# Fed Hold, AI CapEx, and Labor Market Divergence

**Podcast:** Bloomberg Daybreak: US Edition
**Published:** 2026-01-28

## Transcript

Markets move fast.
Get the insights you need in 10 minutes with Barkley's Brief, a podcast from Bartley's Investment Bank.
Each week, our experts analyze market themes, helping you anticipate what's next.
Listen to Barkley's Brief wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Carol Masser.
And I'm Tim Stenovek, inviting you to join us for the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast.
Now, every day we are bringing you reporting from the magazine that helps global leaders stay ahead.
We've got insight on the people, the companies, and trends that are shaping today's complex economy.
That's right, Tim.
We're all over global business, finance, tech news, all as it is happening in real time, and we've got complete coverage of the U.S.
market close.
Gotta say, basically, if it impacts financial markets, if it impacts companies, if it's impacting trends and narratives that are out there, we are on it.
We also have a lot of fun doing it.
Bloomberg Business Week also brings you the analysis behind the headlines through conversations with our expert guests.
And we are doing this all live each weekday.
And then we bring you the best analysis in our daily podcast.
Search for Bloomberg Business Week on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen.
Check it out on your way home from work to catch up on the conversations that you miss during the business day.
And on the weekend, check it out for a complete wrap-up of your business week.
That's the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast.
I'm Carol Masser.
And I'm Tim Stenovek.
Subscribe today wherever you get your podcasts.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
This is a breaking news update from Bloomberg.
Instant reaction and analysis from our 3,000 journalists and analysts around the world.
The Fed decision seconds away.
Unchanged is the expectation with the co-op is Mike McKay.
Well, pretty much as expected, John.
No change in rates, and the Fed leaves open the option of cutting rates in the future.
Stephen Myron and Chris Wallard dissent in favor of a rate cut.
Michelle Bowman does not.
Waller's dissent, of course.
Told to maintain an ample level of reserves by buying treasury bills, or if necessary, maturities of up to three years or less.
It's all about as plain vanilla as you can get, which shifts the focus, of course, to German Powell's news conference at the bottom of the hour.
What does he say about the future of interest rates?
And what does he say about his future as a member of the Fed?
Stay tuned.
We will stay tuned.
The news conference about 28 minutes away.
You run into that.
My McKee there, world class, as always, a Fed decision.
Unchanged.
The vote interesting.
10 to 2 to hold rates steady.
The two Governor Myron and Governor Waller.
TK, is it unfair to describe the Governor Waller dissent as an audition to take the top job at the Federal Reserve?
1991 is classic paper on game theory.
I just think we saw a little waller, game theory uh going on to say uh the least.
I don't have a strong opinion on it, but definitely uh that's a setup for the president to make uh a waller decision.
This has been an individual, Torston, who has provided thought leadership on this committee, effective thought leadership now for a number of years.
That dissent will be described by many in this market as an audition for the top job of the Federal Reserve.
Is that unfair?
I think it is a bit unfair.
I mean, Chris is very, very steady and stable and has had his whole career as a PSD economy, is doing research, going after the data, being data dependent.
So I do view this mainly as a sign that he actually is worried, and his speeches have also given very clear indication of this.
He is actually truly worried about that the labor market might be signaling that things are about to get worse.
So I think it's a little bit unfair to put him into that category.
Because I do think that it's very important that he is telling us that he does believe that rates should have been cut today.
Is that worry about the jobs market justified by the data you look at?
Well, that's the discussion.
I happen to have the view that this is only because of labor supply being much lower.
Immigration used to be three million a year, now it's about 400,000 from the CBO.
So if labor supply is lower, you should also expect job growth to be lower.
Other people, including Chris, put more roll up, put more weight on labor demand.
So that's the debate at the moment.
Yes, there has been very little hiring, little firing, suggesting that labor demand is indeed also weak.
So this is the very important debate.
And of course, only the data over the next several months will tell whether this dissent was actually a good idea or not.
