tv Bloomberg Markets Balance of Power Bloomberg October 5, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm EDT
westin. welcome to balance of power, where the world of politics meets business. we're going to head to washington on the confirmation of judge kavanaugh. presidential elections in brazil. the jobs numbers out this morning. let us start with you. i watched that vote. what happens next? >> a dramatic moment on the senate floor. everyone is watching susan collins from maine, the republican. she is going to announce at 3:00 p.m. how she will vote. she voted yes to advance last year's health care bill and voted no against the final bill. she could do the same for judge kavanaugh. friend, lisa murkowski, voted against this, one of the most dramatic moments we have seen this year. we are watching the senators
along with joe manchin and jeff flake. miss murkowski has said she will vote against it. what are the chances of that he will be defeated? it looks right now like it is going forward to confirmation. changesif susan collins her vote to vote no, he could still advance as long as joe manchin and jeff flake foe yes and vice -- both yes and vice president mike pence comes into rate vitae. we would need -- comes into break the tie. we would need two senators. david: thank you. we want to go to brazil. gounderstand there are does candidates who might make it through to the last round of voting. >> we have two front runners, doir bolsonaro and fernan haddad.
has are looking, bolsonaro 35% of votes. they will go on to a runoff at the end of the month. one further question, we do not know very much about the candidate. we do know what the workers party would do. do know something about polson's economic advisor who trained in the university of chicago. he wants to privatize everything. what we do not know is if jair bolsonaro will go along with these ideas. voted against ideas his economic advisor is now proposing. it is unclear how long this alliance will last and if this will move forward with investors -- with the agenda investors are hoping for. david: let us turn to job numbers. we have got carl riccadonna here. ,resident trump tweeted out
3.7% unemployment is the lowest number since 1969. >> this does highlight the continued tightening of slack in the market. not getting the wage pressure so that signals more room to run. said we can kudlow go lower in unemployment. carl: you know you are near the low point when you start to get wage pressures and that is not happening. if we look at the hurricane distortions and things like construction earnings and earnings for utility workers who are from out of state to do repairs. .7%e were .6% and increases. had they been more in line with the trend, you would have seen less wage pressure. -- what we are we
are talking about is the phillips curve. chairman powell saying you can increase wages without getting inflation. could amazon make a difference? effect, will see an november 1 is the day when they are changing the minimum wage. you could see some of that in the october data. other employees are struggling to compete. to be an economy wide impact. it is one sign of tightening labor conditions. amazon is not doing this out of goodwill. seeing this in retailers, fast food chains, across lower skill segments as they are trying to combat workforce turnover. david: one of the possibilities is that amazon might trigger a federal minimum wage increase. a lot of states have increased it. if we did get a federal increase, could that affect the economy? carl: that leads to more
pressures. as we see labor become more expensive, you see investments start to gain traction. this could start to answer this question over the last year's of why productivity is so low as workers become more expensive. david: thank you so much. we are going to check in on the markets. for that, we turn to emma. the red once is in again as stocks head for their slide since may. the dow jones down .8%, the s&p 500, .7%. the biggest issue is in the nasdaq, down 1.4%, a number of things impacting stocks. spat betweenthis the u.s. and china when it comes to trade has been deepening. it has not been a good week for tech.
got off to an indifferent start. tech,s after bad news for not least of course the report that china in full companies with hardware hacks and some of those names are the biggest names in tech. we are looking at apple and amazon falling, the biggest weights on the s&p 500. , i have got a chart for you. they have been hit by a couple of reports out from morgan stanley and deutsche bank, people concerned about the chipmakers. this is a chart of the philadelphia semiconductor index. a looks at daily changes over the past year. have40% of those moves been 1% or more as we have seen this tug-of-war between the bears and bulls pullout.
undecided republicans while joe manchin is also undecided. the gop will need two of four votes to confirm justice judge kavanaugh. arrested one man after he was accused of posting of thee address republican senators backing judge kavanaugh's confirmation on the internet. it has been a year since the new york times reported allegations of sexual predation against harvey weinstein. other peoplefive have been accused of sexual misconduct. according to data compiled by bloomberg. hundreds have been fired, most men. many have denied wrongdoing or questioned the motive of their accusers.
