Q4... Continue Watching

Published Oct 7, 2022, 11:05 AM

Jonathan Bernstein joins to look at the midterms slate five weeks out. Clara Ferreira Marques discusses Jair Bolsonaro's performance in the first round of the Brazilian election relative to poll predictions, and why 'Bolsonarismo' looks like it will remain a force post-election, no matter the result. And Mike Regan takes the temperature of a very whippy market digesting more Fed speak and lower lows as Q4 begins.

Welcome to Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Ronnie Quinn. This week very well could be true that the markets are right in sensing a less aggressive sed but we're just gonna have to wait and see if I think it's just more hope these days. Mike Regen on markets whip sewing again and Clara Ferrero Marquez on the Brazilian election after polls underestimated President Jayyer bol Snaro's popularity, sending the presidential race to a runoff. First, though, to the mid term elections here in the United States November eight. We heard from President Biden this week preaching unity with Republican Governor Rhonda Santas. He thanked me for the immediate response we had. He told me how much he appreciated it, said he was extremely happy with it was going on. This is not about whether or anything having to do with our disagreements politically. This is about saving people's lives, homes, and businesses. But the message community may be sure lived. With mid terms fewer than five weeks away, markets and corporations will be looking to results to figure out what happens to a slate of short term tax parks designed to sunset at the end of the year, also the prospect for legislation in the next two years regulatory risk and federal energy policy. I spoke with Bloomberg Opinions Jonathan Bernstein to gauge the state of the slate. So, Jonathan, it's important to preface everything by saying that we're still five weeks away from the mid terms, and so much can change in so many arenas, from individual candidates to what issues even Americans consider paramount But for now, at least, it does look like the Senate is favored to stay Democrats. Do you agree, Um, you know, both the House and the Senate have become so up for grabs right now. The latest polling couldn't change. But right now it looks like there's about a one third chance that Republicans would have majorities on both sides of Congress, about a one third chance that Democrats would have majorities on both sides, and a one third chance of a split Congress with Republicans having the majority in the House Democrats in the Senate. So yeah, most of the forecasters right now would say Democrats have a slightly better a chance of holding their senti majority than not. But it's very up for grabbed. What states does it depend on? Obviously we're watching Georgia. It may come down to Georgia, but other states have huge impact on where it actually ends up. Yeah, I mean, there's still several states that could go either way. Nevada, Georgia, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona and Florida, even New Hampshire even you know, there's just a lot of states that are at least if the poll isn't quite within the marginary, it's awful close to that. So you don't think that New Hampshire and Arizona are lost to Republicans yet. Then if you had me bet on even odds, I'd take the Democrats to New Hampshire and Arizona. I don't bet on elections, but if you gave me, you know, tend to want odds. I'd have to think seriously about the possibility if the environment shifts to Republicans over the last month. It's certainly possible that Republicans could get back in the game, and some of the states that right Democrats have an advantage. On the other hand, the environment could shift a little bit to the Democrats and something like Florida or Utah where we have an independent Republican running against the regular Republican, but the independent Republican would probably caucus with the Democrats if he was elected. I think I'm not sure if he's actually said that or not. You know, those could become all of a sudden in flight if things move a little bit to the Democrats, and we just don't know if that's going to happen or not, so it's all to play for. Still, it does seem like Republican money is going to Ohio and Florida. Should we read anything into that? You know, I'm sort of an outlier on opinions about money right now. My feeling is there is so much money out there, it is so easy to raise. There are so few restrictions that any candidate who has a reasonable chance is going to be funded enough that diminishing returns start sitting in. So I don't think that any candidate who would have a chance otherwise is going to be starved for funds, even in states like I believe Arizona is one where the party seemed to be deserting the candidate. If a good poll shows up, he'll have the money to spend. If it does come down to Georgia. Even if it doesn't come down to Georgia, does Harshel Walker do it? Even with these new allegations about paying for a girlfriend's abortion, even though he's staunchly anti abortion publicly. You know, I think what we should think about stuff like that is that it probably matters on the margins. After all, hardcore Republican voters, it's too late to drop him as a candidate, so he's going to be on the ballot. Hardcore Republican party actors are stuck with him. You know, we'll take something extraordinary for them to say, oh, forget it, We're going to give away one of the major swing states and give them. It's not gonna happen. Could it affect some voters, sure, even if it's one two percent of voters in Georgia. Well, if they stay home and they said, do I really want to go out to the polls and vote for this guy who has not just this latest