Jan for the press conference and for Vice Chairman Clarida, Fed omits language on downside risks to employment having risen.
Let's have a chat with some Amazon people this morning.
Let's talk to UBS this morning.
The mail I get, the mail you get, people think fancy guys like Torsten Slack are nuts when they talk about a fully employed America.
I don't want to overdo the data that comes from the conference board because consumers' confidence all over the place right now is skewed by a whole bunch of things, including politics.
But attitudes to the labor market.
When people turn around to your torso and they say right now it's getting harder to get a job, jobs are not plentiful, you have to take notice, don't you?
Absolutely.
It is absolutely the case that the labor market data has become slower in terms of job growth.
But what is really critical here to remember is that if you have much fewer immigrants going from three million to 400,000 a year.
Of course, that's also going to create the break-even rate for non-farm payrolls.
That's a lot lower.
That used to be 200,000 a year.
Now the Fed says it's about 30,000.
So the closer you get to serum, of course, the more this will also begin to have more worries among people, whether can I find a job, can I not find a job?
And those worries, of course, in sentiment are exactly showing up.
That in particular the lower leg of the key continues to be under significant distress.
The Federal Reserve keeping rates unchanged if you are just tuning in as expected.
Equities on the SP 500, just a little bit lower, just off all-time highs on the S P 500, two dissents, looking for a 25 basis point reduction, one from Governor Myron, another from Governor Waller.
Joining us now, a man who knows a little something about how this committee makes decisions, the former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarider.
Rich, welcome to the program, sir.
What do you make of this decision?
And what are you looking for from the news conference in 25 minutes time?
You know, it's as expected, pretty minimal changes to the statement.
If anything, as you mentioned, though, changing in the wording about the labor uh market.
I thought it was a close call going in whether or not we would see Governor Waller or Vice Chair Bowman dissent, and in the end we did get the dissent from Chris Waller.
I agree with Torsten, who was on uh earlier.
You know, Chris is a good economist, he's been consistent and had a good call on the labor market and inflation, and and he's made the case in many speeches uh that uh there is a case to get rates down down to neutral.
So I take him at his word on that.
Maybe I'll be able to do that.
In terms of the in terms of the press conference, uh obviously no SCP uh projections or uh the like.
Um, and I think the the reporters will be pressing the chair on what message they should take away from from this in terms of the remainder of the year.
When you look at the politics here, I'm hesitant to say Chairman Clarida, but is this a moment where the president goes outside the chosen four candidates?
You know, there has been a speculation.
There is the reporting uh this morning.
Uh, you know, I know each of the candidates, I think any of them would be a good choice.
They bring strengths to the the job, but uh there are a lot of moving parts when you're Fed uh uh chair, and so it'll be interesting to see uh who they finally uh select.
You and I remember the day where Phil Graham went after Alan Greenspan on foreign exchange.
Richard Claret, is it appropriate that a Fed chairman speak of dollar dynamics, particularly the whipsaw of president weak dollar and secretary of treasury strong dollar?
Great question as usual, Tom.
You know, never say never, but both as a policymaker and as a student of policy making, uh the Fed tries to stay out of any and all discussions about exchange rates, and I would expect Jay Powell today, if he's asked that question to do the to do the to do the same.
So, Riz, when you think about yield curve dynamics, I mean, what is your view on what the yield curve will do?
The consensus has the view that it will steepen.
Is that also your view?
Or do you think front-end rates will stay stable and long rates will also stay stable?
Or how do you think about the way back in 23 or the first cut uh in in 2024, the 10 year treasury has been in a range from roughly four and three quarters to three and three quarters.
Uh a lot's happened in that intervening period.
Um that importantly reflects much higher real rates uh than we had uh pre uh uh pandemic.
So you have seen a shift up in the curve relative to pre-pandemic, and yes, uh would expect the curve to continue to steepen uh over time as 10 years stay in that range and as front-end rates uh come down under the new chair.
Richard, you identify a range impressively stable so far.