european and british officials are striking an upbeat tone about a deal. jean-claude juncker said negotiations are working day and night and the sides are hoping to make progress on the irish border in time for a summit. if all goes well, they could seal the deal on a divorce next month. global news 24 hours a day and at tic toc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm kailey leinz. this is "bloomberg." david: thanks. appear to relations be getting worse rather than better with vice president mike pence comparing china unfavorably to russia. >> beijing has mobilized covert actors and propaganda outlets to shift perception of chinese policy. a senior career member of our intelligence community told me, what the russians are doing pales in comparison to what china is doing across this country. an authoritycome
on geopolitics, richard haass, the president on the council of foreign relations. he has served as a special envoy for northern ireland. , the author of "a world in disarray." it does not seem to be getting better. you heard what the vice president said that russia is not as bad as china. is he correct? richard: i find it surprising. we know that russia did extensive efforts to undermine the efforts in this country. china is trying to promote positive views of china. it is using financial leverage. across thee and board effort to subvert american democracy. the speeches part of a larger broadside. it did not take place in a vacuum. given the economic pressure we
are putting on china. we slapped sanctions on china for buying arms from russia. to be an effort to take the relationship with china and put the pressure on. david: there are elements that are intermingled. one is democracy. the other is economic. they tend to get intermingled. on the economic front, bloomberg had this report that china has put chips in these motherboards that end up in computers so they can get access. does that surprise you? richard: somewhat only because it is such a brazen thing. idea they would risks so much of their commercial , they putip with us into play the idea of china as a central part of the supply chain. if we cannot trust china not to use that, that is going to spur talks,ement, the nafta
to creating new supply chains that are not dependent on non-american sources. i can see an effort to silo american production so that china plays a less pivotal role. david: how realistic is that? they are a large player worldwide and we could not go elsewhere. where could we go? richard: i am going to china. sense of how bad this relationship has turned? disagree with tariffs on china but almost everybody -- that theyis abuse their participation in the wto for word -- in ways it was never intended. intellectual property theft,
forced technology transfer, we are seeing a pattern. it is not clear the chinese have taken on board there is a rethink going about the integration of china. -- the issue, if we want to have a less china centric global economy, how viable is that? that is a question. david: we had the former u.s. ambassador to beijing and he likened this to an economic cold war. we have resulting's with canada and mexico and we are working with europe. version,end up in a just u.s. and china. richard: i do not think it would be just economic. a more frontal attack on chinese internal treatment of its own people. about theing concern south china sea, where the u.s. maintains the right of free
passage and overflight. there is a sleeper issue out there, which is taiwan. this has never been resolved. we are beginning to see signs of the fabric of how we finessed it is beginning to fray. i think it is possible it is not just economic but also a political and strategic confrontation. oryou had me on the show one two years ago, i would not have predicted it. david: taiwan is something we do not focus on enough. and those little islands, but they are not islands. taiwan is the sleeping dog we have left -- let live. we are poking it again. you hear rhetoric much more confrontational on taiwan. richard: when i was in government, we used to be worried people in taiwan would declare independence. what we are seeing is much less
tolerance of anything that changes the status quo and the united states is beginning to change the status quo. encouraging officials to travel to taiwan and we're looking at ways to penalize countries that downgrade relations with taiwan under pressure from the mainland. based on the politics in beijing and the mainland, i do not think there is any give on their part. i would put it the list of things people should start worrying about. david: let us talk about resolving this. we had john bolton saying that we need to have an approach that has such deterrent effect, the chinese would never think about doing this. area? get in the cyber war was the cold bipolar and we had attribution. we could retaliate against them. in cyberspace, we do not know
who is doing things. we cannot threaten to retaliate and we cannot. there are so many players. this is a world with billions of polls. this is far more difficult intellectually. this is more difficult than the challenge we faced with nuclear weapons. david: you went to northern ireland, which is difficult. how do we climb back down off of this #-- this? richard: we have got to. able to deal with climate, trade, cyber issues. it is in both country's interest. can we work it out? it will not be easy. a good sign that the secretary of state to be in china. we have got to deem it -- deep in this dialogue.
have got to institutionalize talks about how the united states and china are going to deal with domestic issues, with the relationship, with regional issues. this has got to be foreign-policy priority number one. david: let us turn to one other issue, iran. oil exports are going down. how is this going to be resolved? this is going to start hurting the economy. richard: it is hurting iran. set the oil price at $55 per barrel. prices because of smaller output are up to $80 per barrel. given higher prices and given what china and india might do, iran will be able to model through the sanctions. david: what might china do?