candle but a whole series of things. Um, you know, not to mention that his qualifications for the job were very shaky. Misibility to form on the job have been very shaky in any of the settings we've seen him in, so you know, if it's a very close race, it costs some more two percentage points, that could be enough. On the other hand, we've seen plenty of big campaign issues, including important ones, come up, matter for a while and then they move on to something else, and most partisans are very good at making excuses for people on their own side. So um, sometimes campaigns really do collapse, and we've seen in this cycle some candidates running well below where their party seems to be in that state. That could happen to Walker as well, But we'll see how it plays out over several days and over the remaining weeks, and what else happens. If he has other public fights with members of his family, for example, that can't be good. But he does love them at the end of the day, apparently so so. In terms of issues, we obviously saw abortion becoming a huge issue. It's questionable as to whether it will stay an issue for the next five weeks, what happens with the economy, what happens with the inflation and so on. It will bring out more voters, though, that's for sure. Are you looking for turnout to increase this time around? The indication so far seemed to be that it will be a high turnout election. Um, we are in a relatively high turnout cycle and most recent elections was very high turnout election and for mid you know, midterms are never as high turnout, but it does look like all the indications are that this will be high turnout election. And as you know, as you implied, yes, whether first of all, an issue can get people to turn out and might not otherwise, but issues can be very Policy questions can be very important even if they don't affect vote choice. Because a whole lot of Democrats, for example, are running on the abortion issue. They may feel that that was why they want if they win, and they will then act on it if they have the votes to do so when they're elected. The same thing, you know, for Republicans who are running on other issues, those issues, even if they don't actually move votes, will be what Republicans perceived to have elected them. So, Jonathan, it's hard to postulate, given though we don't know how the next government is going to look, But if it were to be a divided government, what would that mean for Joe Biden for the next two years? In terms of reelection it probably doesn't mean anything, But in terms of getting things done well. You know, if Republicans are a House majority, in particular, Republicans don't have sort of a list of policies that they want that they will then compromise with Biden and with the Senate, since nobody's going to have sixty senators so with the filibuster, that means that whoever has the majority, they're going to have to compromise with the Senate just to get anything to Biden. But if the Republicans have a majority, we're going to see investigations, a lot of ugly smear type investigations, not sort of serious policy type or even you know, based on fact types of investigations. You know, we saw this before with Benghazi and a Republican House and Barack Obama. We will see it again. If Republicans stake control. There is a possibility that Republicans could bring the country to default over the debt feeling. If Democrats don't do something before the end of the year to make that impossible. There is I'd say a fairly good possibility that next September October will have a government shutdown. If Republicans have the majority of the House, they don't have a set of things that they want to get done that they can compromise about their running on Joe Biden being unpopular, and that's what they're going to try to do, is go after Biden. Just in that scenario, is Kevin McCarthy a shoe in for speaker? Some of the experts on the House that I've spoken to think, you know what he probably is. But it also depends on what the majority is. You know, it takes two d eighteen to have a majority in the House. Speaker elections is an election on the House floor. If Republicans from the Freedom Caucus or other even more outlier Republicans refuse to vote for McCarthy for speaker, he needs to get to eighteen. And if they only have two twenty Republicans and three Republicans refused to vote for him, they can't elect him. Is that what's going to happen? We have no idea, but it certainly is something that he's going to have to worry about. And then, of course we're assuming a lot of things now. But McCarthy, you were to be speaker, and assuming the Republicans do take the House, how would McConnell want government to look? Would McConnell want an obstrappers Congress. I think we can look at what happened during the last two years of Barack Obama's presidency. McConnell wasn't trying to bring the country into default. He has enough respect for, for example, the business interests that a lot with the Republican Party to not want to do that. But in terms of confirming nominations, confirming judicial nominations, that's not going to happen. We may have a half amfleach happening. You know, as we get to a normal cycle of cabinet members leaving, would McConnell bring up a Treasury secretary, of Defense secretary up for a vote? Would he have thoats to do it if there are fifty two or fifty three Republicans, I don't know. We may have a lot of positions that go un filled. So that kind of stuff he would certainly do. In terms of figuring out a way to get the debt feeling done, we've seen McConnell being willing to work on that, But we've also seen a couple of government shutdowns when he was the Republican leader, so you know, he won't have the