For you and the team at PINCO Rich, what's behind?
What's the biggest pillar of that stability that we've seen over the past few months at the long end of the curve?
Well, I think we it reflects the new dynamics, both because potentially a faster productivity growth and and fiscal uh concerns, it's appropriate that longer dated real yields are higher than they were uh uh before.
I think that's an important uh fact of life.
I mean, the real debate and the real issue is you know, within the Fed and in the markets is you know, where's the neutral rate?
Where do front-end rates uh end up?
And we'll we still think that neutral for the funds rate is somewhere down around three uh uh uh uh percent.
Uh but obviously that's gonna depend on where we are uh in the cycle uh as well.
And this may be an unfair question.
Do you think an incoming Fitchair is going to make uh dramatic changes to the Fed staff in terms of who is head of which departments, or how do you think the incoming chair might think about things if he or she doesn't think that it's likely that interest rates are going to be coming down because of persuading the committee?
You know, I'm not sure I'm not sure about uh that.
It is important just for the public to know that that the board staff does report to the uh chair.
You know, during my time there, Chair Powell asked me to get very much involved with the staff, and I learned a lot from uh them.
Uh, but uh it's I I think uh there typically have been and and always will be changes in staff, people get promoted, people uh moved on, and I should say during my time at the Fed, the the senior staff I worked with was incredibly uh uh capable.
So uh uh I don't think there will be any issues uh there.
First of all, I think it's so important that we describe the academics of Richard Clare to all that he did with this fancy thing, dynamic stochastic general equilibrium theory and monetary policy.
John mentioned earlier, do we know the reaction functions?
Do you have an operative theory from the world of Richard Claire to now that's operational?
Well, Rich is well famous for the credit multiply and the work he did with Bernanke, and of course, what credit markets have been doing and what credit markets are doing is often very critical, of course, for the economy because if credit conditions begin to tighten, the economy has a problem.
If credit conditions begin to loosen, of course, the economy could also have a problem, namely that it just becomes too easy money, including in credit.
I believe the next six months were full bore ahead.
The credit spreads are very tight, and now the dollar's weakening.
And when you think about the dollar's influence on financial conditions more broadly, Tosten, what is the contribution that comes through the FX channel?
Well, what I think is very important to remember is that foreigners come to the US for two reasons.
They come to cut coupons in fixed income because yield levels are higher here, and they come to get exposure to AI.
So for any discussion for talks about, well, with the dollar begins to go down, you need to come with a view that either AI is going to roll lower or interest rates are going to be a lot lower.
So as long as you can cut coupons and get much higher returns in US assets, you will still have foreigners abroad in Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, who come to the US to buy US financial assets because they simply do offer higher returns than what you get in most other countries.
Foreign holdings of treasuries at the end of last year, close to the end of last year, record highs.
People hardly talk about that, do they?
Well, and if you go back and look at the tick data for net foreign purchases of US assets, you saw that in April of last year, during Liberation Day, things were absolutely chaotic.
It was indeed the case that the rest of the world was still America.
But since April, for the data we now have from May up until November, it was very, very strong inflow of data into rates, in particular credit, and also of course into equities.
If you want to just tuning again, welcome to the program.
About 10 minutes ago, the Federal Reserve leaving interest rates unchanged.
Two votes for a 25 basis point reduction from Governor Waller and from Governor Meyer in a news conference with Chairman Powell in about 20 minutes' time.
We've got the former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clowder standing by just for one more question.
Richard, want to come to you on this.
An important topic, because the chairman will be asked about this in a news conference.
I have no doubt of that.
A more confrontational approach, a more assertive approach from the chairman a few weekends ago towards the White House.
Rich, what do you think prompted that?
How much internal debate was there about it?
You know, I'm not sure.
I guess we'll have to wait for J.
Powell's memoir uh to uh to find out.
I just infer uh that uh the chair made the uh decision.
Uh he'd been, you know, he had been quiet and had really not uh weighed in uh in the past.