india will go along with the sanctions. we have not heard from china. how critical is china? richard: they will take some of it. they can do it through the spot market. no sanction is watertight. oil will findan its way to the market. over time, output will go up. they will pay something of a price. restart thely to nuclear program. do they think about putting pressure on neighbors? there are lots of things they can do in yemen, in saudi arabia. iran is not a country without tools. has toolscountry that to change what is going on in the middle east or the world. assume they're
going to absorb whatever pain we inflict. david: one of the ways the u.s. is making sanction so effective is by use of the financial system. is that dangerous? , people that too much will find other ways of making payments. tohard: people are about have a real-world experiment on this. the europeans are looking at a model. this is not happening in isolation. we have tariffs, sanctions, new sanctions. is the worldt going to be willing to have a dollar centric system which is an instrument of american foreign-policy? if we continue to weaponize at the dollar, the world will begin to find ways of becoming less dollar dependent. for havingvantages the dollar be so central, given our debt.
position a different if they world starts moving away from dollar denominated interaction. it is possible we are beginning to set that process in train. david: thank you for your time. that is richard haass, president of the council on foreign relations. still ahead, our stock of the hour and the power of a tweet. that is coming up. this is "bloomberg." ♪
short seller in richmond commission is doing incredible work, a week after settling this lawsuit, sarcastically referring to them as a short seller enrichment commission. david: and settling a lawsuit about whether he was trying to short sell. >> it is incredible. we have not heard from the sec but bloomberg did speak with an officer who said they could pull the deal. paiddition to the fine he for tesla and giving up the chairmanship. tesla is supposed to put in place independent directors. it looks like that has not happened. investors have not liked it. they have pulled their money. david: the deal gave him time to do things, including stopping tweeting. what happens next? >> it will be interesting to
see. we are waiting to see what the sec will do. investors are not happy. take a look at this chart. it shows you how the stock moved overnight when these came out and that the opening, you can see that downward move. social media sentiment does not seem to like it. david: he has the attention of social media. thank you. up next, the politics of the cabin not nomination. confirmation is far from certain. we will talk about how that might play in the midterms. this is "bloomberg." ♪ >> leverage has been building up over the last year or so.
administration. director larry kudlow joined bloomberg today and issued a warning about beijing. >> i think it's a good thing to be on guard because our chinese so-called friends have done a lot of mischiefs in that area. not least of which in addition to these chips and stealing of technology, cyberhacking. ark: kudlow remained noncommital saying, i want to underscore, maybe. there is a mystery involving the head of the international police organization interpol. bloomberg has learned france is looking into the disappearance hua. he vanished. now the south china morning post said he was taken for questioning and is being investigated. secretary of state mike pompeo is on his way back to north
korea. when he arrives he will be lacking leverage when he enters his scheduled meeting with kim jong un. his push for nuclear disarmament has been undermined by calls for sanctions relief and for trump calling for another summit with kim. the death from the erk quake has risen to 50. hundreds still trapped a week after the disaster. powered by more than 2,700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries, i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. david. david: it's friday which means in our update on the mid-term elections we get to think about a week in politics and quite a week it is. joining us is e. o'brien murray and his counterpart basel smikle. we just had the cloture vote.
listen to what the majority and minority leader said. >> president trump's nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to the united states supreme court will go down as one of the saddest, most sorted chapters in the long history of the federal judiciary. >> today, we can send a message to the american people, that some core principles remain unfettered by the partisan passions of this moment. david: so, basil, not coming closer together. put that to one side, how do you think this will come up? even after right now, after the cloture vote, it's still open. we have jeff flake. murkowski is not so clear. basil: and susan will announce her decision which think will be yes. at the end of the day i think he will be confirmed and that
will send shock waves on the left and right, quite frankly. i think democrats have been incredibly engaged, motivated. we have seen that throughout this entire mid term election cycle. but that does not mean that republicans won't be engaged on the right either. that's what i sort of tell my counterparts on the right. that we have to be mindful of the outrage that republicans have felt through this process. i think it's unwarranted but they feel it. and they're going to be energized as well. there is a net positive for democrats but we have to be mindful what's happening on the other side. david: who issues -- will he be confirmed? is it a net positive for republicans? >> what democrats did was won the week by pushing it off at this point. had the vote taken place a week ago with a lot of other color common tears going on this week it have been a much cleaner vote. you said it's the end of the week. the vote is tomorrow. i don't know if you -- they
vote at 10:30 in the morning and vote may not be finished until sunday when he can fly back from his daughter's wedding. you can have democrats to go and vote which means he doesn't have to vote. asel: there are -- there is -- basil: there is time to change his mind. david: democrats have been motivated. there are some thoughts the democrats could be complacent. democrats were more enthusiastic than republicans but there's other reporting, there are polls being done saying that might be eliminated. n.p.r. with more is got together and did a poll. there had to be a 10-point enthusiasm now two points. basil: i think it favors us. what i tell my peers on the left is, number one, where republicans historically over the last 10 years were focused