ability to come up with those two eighteen votes in the House to get a debt limit increased fast or to get a continuing resolution to keep government spending going the next time it runs out. That's on the House side. He can't really control that. There's so many things to ponder because, of course, as soon as the midterms are over, then we're looking at the potential for announcements by various people, whether they're running for president or not. Obviously we know Trump is very likely to run. Biden we're not quite sure about, but I guess you'll run. But there could be a lot of other candidates too, And there are different sort of strains of Republicanism emerging. What do you see in the hinterland. Well, let's start with Democratic side. It is in Joe Biden's interest to have pretended to be running for election up to this point, and it's acted to his interest to continue to whatever he's really thinking up to the point where it would really harm Democrats for him to drop out. We don't know what he's really thinking, but that's what he's doing. It's consistent with the interests of the presidency and his presidency. Some point between election day and say Memorial Day, he's going to have to make a final decision. And you know, if he intends to not run, he's gonna have to stop pretending that he's running. If he intends to run, he's gonna have to do something dramatic enough, possibly a formal declaration of candidacy that everybody knows, Oh, yes, he really is running. Assuming that he is recent rebounding, the polls holds up, he's over. He probably does not have any serious possibility of losing the nomination, and nobody important is going to come after him. But then again, if he flips back under who knows. On the Republican side, they've been running for two years now, whether it's governor senators. A lot of candidates have been running. Trump himself never stopped running for president. That's all he does is run for president. He didn't do very much presidenting when he was elected. He declared for re election the day he was sworn in, and then didn't bother stopping the whole time. So he's running now. He may have to drop out at some point. The way that he can raise money under the law changes if he becomes a declared candidate, and that's probably one of the big questions for him as far as when he makes a formal declaration or if he eventually doesn't. Obviously he's also got legal problems over him. He may have calculations about whether a formal candidacy would help or hurt his legal situation. And then we have a whole bunch of Republicans, yeah, that are running, and some of them will probably get to the point of formally declaring even if Trump runs. Most of them will drop out if they feel like Trump is a formidable foe. We haven't seen anything like this an hundred years or whatever. It is a former president trying to win back the nomination after being defeated. I would guess that there's a lot of Republican Party actors who feel that Trump is the worst thing possible for the party. In what are your thoughts on the descantist style and whether that could take over nationally? I think that we've seen him get a lot of publicity in Republican align media. That's a very important factor in Republican nomination politics. I don't know that it's a style very different from Trump's. It looks like one of the things that we're going to have is several candidates who in various different ways stick with the Trump profile, Trump without this, or Trump plus that, something like that, because Trump is still popular among a lot of voters and some party actors. So I don't see any particular disqualifications for either of those candidates. But I don't see it for several of you know, we don't have somebody like Rudy Giuliani from several cycles ago, where it was very obvious that whatever the poll said, he had some serious problems attracting Republican voters and the support of Republican Party actors because of his policy position. For the most part, I don't see policy position problems with any of these people, any of a dozen or so Republicans who have made the trip out to Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina indicating that they are running right now, or they're doing what one political scientist says, they're running four. Whether they'll be running in is another question. Some people think about the sand as the other lane locked up. It's very early for that kind of thing, and I wouldn't be very surprising at all if we have more than one candidate have a surge at some point and perhaps catch on long term, and perhaps surge and then burnout as we've seen lots of candidates doing previous cycles number opinions. Jonathan Bernstein to Brazil now on the presidential election runoff at the end of the months, which will pitt former President Lula against President Wilsonaro. This after a closer first round than predicted by pollsters. I spoke with Clara Ferra Marquez, So Clara, in a way, this was a huge loss for Lula, given that the polls are suggesting he might win in the first round. Right, it's important, I think the things that if the facts of a little bit when Brazilian elections are very rarely solved in the first round. It's only really happened twice to the advent of democracy. And I think wild colts had indicated in the weeks before that it was possible that Lula could carry the election in the first round. It was always a little bit of an outside chance. I think the surprise here was really the strength of a scenario support impulsed push him in somewhere in the midberties, and he came out of the pot. And I think, really importantly it's the strength of congressional support and the success which his allies had both in Congress and in guvenatorial