okay? So it seems to me like, you know, we've all we all know that they lag, right? The CPI is lagging. Monetary policy then lags months. So by the time he sees 2% CPI year over year, then he'll pivot. And what I fear is that he will really follow through on this, that these people are so model driven and so committed to be this sort of theoretical kind of academic view of the world that he'll stay focused on that and he'll be too driven by that. And that the idea of tamping down inflation also, I mean, he's located in Washington D.C. and inflation is like, you know, we can't have that. So I just, every time I hear about the pivot, I get a little skeptical and I think, no, you don't understand, he is going to, he wants to break something, I feel. You know, I feel like his mindset is, that was the title of my last report. So look, I think, yeah, that's definitely a future that I contemplate. So let's unpack that future. Okay. So if the fed truly is only going to pivot, wants to get inflation to under 2%. We're going to have the most calamitous recession in history of the United States of America. Right. Which is a future that can happen. And the other thing that I would say is that if that does happen, I would guarantee to you that inflation will then rise again. So the issue is that, you know, so if they are committed to following what they think is the path of pole hooker. They will end up being burnt. And there isn't, for so for listeners, they'll end up. They'll end up like birds. Oh, Arthur burns. Yeah, so they will guarantee the Arthur burns scenario. So in the 70s, you know, like everybody basically finance is raised in these myths, like every other epistemic community. Exactly. And our myth our myth is that 600 basis points of difference. Was all that it took to dampen inflation, which is one of the most stupidest things I've ever heard. So Arthur burns was the chairman in the early 70s and he, the fed chair, and he raised rates. Sure. Caused the 73 75 recession. But inflation started creeping back up. And by the way, he brought inflation down from 12 to 5%. So he was successful. If we were at 5% CPI right now, real wages would be positive in the United States. America, nobody would be, nobody would care about 5% CPI. Politically at least. Right.
Squawk Pod
"arthur burns" Discussed on Squawk Pod
"I think that's very much too tight given the forward looking actual rate of inflation, not necessarily what we see in backward looking BLS statistics, but forward looking, as I've mentioned many times before, home prices declining commodity prices declining freight rates declining all the way up down, we see declines not rises, and I think that and look at the dollar. The dollar is showing how tight the fed actually is. Take a look at the money supply. We're going to get it tomorrow, monthly money supply. 1 o'clock people don't talk about it, but that was the clue to why we had so much inflation over the last two years. And that has stopped not only stopped it in its tracks, actually declined for march in the first time in since World War II. We've had such a protracted decline. So the feds talk and the tightening is so extreme that I think that the risk of recession is much higher than waffling on the inflation. You and I are kind of in the same camp there and I think that the fear of ending up like Arthur burns or whoever you want to pick back prior to Volcker, I think that's so front and center with the current chair that that could end up with a policy mistake. Plus getting burned on the transitory side of things and being so wrong initially, you could end up making a policy error by just being burned by that. Could you absolutely. Absolutely. That's happening. Yeah, absolutely. And by the way, I look back at burns. They kept on pouring money in. Commodities were kept on going up, you know, we didn't see the dollar soaring like we did.
Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
"arthur burns" Discussed on Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
"And the reality is there's a tension between those two that we always really need to think about. Yeah, well, so I mean, speaking to that, there is this call for if there's a crash for there to be a backstop, right? And that's what we've had. So I would say that it's understandable that there's this consensus that once it dips too low once this crash happens and we sort of see an unwinding or potential deflationary spiral, we have the lender of last resort, right? They will pivot again. It's inevitable. That's their job. Their job is to control the business cycle if it gets too hot or they need to do things. The inflation side or on the markets kind of getting too hot. They need to bring back stimulus. Pull back and when the markets are in stress or people are unemployment rising, they need to come back in. The reality is they did that in the 70s as well, right? That's people lampoon Arthur burns for pivoting too early, right? You don't really hear much about McKesson Martin. He did the same thing. But the reality is they pivoted because both cases, there was a major recession, right? And to be clear, the recession that Arthur burns faced was the biggest recession since The Great Depression. People don't really realize that. It was a long, bad recession. And so after raising ten and a half percent, he pivoted, right? Shocking with me and he got a recession inflation did come down from, I think it was 8 and a half percent. All the way down to 5, four and a half 5% sound familiar. And guess what? He pivoted because the recession was bad, but what happened, the second he pivoted, the underlying forces of inflation, the fiscal responses. Everything that was going on drove an inflation almost immediately back to 12 and a half, 14 and a half percent and went even higher. And so everybody blames him for pivoting too early, but their job is when you get a deep dark deep bad recession like that too pivot. To do and everybody says, well, Volcker was tougher. See, Volker knew that he couldn't pivot and whatever. Not really. He just, you know, he was in a situation where after he did it, the inflation didn't come back as strong, and he could, you know, he could deal with it.
Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
"arthur burns" Discussed on Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
"The corollary to that is they may actually make things worse on the inflationary front by doing that as well. Because I read about this in the newsletter. Look, there's a populist movement going on, right? If we get a big economic crisis and markets blow up, what do you think the response is going to be? Is it going to be more monetary policy? Everybody, that's what everybody is hoping for, because that's what happened in the last 40 years. The reality is it's going to be more fiscal. It's going to be the people who did not benefit in the upside. Are likely to come to their politicians and say, hey, we're hurting again. And it's supposed to like to be even more fiscal, which is likely to drive even more of this rebalancing. So in more inflation, so you're really set up for a massively stagflationary environment. There really is no solution. And the more that the fed is involved, actually, the worse it is, because if anything, we need a supply side response to match the demand side response or getting, give me more balance and instead we're getting this demand side response and the monetary policy is actually taking supply away from planet Palo Alto, right? And so it's really a counterintuitive, it's not what we've been taught broadly about how monetary policy works. And I think the fed Powell has gone out and he's trying to say a lot of this between his teeth as well. He needs the market to believe that he can, you know, that they have the control. So he doesn't want to say it too much, right? This is why the Volcker narrative is so big, right? They want the markets to trust that they have control. But between his teeth, he's also kind of saying, you know what, guys, we don't really have all the tools like we're trying here, but they don't have the surgical precision, yeah. They don't. That's exactly right. So it's a tough situation. The fed's in a tough situation. I don't have the Powell. There is no real good answer, but I would ironically say that the worst thing they're making a big policy mistake in my opinion, that they shouldn't even though they have this mandate and they have to control inflation. They have to try and do whatever they can do. This myth of Volcker stopping inflation is actually completely false. As you mentioned before, there are two other fed chairs before him that tried to do essentially what he did and failed miserably. I believe mcchesney Martin, Arthur burns, both of them, did 7 and a half percent in ten and a half percent fed funds increases and failed miserably because the populist movement was still in effect fiscal policy was still flowing, right?
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Economy through, but he could not equally well, or maybe more likely end up being Arthur burns, who was the fed chair during the great inflation of the 1970s. Inflation didn't go up steadily in vicinity. There were periods where it actually came down. 70 72, 74 to 76. But the fed would never quite get on top of it. And so I fear a repeat of that process where the front fed Titans, the economy's flows the fed declares victory everybody sized with the relief and then inflation goes back up again at some point, maybe because of an external shock or maybe because monetary policy is being eased prematurely and inflation expectations haven't really calmed down. Neil let me put one more overlay on that and that is China. We also got economic data out of China over the weekend really, really early yesterday, which really showed a slowing economy there. They have challenges that you know terribly well, whether it's their property market or some of the shutdowns they're doing because of COVID-19. They have unemployment youth unemployment at 20%. How much is that likely to affect the United States economy as well? Will it drag us down? But it's probably from the point of view of a fair good news because if China slows down what that means most in immediately is that China's demand for commodities slackens. And that's a disinflationary force right there. You'd certainly be feeling a somewhat different feeling if China was booming the way it did in that period after our financial crisis when the Chinese did massive stimulus. And they sent commodity prices skyrocketing as a result. So I think from the U.S. perspective, it's probably on balance. No bad thing that China is in fact growing much slowly than they intended. Remember they had a 5.5% growth target. That's out the window. No way is that going to be met. But of course, if you look at the Chinese situation, it's good news in another sense. The U.S. has a lot of reasons to worry about China. Remember all the buffalo over Taiwan, we just had, in many ways, I think it's fair to say we're in something like a Cold War with China right now. Well, if the Chinese economy is flatlining, if the miracle years are over, if it turns out that actually China's situation is worse in terms of debt, terrible, much worse in terms of demographics, then the U.S. can afford to be a little less afraid of the coming Chinese challenge. And it looks less and less likely that there's going to be a Chinese or an Asian century and that the U.S. is going to have to accept playing second fiddle. I must say when I look at the Chinese economy today, I'm less and less convinced that at some point the Chinese economy will overtake the U.S. and current dollar terms. I made a bet a few years ago that that would never happen. I'm feeling good about that bit today. Okay, well, thank you. As long as you're feeling good about your bet, thank you, Neil. It's always such a pleasure to have you with us. That's Neil Ferguson of the Hoover institution. Coming up, we're going to go to The White House where even in August administration is
Bloomberg Radio New York