And I think he just made a decision that he he wanted it to be known that that he felt that uh the Fed needed to focus on independence and focus on making the judgments on monetary uh policy harder.
We'll have to wait for the memoir.
Rich, do you think it's made it harder to focus on monetary policy, though?
I really don't think I don't think so.
In in light of uh of all the things that are that are going on, I I think it was a very clear, a very clear indication that for the remainder of his term as as chair, you know, that will be the will be the focus.
Richard Clarida, thank you, sir.
As always, the former Fed Vice Chair Rich Clarider.
We have no doubt the chairman will be asked about that issue in about 20 minutes' time.
Joining us now to extend the conversation, Bob Michael of JP Morgan Asset Management.
Bob, you've always got your own questions, buddy.
What do you want to hear from the chairman in the next hour?
Well, the the question he's not going to answer is does he intend to stay on if after his chair um expires?
But I think the one to ask is what does he see in the labor market that's particularly wearing to him?
And is the Fed undergoing studies about what the broader impact of AI will be across the economy?
Bob Michael, you look at the key question that you mentioned is labor.
We mentioned this earlier off Orzag and Posen recently.
Does your team at JP Morgan see any form of wage dynamic that indicates inflation?
Um, not so much right now.
I I think this low hire, low fire um has really dampened wage gains quite a bit.
We'll see what happens in the first half of the year.
Yeah.
Certainly, expectations are pretty good for the economy and corporate spending.
Maybe that will lead to higher wages, but right now you're not seeing evidence of that.
I really can't emphasize enough, folks.
That phrase there will see into the middle of the year.
Then Bob Michael, with that, with an interest rate strategy, and given all the upset at the Fed, how far out is the Bob Michael vision at JP Morgan?
Can you get out to Q3, or dare I say, model out a fixed income portfolio to 2027?
Um you can, and you have to.
You can't invest a lot of assets without having some view on the short term, the medium term, and the longer term.
Right now, things look pretty good.
Um, on Monday, I said that the yield curve looked about as perfectly priced as you could have it.
So does the bond market.
It seems to incorporate reasonably good economic activity this year.
It seems to incorporate what we think could be disinflationary forces coming from both the headwinds of tariffs on spending and also the impact of AI.
It's sort of an ideal market for bonds, including credit.
Well, and to the issue about AI, given AI is so prominent in the equity market, and now AI is also becoming a bigger weight in the public IG index.
And by the way, AI is also hugely in venture capital, two-thirds of venture capital is AI.
How do you think about the construction of portfolios at the moment when you suddenly have, when you look holistically at asset allocation, one factor, namely AI, that is everywhere?
Well, we we've seen a lot of sectors in the past um access the markets for a lot of funding.
And the lesson from that is to wait until the supply starts to weigh on prices, and that's your opportunity to go in.
Um, I think what we do understand is there's an enormous need of capital because there's an enormous productive use for it to build the infrastructure that's going to power everything.
What we do see at JP Morgan Chase is every line of business is using AI and how it operates, and it is creating a lot of efficiencies.
It allows us to scale um very, very efficiently.
So it's not going away.
Um, it only seems to be accelerating.
Yeah, Bob, I want to build on this.
I think it's really important, and I say this a little tongue in cheek, but ultimately, a big factor behind the GDP growth for the last 12 months is the CapEx spend of a handful of companies.
Is that becoming the more important macro indicator?
Never mind payrolls.
It's what happens after the close today from Meta Microsoft and what we hear from the big tech players over the next week.
Um, I think so, because they're not only telling us how their businesses look, they're telling us how every other business looks and how every other business is thinking about AI.
And are they willing to invest more there?
I think we're going to find the answer is yes, that everyone's over the hump.
They see this is real.
They've lagged a little bit.
Why shouldn't they?
They were unsure about the impact of tariffs, they were unsure how AI would play out.
Now that seems to be in the rear view mirror.
Um, I think you are going to see pretty good earnings and pretty good um downrage forecasts.
I think for monetary policymakers officials worldwide right now.