races exactly a financial markets love the results. The interpretation was that if Lula wins, it will temper his more leftist tendencies. But in truth, we don't really know what either candidate would do or even be able to do in power, do we. Well, I mean, we do have some indications because both these men have been president try for two terms and Bocenaro for one. So it's a really On the one hand, there's a sense that orcenario, if re elected, would really push ahead with reform, parking back to twenties. Seen, the reality is, as president wasn't really able to do very much of that. Bulgeard his finance minister came in on this big ways of hope. There was some reform of the pension system, roll and overdue, but really it felt short of what could have been done. They haven't really tackled physical and other much needed changes, and they've mismanaged the greatest shock, which with COVID, So it's a little odd. And then on the Rula's side, you know, as president, he was a pragmatist. He really did govern from the center. I would say, you know, this probably will push them to do that even further, he'll have to move to the center in order to gain the support of third way candidates. But the fact is he was already there. His Vice President Gerald Well, whose former governor of San Fallow, is really a centric So that's the message he's been sending for Sometimes, if Lula wins, what is the danger that Bolton Arrow doesn't accept the outcome? How tense could have become very I think, and it's going to become terms for the next four weeks. We've already seen quite a lot of electoral violence. We've seen pulp, there's attacks because the white bolcenario has discredited the poles and people carrying out those poles that will only accentuate I think the real issue with Boar scenarios that taking a leaf from the Donald Trump playbook, he's really been paving the way for some sort of adventurism come October thirty and so he's questioned the electoral mechanism, even though Brazil has a very well established electronic voting system. You know, there's absolutely no evidence of fraud. He's eaten away at the balance of powers, attacking the Supreme Court. He's really cozied up to the military since twenty eighteen, and large parks didn't really have a party power base. He took to the military as a way of basking in the reflective glory of their reputation for competence. For examples, he was an army captain. He wasn't a particularly good one. That doesn't really matter if he can still do that and has done it very effectively. So that's connections to the military and with the security services generally that include the police, and that very worrying. Also the supports of gun ownership, so there's a surge and gun ownership and business a washing guns and that too. I think he's a pretty major concern as we approached this. It's not necessarily true that we would have an uprising. I mean, he has said things like I'll leave power either to go to prison or because God removes me and I'm not going to prison. They're very sort of comments. But I think the real risk here it will depend on how why the margin is between the two countilates of ruler winds, how wide is that margin between them. The other thing to bear in mind is that this might not be as outright coup as you would imagine in a nineties seventies kind of way that these are modern coups work in different ways than what we might well see is there's lots of point back point instability, and that is extremely concerning. Can we draw any conclusion about how populism is developing differently in Latin American countries, Well, it's always different, and I think Latin America we have a tendency to talk about it like it's one uniform. Play is obviously very very differently to different countries, different experiences with dictatorship. I think I have the things to point sales would be. One is to spare down this idea of the pink tide. You know, we have seen quite a lot about the bag in Chile, Peter in Colombia, there's a lot of talk of inside of ruler country are in Brazil now, the reality of these are all very different candidates. They're not on the right, but really what stands out for three of them is that they're anti incumbents. People are unhappy with the way things are going, the way economies are going in particulars, and I think also just to bear in mind that it's sorts of very different experience. When Will was first empower when there genuinely was addictively that's not really the case. Now. It's been operating from the assumption that Lula is going to win, but that's based on the polls and they were wrong. So could your ball scenarios day in power, Well, it would be unpertidented because since the advent of democraty, no one became second or did not win the first round one the second round. But we're in pretty unprecedented territory here. I think it's important to how little ruler has said about his actual agenda for when he governs, So the longer he has to wait for the next round for more details he provides, and that's less effective than just being the anti ball Canaro candidate. I think it's also notable how lukewarm some of the support has been for Lula. It's astounding, and you know, this is an election where democracy is that they can just hasn't really come across that way to a lot of people. For most people in Brazil, this is stilled an election that is about the economy, and despite you know, the reality being a lot less worthy, people still credit for scenario with quite a lot, and he'll be giving out quite a bit of cash hando that's just for the next round. So I think it's absolutely a possibility that is not to be discounted. Bloomberg Opinions Clara Ferrera Marquez. By the way, do get in touch. Comments