on gerrymandering and flipping state legislatures, they are focused on judges because having trump in office is the best opportunity to do that, number one. number two, not every republican trump supporter is in charlottesville, standing behind him at rallies. the silent majority, we didn't think were there was there. o'brien: the motivation for independents at times are supreme court, 3.7%. david lowest in our lifetimes, back to 1969. the tax cuts that went through. all these things way back and we sat and talked about nafta and trade. what does it mean in other states, iowa? david: it was all about tax cuts and the economy. i don't hear anybody talking about it than on bloomberg. people talking about kavanaugh. o'brien: the vote is taking
place tomorrow. you see the motivation some ads. they are also talking about insurance across this country too. health insurance. they are talking about numerous issues at a local level. that's what we don't see when we sit here in new york. basil: we are not sure whether they will feel the benefits of it today, the tax cuts. if they don't feel those benefits now or to some employment to some extent, they won't go to the polls and vote that way. they will vote out of emotion and the emotion is around kavanaugh. o'brien: the challenges, it happened and they are used to it. david: that may be true. you've seen poll after poll that says it's unfavorable on the tax cuts across the country, it's an unfavorable. o'brien: that part is messaging who got the tax cuts and who benefit from them. when you start looking back in history and it happened so quickly, the companies that gave bonuses, the companies that gave pay raises and the
tax cuts were greater. this happened back when it kicked in. people need to be reminded of that. word. basil, last sorry. put aside even november 6, what are the long-term effects of this kavanaugh nomination? what are the lingering effects going to be five years down the road, 10 years down the road? basil: we had one saying he is not -- david: john paul stevens. have you lost women? o'brien: no. if you talk to independent women, they are coming back to us. david: i gave you the last word. o'brien: thank you. david: president trump rebranded nafta but it's not just about dairy and auto parts. we will show you how digital trade fits in. that's coming up next. this is bloomberg.
david: you're watching "balance of power." i'm david westin. donald trump said he had much to be proud of on trade. digital trade. president trump: it will be the most advanced trade deal with provisions on the digital economy, patents, very important. david: ok. digital trade may not have been people's radar screens but importance with u.s. digital economy growing. meone is martin schroeter, i.b.m. head of sales.
martin, thank you for being here. what do you mean by digital trade? it's not a phrase we hear that often. martin: when we think of digital trade, maybe it's easiest to talk about the componentry. think of the infrastructure it takes for computers and networks and software to interact and then put on top of that just the transactional value of things that are going across borders when you're ordering things digitally and add to that again all of the ontent that might be traveling digitally. they are a subtangs driver of economic growth. david: does it include the hardware and software? martin: and the content. and the content. the infrastructure, the transactional value and the content. in the case of media, you have a lot of content that's moving. david: so you have three principles you realliess spouse going forward to make sure we -- you really espouse going orward to make sure -- prevent
data localization, protect algorithms and source code. permit free flows of data across borders. martin: we have the digital equivalents of tariffs and how it will slow down clients of big companies that want to operate globally and impede their ability to optimize their pply chains and logistical processes. our review is and it should be permitted unless, unless there is a strong, strong reason. and the way, for instance, the u.s. m.c.a. was written, it does have some exclusions but they were written very well and narrow. permit free flow of data unless something is explicitly eliminated. second is this idea of data localization. it's a little bit of a false protection, if you will. a number of countries are
debating this idea, well, we'll have to make sure the data stays here. the bad actors in the world, they don't look at the maps. they don't know why the boundaries are. the idea if you keep it in your own country or limit where it can go, it's really a false sense of security. the bad actors will go wherever they need to. it will create a lot of inefficiencies and a lack of productivity if you're forced to store data in certain spots. and then finally, the idea of opening up source code and the idea of forcing companies to expose source code is a really, really bad idea as a condition of doing business. we always proteched our source code. we think of source code and of rithms as the equivalent 20th century design. we feel very strongly that making source code -- requiring source code to be given up we're losing control of that as a condition of doing business
is a really, really bad idea. david: draw the comparison with trading goods. if you go back to world war ii, we were trading, tariff and nontariff. we had gatt and w.t.o. to increase the free flow of goods, where are we with digital trade? are we back in the days of 1947 or not there yet? how much restriction is there? martin: i think we're in a reasonable spot because it's a discussion that is happening in a number of localities. so, i'll use the u.s. m.c.a. as an example. that has some really powerful provisions on all three of our principles. so it does permit the free flow of data, as i said. it does not require data localization as a condition. it doesn't require you to give up your source code. in fact, it actually goes one step further and doesn't require you to give up your algorithms as a business.