The divide between GDP and payrolls growth.
GDP is fantastic.
Payrolls growth super subdued, and you can point to supply side factors like immigration.
That's a factor sure.
But the character of GDP is becoming less and less labor intensive based on what we've seen over the last 12 months.
Absolutely, and a very important point when we talk about the Fed is that that also is because we simply have that the forces that are driving GDP are actually not very interest rate sensitive, because most of the forces that have been driving the boom in AI and the energy build-out have been coming because of equity valuations being so high.
Now there's more in the change in the capital structure towards also more debt issuance.
But for the last several years, no matter what the Fed funds rate did, we had a really strong boom in AI, and that was driving the economy forward and continues to drive the economy forward because this strength is coming from sources that are much less interest rate sensitive than traditional components of GDP.
Well, let's get a source on this.
Torsten Slack this morning.
It was good to see you up before 9 a.m., Torsten.
This is his daily note, the Daily Spark.
Bob Michael quantifying the productivity gains from AI.
I would say this is JP Morgan with what is it?
It's like Walmart, two million employees in the US.
You people have more knowledge, Bob Michael, about the new use of AI.
Help Dr.
Slack out.
How are our productivity gains from AI?
Well, the aspiration is that you're growing and you can do a lot more with the same amount of resource.
So that's the ambition and the aspiration.
We're still early into it.
We'll see what the payback is down the road.
I mean, look at this, Torsten.
Please expand on this productivity, and I guess it comes down to solo and this strange thing.
Total factor productivity, which is basically a made-up pixie dust of that American like John, you mentioned earlier, that American spirit.
What is our total factor American spirit look like right now?
Absolutely.
GDP growth can come from three sources capital, labor, and productivity.
And the key issue is if productivity is strong, that can more than dominate the other forces of growth, especially when labor is now contributing less because immigration is being restricted.
So that means that the requirements coming from total factor productivity or productivity are really significant because that needs to deliver a lot of growth now that we have less growth coming from the labor side.
This is why it's hard to sell America.
So many of these reasons are just a long list of things as to why it's hard to sell America.
Bob, the headlines of the last week or so, not just the last week, but the last 12 months.
Do you push back against them as well, Bob?
Yeah, they're total hogwash.
We invest money for loads of different plans around the world.
This time last year, into March, April of last year, maybe through the summer, there was some concern.
There were plans that were looking at diversifying.
We saw very little of it.
We're not seeing any of that now.
I think there's a realization that the breadth, the depth, the size of the markets in the US make it the best place to exercise your fiduciary duty.
And that's what they're seeing.
Yeah, is there some currency hedging going on on the side?
A little bit.
But is there a wholesale sell America assets?
Absolutely not.
If it's happening, we're not seeing it.
And we pretty much see everything.
You know, Bob, I I'm thinking of the University of Pennsylvania.
And you know, you're in Latin class at Pennsylvania where you've got straight A's.
And you know, you look at hogwash as Nugay or Frutilla or in Epsia and butchering the pronunciation here.
But stay with me on this, Bob.
Is there hardwash among the administration?
Bob Michael, you're a bond guy.
I want you to help me with foreign exchange in Bruce Caswin's world.
I got one day it's a weak dollar policy.
I got the next day a strong dollar policy.
It sounds like it's time for Secretary Diamond.
I think he's doing a great job where he is, and I hope he stays there.
One way to end an interview.
Bob, thank you, sir.
Bob Michael of JP Morgan Asset Management staying out of trouble.
Hogwash.
Hogwash.
That's what he thinks of those headlines.
That's brilliant.
And you hear it in your more your wonderful morning note as well.
People are so frustrated by the spin that they're getting, given the cacophony of our American politics and all.
You know, a long time ago, Tom at the president's first term, Mark Dow wrote a great piece on divorcing your political bias from your market analysis.
And I think there are reasons to be worried about diversifying away from the dollar.
And I'm not going to color everyone who has that opinion with the same brush.
But I will say this.