and opinions always welcome at Foley Quinn on Twitter or email v Quinn at Bloomberg dot net. Now to the markets and another whippy week to start October, Bloomberg Market Senior Editor Mike Reagan joins, all right, Mike, Well, this week we saw stocks rebound, but it was more like perhaps a short squeeze, maybe a little bit of bargain hunting. But now we're seeing some kind of consolidation, though again it could still be just a reaction to headlines such as the opee class cuts. Where is Wall Street right now on the fourth quarter? Well, I think you're right now. This rebounding stocks we saw was a little bit of short squeeze ease, and also the drop had been so severe that valuations uh started looking attractive. But I think another thing that's really driving it is what I think of is sort of wishful thinking. Um that some of the central banks around the world are poised to be a little less aggressive with their interest rate increases. For example, a Reserve Bank of Australia only raised rates by a quarter of our percentage point. Many people were expecting much more, and prior to that, the Bank of England announced that it would start buying that country's bonds to sort of shure up the bond market there that was in turmoil. So the sense I think a lot of people have is that you know, the FED doesn't want to sort of break anything with their interest rate increases. If they tighten financial conditions enough that it causes problems in the financial system, that they will either pause or be less aggressive with rate hikes. And it is how we're wishful thinking, because I think that's possibly what it is right now. It very well could be true that the markets are right in sensing a less aggressive FED going forward, but we're just gonna have to wait and see if that's the case. I think it's just more hope that that's the case these days. Yeah, because when you think about it, Australia is a very different economy and interest rate increase in Australia affects a lot more people a lot faster. Housing is much more to do with variable rate mortgages than it is in the United States. And if you look at England, well there's a whole lot of idiosyncratic problems in England. So I guess I agree with you that maybe Wall Street is being a little bit hopeful in thinking that the FED is going to be more aggressive. If we think about what Mary Daily said this week, she pointed to real wage growth and pointed out that real wages are actually falling nine percent, And let's just have a listened to what she actually said. Unlike, it's a great time to be a worker. The workers have all this power. I don't see a lot of power if your real wages are following nine percent. And so that is sort of an example of why inflation is a corrosive If we let it go, it's a corrosive disease. So yeah, Mary Daily is the San Francisco FED, a labor economist. Her eyes are clearly on the labor market. But I mean she kind of speaks for many of the FED members these days. Yeah, I think that's an absolutely correct interpretation of her remarks. That a lot of the remarks really that we've heard from the FED um the one sort of limb that a lot of people grasp onto was Layle Brainer of the FED, very influential member the FED said something to the effect that they are monitoring for stresses in the financial system and that they don't want to aggravate anything like that. But I agree that most of the commentary from the FED has been look, inflation is our biggest problem. We are going to solve that before we worry about anything else, basically, So that is kind of why I think it's a little bit of wishful thinking in the market that they are poised to be a little bit less aggressive. But to get back to the you know, the start of the conversations has had fallen so much. You know, as of last week, we're setting new loads in the major benchmark index. Is evaluation started to look attractive again, assuming you know, you can put some faith into the earnings estimates for the rest of the year and next year, which, to be honest, not a lot of people are they expect those earnings estimates to come down. But it does sort of present an opportunity for many investors to come in and say, Okay, this might be the time to buy, even if it's just a sure term rebound. Because We've seen that all year stocks would fall very aggressively, then we'd have a very sharp rebound, and then they fall even further, set new loads, and then another rebound. So I think that rhythm big declines and then a fierce rebound have a lot of people trying to perhaps guess that this is another one of those occasions where we'll get a nice, strong rebound, even if it doesn't mean the bear markets over for good. There are these tactical opportunities to catch a bear market rebound in the middle of a nasty sell off like we've seen this year. Well, you mentioned companies and Helen of Troy, the maker of Oxe kitchen tools and hot tools, curling irons, basically the or of lots of things that people use around the house that are not extremely expensive. They said that consumers are delaying purchases and trading down. Are we seeing the beginning of what could be a more chilling earning season. I think we are, you know, and they are one of several companies, FedEx being another, Nike, CarMax. A lot of companies have sort of pre announced or at least given some sort of outlook for the rest of the year and for perhaps early next year, suggesting that yes, consumer demand is polling off. And not only that, this strong dollar, this relentless rise in the dollar we've seen all year, is very bad for companies that depend on overseas sales. You know, if you're selling products in Europe in euros and then converting it back two dollars, you're really, you know, getting