"arthur burns" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"It's really interesting here This has been a timeless debate folks This goes back forever really back You know as far as I'd say John my memory to Arthur burns before Greenspan But the idea of parsing it I haven't heard chairman Powell doing that much recently I'll give him credit for that John do you see the GE news Go on some GE launches $23 billion bond tender offer to slash their debt load which is really something I mean this is not apple or Microsoft with minuscule percentage of debt John This is 36% debt And again John this goes back to corporate dynamism and corporate action I think that's underestimate An attempt into the world and Tommy had admit it's taken a long time for this company to adapt to the world around him Well in the defense of Lawrence cop I just looked at the weighted average cost of capital function John I just looked at return on invested capital and it's amazing what cop has done out of 2018 in the crater there The cards he was dealt were just extraordinary But this is again this action Have you seen in his Joel levington told us yesterday who's next is 3M the next GE Well Tom you understand the ark of management better than anyone over at GE Did we need an outsider to make this Absolutely Yes This is a sensitive issue always And you know when you can get someone of cops character and what he did at Dan and her years ago okay I get it But it's a general rule to shake things up Yeah you gotta go on Okay but let's also talk about the broader backdrop How they got to this point was reducing debt dramatically How could they reduce debt dramatically and actually finance themselves at such a good cost Because of the backdrop of how low rates are and how much demand there was for debt How much has that ultra easy credit market given the flexibility to these companies to make adjustments in their capital structure John that are very needed To me this is actually something to watch Because GE was a death story among all others Do you know what I'm excited about I'm not talking about GE anymore We just won't have to talk about GE anymore Just reminds me of Deutsche Bank Tom Do you remember how much we used to have to talk about Deutsche Bank Well yeah I got to be careful when I say you be careful You be careful Under stories like method two get to cover method two all the time and then you're just not Deutsche Bank Wednesday at CPR It's API Wednesday Let's build up some enthusiasm for the data point that comes in one hour And 5 minutes Enthusiastic I think it's fascinating I'm not sad enthusiastic Come on Equity future of 1% I'm not enthusiastic about that you're right The other time by four.
Adventures in Finance: A Real Vision Podcast
"arthur burns" Discussed on Adventures in Finance: A Real Vision Podcast
"And like if it meant that the fed was going to do an imminent inter-meeting rate hike. Like that's what that man that that's because back then. The fed was vigilant about inflation. So you had powell's testimony today concurrently with empire state in philly fed showing the biggest readings and fifty years. And it's it's insanity to me what's going on in the markets. Now you know the inflation trade worked for about six months in now. It's correcting gay and this. It's a divergence of epic proportions right and eventually you know how i don't understand how you cannot believe the inflation trae long term when you see the fed completely unwilling to raise rates until two thousand twenty two at the soonest and you see these manufacturing surveys coming in at fifty year highs and cpi five point four percent in the month to month. Annualized number is ten percent like this is crazy. Stop so when you see tens going blow one thirty. Like i mean it's i i don't know i don't have an explanation for like you know. The markets can do what screw the most people most of the time right so obviously the inflation trade got pretty crowded right so we so we have to work off. Some of that speculative sentiment. So it's gonna take a couple of months but you know just in the short term. Like it's not jared have station for either but let me just ask you this. We know what the explanation is coming out of the fed coming from the chairman on the hill today and yesterday talking to congress. It's basically second verse same as the first. It's what we heard. Yesterday it's effectively transitory pockets of of hot pricing but not sustained it. Is this notion that it is reopening trade. That it's a rebound effect. What you make of the explanation that we're receiving from chairman pal in relation to the data. You see total horse shit juice juice. Eat the stephen roach piece that was on. I forget i forget what website it was. Not so stephen roach. Chief economist of morgan stanley in he did this. Whole history of arthur burns in the nineteen seventy s and. It'll arthur birds the smartest guy in the room and fed chair and what they did back then when when they started to get inflation ate you know when it was oil prices because of the embargo he says this he didn't use the word transitory but he said this is this is now liar and basically excluded from cpi and then food prices start to go up and it was because of shortage of peruvian anchovies edge that we're feeding into like feed for livestock. That was going into food prices so excluded food in so what he essentially did was he created core inflation and he ended up excluding sixty five percent of the basket so only thirty five percent of the basket remade and even that part was going up fourteen percent so it's literally gun lock today was saying you know. This reminds me of the seventies. It's you know it's different for a lot of reasons but you know ideologically. It's the same. What if we exclude all major eight major sectors from. Cpi where will it be that. Can we get it flat..