I think some of this is being driven by people who just don't like the policy out of the White House Torston.
And dare I say they have a bit of TDS.
I do think some of that is coloring some of the analysis that's coming from not just Wall Street, but from research desks around the world.
Absolutely.
And you go around Europe and you talk to a lot of people who are, of course, saying, oh my God, what's going on?
This is confusing.
This is chaotic.
Is it all these discussions?
And then you ask at the end of the beer, well, how are you even investing your money?
Oh, we're still buying dollar assets because dollar assets still offer great returns again, higher levels of yields.
Also in AI exposure.
You don't get much AI exposure if you invest only in European stocks.
You don't get much AI exposure in Japan, Canada, and Australia.
So the US offers things that are simply not being offered by the rest of the world.
I mean, quickly, John, you spent 12 hours on the set in London the day of Brexit here.
We're popping 138 on sterling.
Does your life change for the 143 sterling?
You're still convinced I get paid in sterling.
I hope so.
I mean, I'm looking at the chart here, and we're right up against the range of sterling.
Given the recent price action, I wish I was funded in sterling, but given this is my tenth year over here, I'm still funded in dollars.
Your reviews over.
Okay, thank you, sir.
Thank you, boss.
Let's get to Dan Swunk of KPMG.
She joins us now.
This news conference starts in about seven or eight minutes time.
Diane, welcome to the program.
What are your questions for Chairman Powell when this news conference starts?
Well, I think one of the questions that hasn't been asked of the Fed is we've heard the Fed talk about curbs on immigration and its effect on the breakevens on unemployment and the labor market.
More broadly, we have not heard anything about the pockets of labor shortages that are beginning to creep up.
The quit rate in leisure and hospitality absolutely soared in November and over the summer, and that is because of curbs in immigration.
We know that foreign-born and native-born workers in some professions, most notably in the service sector, are compliments, not substitutes for each other, and that's something that we're watching closely as well.
And even with the productivity growth we've seen, the AI boom that's going on is currently with that productivity growth, not derailed inflation.
And in fact, it is adding to inflation on the margin for insalient prices for many consumers, notably electricity costs, and then you have this coal spell on top of it that added to natural gas costs, but all of that is still pushing up prices rather than down when we're going to get a lot of fiscal stimulus in the beginning of the year as well.
Diane, your work recently has been absolutely brilliant about the fabric of employed America.
What is the one thing Wall Street consensus?
The three zip codes in Manhattan, what's the one thing they get a wrong about labor America?
Well, first of all, the overall unemployment rate is not really a good summary statistic right now.
We know at the end of the year, those having to accept part-time instead of full-time hit an all-time high.
We're now at the place where in the new millennium, for the last 25 years, we've seen instead of multiple job holders falling as an expansion goes longer, they're now rising.
This is part of that labor share of income being eroded, the inequalities we're seeing out there, and the frozen state of the labor market where those who have a job are clinging on, and those who do not have a job are left wanting, I think it's very important to understand when you think about things like the U6 measure of unemployment, which gets into that sort of under the hood.
That's running around 8.4%, 2.2% above where it was in 2019.
And I think those are important issues.
Diane, quickly here, the model is that the tech bro are taking over America.
We've talked about American exceptionalism, but so many people just want to turn around that ugly labor share vector.
How would you do that?
Well, it's a difficult thing to do, and certainly with the way that the C-suite and the gap between employees and the C-suite see AI and how it's affecting productivity growth is another issue.
We could literally see a payroll recession as the economy booms in 2026.
And that is something that I never expected to see out there.
I think it's really important to remember, though, that we still have not ameliorated inflation.
We still have inflation.
And it's much like compounding stock returns that has driven that wedge of wealth higher, compounding inflation over the last five years has left prices out of reach for too many.
At the same time, the labor market is frozen, and that is why you're seeing the consumer attitude surveys we are.
And what are the consequences of the K-shaped situation for the consumer from a broad macro perspective?
The weekly, the monthly retail sales data is still reasonably okay.