hurt on that for an exchange conversion back in the dollars when it's this strong. So there are a lot of people racing for some disappointments in the earning seasons, especially from the outlook perspective, the forecast for the rest of the year and next year. That's why I say, you know, the valuation look cheap if you look at say the ratio of the SMP from fifteen les change or something now right, Yeah, yeah, it looks attractive when looking out at what is expected for next year's earnings, where the next twelve months earnings. But a lot of people are thinking, well, we can't really put a lot of faith in those earnings estimates right now because of all these issues, and that company you pointed out being a prime example of that, and and your identity in fact actually pointed out in one of his notes that you know that fifteen looks cheap, but we could actually see the four would be going down into the single digits. Mike, how is it all? Are the convulsions in the UK markets bleeding over to the US? You know, they definitely caused a lot of altility when Liz trust announced her economic plans and he saw that weakness in the pound and a rise in interest rates are very dramatic and disturbing rise in interest rates in the UK, so it did cause some added risk, the version in the US markets and global markets really, but they kind of snapped back from that because of the actions by the Bank of England and even the UK government softening their plans about the top tax bracket. So that's sort of reversal and sentiment towards England, I think is also one of the components of this rebound we saw in equity markets in the US this week. So it's certainly you know, all eyes are on England and the UK for the foreseeable future to see how all that shakes out, because it's a very crucial link in the global economy, financial center for most of Europe as well as you know, just a big, important economy that a lot of people pay closest attention to. If it looks like Britain is going into a deep recession, or that Britain won't be able to get it to act together in the next few quarters, will that have an impact in the media term on U S docks stand rates. I think that, you know, I think a lot of the economic damage that people are expecting Europe this winner and into next year a lot of authority priced into the stock market. You know, it's impossible to sit here and say exactly how much is priced in if all that damage is accurately reflected in the stock market, So you know, I think it could be another source of pain for the US stock market, but I don't think it'll be the type of thing to trigger, you know, a really severe further of the bear market. I think we have chriced in a lot of expected damage to the UK economy and the European economy as a whole, including whatever energy crisis might come up. Mentioning rates BMO. And this is a little circuitous, but BMOS as markets are trading on the thesis that good news is bad, So a good job sprint reinforces the FED stance that the economy can take a prolonged period of tighter policy, but that will end up hurting risk assets because it's good to bolster terminal rate estimates. Again a little circuitous, but it makes sense when you think about it. What we think when we look at where rates are. I mean, we've well backed off the four percent mark at this point. Yeah, well, I definitely agree with that notion that good news is bad news, and you know the obvious convers so that that bad news is good news. Um. The one interesting read we got on the US job market was that Joltz report, which is the number of job openings in the US. The number of openings has been off the charts high for a long time now, and that's sort of one of the things that has people concerned about inflation because if there's way more job openings than people looking for jobs, and obviously companies have to pay more to tract workers, that exacerbates inflation. But those job openings did come down quite a bit, by about a million in the latest report, so back down to about ten millions. Still elevated, but it's moving in that right direction, which normally would be considered, you know, obviously bad news fewer job openings in the US, But in this case, I do think it's a bad news is good news for the markets because it does alleviate at least a little bit of that concern about wage inflation feeding back into regular consumer price inflation. So it's far permission accomplished on that front by any means, but it is moving in the right direction. And I agree that bad news is good news is definitely a theme for the equity markets these days. And also the other thing I'd throw into the mix is credit Swiss, UH, the big the big investment bank. Now there's a lot of focus on UM their financial help at the moment, and I think that's also, you know, riching back into the sentiment that central banks perhaps may look at that type of situation with a major global investment bank struggling and think, Okay, maybe we're it's time to get a little less aggressive with our monetary policies. Again, it's a wishful thinking, it very well could be, but I do think it's It's part of the story on what has influenced markets that we've seen in last week. Bloomberg Market Senior Editor Mike Reagan that doesn't. For this week's Bloomberg Opinion, do get in touch. Love to hear all of your comments. I'm out of Anequit on Twitter or email me v Quinn at bloomberg dot net. And by the way, we're also available as a podcast on Apple, Spotify or your preferred platform. We're produced by Eric mollow Till next time on Bloomberg Opinion.

Bloomberg Opinion

Deeper conversations on the week's most significant developments. Tune in and join in!
Social links
Follow podcast
Recent clips
Browse 102 clip(s)