NBC Nightly News
Chicago, parts of US, brace for winter storms bringing more snow, bitter cold
"Five million people are bracing for either snow. Rain dangerously cold temperatures or all three. The wind chill so low in some places. It looks like a typo shaquille. Bruce reports from isis chicago where the arctic air could break record in days ahead tonight. A bitter winter blast weeping across the midwest plummeting temperatures creating hazardous conditions and avalanche in utah near alexander basin prompting air rescues white out conditions in montana in iowa a massive highway pileup tractor trailers flipped a police cruiser in ruins whipping winds plunging. Half the country into a deep freeze the wind chill and might not north dakota thirty seven degrees below zero. It's slightly warmer in minneapolis with wind chills of negative twenty nine and in cincinnati. It's a balmy five degrees. I would say it feels like sandpaper or on base. And he sat out too long lists. Arthur burn a little bit through your genes the brutal temperatures sticking around chicago bracing for what could be its longest consecutive stretch of deep cold in decades. The dangerous temperatures closing all city run cova test sites through wednesday the concern if air can do that. It's not safe for anyone. The february freeze moving east parts of the batter northeast are bracing for an additional eight inches of snow. On top of last week's storm as long as a so's coming down. We're still working another winter. Punch taking aim tonight shock. We just got an update on that avalanche in utah. That's right jose. We just learned in the past few minutes from police on the scene that four people lost their lives in that avalanche. Four others
Bloomberg Surveillance
Fed, Matthew Zeti And Arthur Burns discussed on Bloomberg Surveillance
"A quiet day to day, but the later on Paul Suinian this, the securities beautifully to our next guest. We have some several many in. The minutes of the fed, which I find ridiculous. And the minutes used to be used to be to try to measure Arthur burns, the what the pipe smoke said out of his pipe. And then it was Greenspan multi syllable. Speeches. And now it's some several many Matthew Zeti joins your Bank right now on the American economy. What fail you miss you do you get out of the minutes? I think the value of the minutes depends on what has happened in between the meeting and today and I think that's a particularly important for about today's minutes. The minutes will typically today should show, the fed was a little bit more optimistic on the growth fund mystic on, on trade, and in global growth. And it clearly that's become stale, given that we've had the flair trade tensions since then I think, more importantly, we'll be looking at is how they talked about the inflation dynamics outlook. Well, let me look into that in moment, but this is really important. The minutes became a joke about some several in many do they still do that to the minute still say some of our districts, several members do they still have absolutely absolutely do. And, and you know, part of job is parsing through how many members and officials are represented by each camping anything on the inflation front, that's going to be an important distinction today. If they feel Matthew, I think from the feds perspective, they feel that inflation is let's call it. Stubbornly low, do you think the fed can even influence inflation? I think that's a key question. And we've certainly seen a number of fed officials and, and academics and others focusing on the fact that the Phillips curve fund, meaning that inflation, does not seem to be as responsive or sensitive to the unemployment rate in growth has been in the past week. We put in a note just recently early this week and it looked at how much of the core PC basket KENDALL said actually affect either through the economic growth or through the dollar. We think about two thirds of the basket. They can't affect that means that there's about a third of the basket that they cannot. And so it does put constraints I think on how much they can they can get inflation. Can I get back to two percent and from this policy framework, debate can even get above two percent if they wanted to so from your perspective, what can lead in a flation higher wage? Just looking at wages, you know three point two percent. That does not seem to be doing it. Yeah. I think wage growth has not been doing it or for a few reasons, one is that productivity growth has risen in line with wage growth. And so you haven't seen these costs push pressures come come through. In addition, these some of these components that, that cannot affect have been been weaker. But I think the fed, if they are looking to push inflation, higher, it's going to, to be through the economy, typing and more importantly to inflation expectations really, really important. How do they force inflation higher? Is there is there a legit published academic study that says a fed pushed inflation higher? I think the whole Phillips curve, framework, which has, has clearly come under question is about the fed being able to push inflation higher. But that's the effectiveness of that has declined because the sensitivity of inflation dislike has declined history. Well, let's go to Walter Heller. He was before you met the sixties did they, quote unquote push inflation higher. Or was it other forces that moved to play should higher? It was a combination if you look back to the sixties, you had an economy that clearly had head over tightened up. They continue to push unemployment rate lower at the same time. You had health care initiatives, that, that let this guy rocketing healthcare inflation. So that was outside their control. But I think most importantly, inflation expectations rose substantially inefficient expectations versus actually because the fed was really trying to get a hot economy at that time they could contain a push mower. And just in time, he had massive fiscal stimulus. So does it looks at that period and said this wasn't uninteresting inflation, expectations and they look forward? Look at that is the key. Way too short. Betsy was we gotta get you in your three hours at some point. He's working with Peter Hooper, just brilliant. Brilliant,