Does this matter later this year, or how do you think about the K-shaped situation?
Is it something that the Fed should take into account?
Or why does this matter from a macro perspective?
It's really important from a macro perspective because I think it's providing a underlying floor under inflation, and that's what I worry about could happen that with fiscal stimulus on top of it to temporarily disperse economic gains at the beginning of the year, as we see those tax refunds come in.
That is important because you sort of the sugar high could be very short-lived if it only makes inflation stick.
And as I said, inflation's already compounded to the place where most Americans feel that things are out of reach, and that underscores and undercuts the Fed's inflation fighting credibility.
Dan, I think we have to say, and I'm sure you share this sentiment.
If any of us gets a tax refund, it's paying the energy bill over the last month.
Dan, thank you.
Dan Swank went in on the Federal Reserve and a backdrop for the economy.
I think we just take a beat with the two and a half minutes we have left.
Well, Dan Swank just said there, that we can have an economic boom and a payroll recession.
Now I know this sounds a little bit philosophical, but what on earth is a boom if we have a payroll recession?
I'm gonna go to Torsten.
So I think your question, John, is brilliant.
What she said was remarkable.
I think I've I don't think I've ever heard that ever, ever.
The bottom line is we have a president who's prosecuting a neo-mercantilist strategy.
You were weaned on this ages and ages, great grandpa slug a million years ago as well.
How do we extract ourselves from a neo-mercantilist strategy to get growth back in for the rest of the public not benefiting from this tech boom?
Well, the challenge, of course, is that the AI boom has the main been the main driver for so long.
But if you implement policies, of course, that ultimately says that we want fewer goods and fewer people to come into the country, the risk is that that, of course, does come deglobalization with a risk of higher inflation, risk of high inflation in prices, risk of high inflation in wages.
So that's why if we are, this is not only the US, this is also Europe, this is also across the Wizardia area, you're seeing more and more segmentation of the global economy.
Of course, results in now everything needs to be produced domestically, home shoring, unshoring, reshoring.
All that, of course, results for fixed income investors in more upside risk to inflation.
We just described the 1930s in the United Kingdom.
Tom, the biggest risk to the GDP growth we've discussed over the last 12 months are the populist remedies the White House might introduce to try and correct the cake.
One of those issues we've talked about for the last few months, the last month or so, has been the introduction of a cap on interest rates on credit cards that could have the complete opposite intended effect of chilling financial conditions, of tightening credit availability.
And they're the kind of things at the moment, this administration TK, they're the kind of things they're thinking about.
I think the phrase is grasping its straws.
I don't hear much policy or science behind it.
Maybe we'll hear that in these comments.
Tolston, this just in from Pugh Van Steenis of Oliver Wyman.
I'm sure you know him.
He wants us to start a podcast and wants to know if Mark Rowan will give up to Orsten once a week so we can do a little podcast together.
Oh, I think.
He liked the last hour so much.
First cast could be Hugh Vince.
Do you think Mark and Jim will get on board with that?
Can we have you once a week?
Can you write the check if we've got a budget in the surveillance process?
Yeah, I can work it out.
We'll try and make that happen.
Tolston, this was a pleasure.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Tilson's luck there of Apollo.
I'm Barry Rittholz, inviting you to join me for the Masters in Business Podcast.
Every week, we bring you fascinating conversations with the people who shape markets, investing, and business.
CEOs, fund managers, billionaires, Nobel laureates, traders, analysts, economists, everybody that affects what's going on in the market.
Whether you own stocks, bonds, real estate commodities, crypto, you really need to hear these conversations.
Sometimes it's behaviorists like Dick Thaler or Bob Schiller.
Sometimes it's fun managers like Peter Lynch, Bill Miller, Ray Dalio.
Sometimes it's authors, Michael Lewis, author of The Big Short, and Moneyball.
Regardless of the conversation, these are the folks that move markets each week.
That's the Masters in Business Podcast with me, Barry Rittholz.
Listen on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.