where are we today, we are seeing lots and lots of good instances. t.p.p. had some of these as well. what we're not seeing, though, and what we're asking for is everyone to come together to let's get one global, one called an we've idea, international digital economy agreement. david: on two issues trump said. china is not good on this subject. that they are in fact restrictive, they do require to give you source code. number one. number two. he said this u.s. m.c.a. is really progressive, state of the art. is he right? martin: absolutely progressive and state of the art. t.p.p. had many of these. t.p. pfrlt when it was started, -- t.p.p., when it was started, no one was talking about algorithms. the m.c.a. included that. the issue around protecting your rights and your source code, we faced that and we've always protected our source
code. we never gave up our source code to do business anywhere. we wouldn't. david: keep i.b.m. from being fully competitive anywhere in the world? martin: it hasn't to date. where we have operations all over the world, we protect our source code, we protect our assets and we do the same with our clients. we help our clients protect their data. this issue is more of a policy issue. we need to get -- so there is a practice to protect our own things. there is a practice where we help our clients and our clients have to make sure their data is encrypted and they're doing all the right things to protect their assets. we are on a policy point. let's have a policy that supports this as well. let's have a policy that doesn't require anybody to give up source code or give up access. david: i said that the digital economy is growing four times as fast as the other economy in the united states. we saw a mckenzie study that said essentially digital trade around the world is like 35%, 40% of all trade at this point,
growing fast. go out five years, 10 years, will it overtake trade in goods? will it increasingly be we need to focus on digital trade rather than trade in goods? martin: oh, absolutely. we can do and we can help ourselves. we, all of us, can help ourselves by getting these kinds of policies. what we see in addition to the digital economy growing, the job growth that drives the digital economy are also the kinds of jobs of the future. so we, in i.b.m., we're working on making sure people are trained for those kind of jobs. making sure we're creating that next work force. that's important. but in order to get the full benefit we have to have these kinds of policies to drive that kind of job growth. everybody is interested. forget about being political. every politician, after administration, every government is interested in making sure -- every administration, every government is interesting in making sure they create jobs for their own citizens. david: from your understanding, who are the countries doing this best and who are the -- i
won't say bad actors -- but the ones that have most impediments? martin: everyone is still debating. in the u.s., for instance, you used the statistic from 2006 to 2016, the digital economy grew four times faster. we saw labor print this morning in terms of unemployment. while you wouldn't connect those directly, u.s. has embraced technology as well as anybody else in the world, has driven a lot of jobs, a lot of job growth and a lot of value creation. so the u.s. has embraced technology and has an ability now to lead again as we go into the next round of digital trade discussions to try to lead the world into getting a global agreement on how we want to interact. david: that sounds like a very exciting new world. does it have ramifications for equality in the sense, you work at an assembly line, you could have a really good life. are we saying goodbye to that
because you have people who are very highly trained, very skilled, making a lot of money and companies -- but it is leaving some of the rest behind? martin: our view is different. our view, in fact, the jobs of the future, while they will change to reflect the things we can do and the use of technology, the jobs of the future aren't necessarily all going to require a college degree. in fact, we have programs which we're scaling around the world that essentially look like a six-year high school, if you will, which allow you to come out, then, to compete for those digital jobs. we hire them ourselves as well. we will make you relevant in the work force. we have those programs today. we think they are the right things to do and we don't see -- we don't see a college degree required for every job on the planet. although, again, every job will be affected by the advance of technology. david: martin, thank you so much. really fascinating. a lot to learn. martin, senior vice president of i.b.m. global markets.
david: a former barack obama operative has emassed amateur turs, seeking to uncover dirt for re-election. we're joined by the reporter behind the story, joshua green. josh, as i say, it's a fascinating story. take us into the life of this young man who has got this virtual army. josh: well, as you say, fascinating guy. john. young, african-american male. was a researcher on barack obama's 2008 campaign. actually left politics after that. he worked briefly in the treasury department on the
financial crisis. then left and went into banking. he was an investment banker at jpmorgan was so shaken by donald trump's election in 2016 that he quit his job and he started this group which is known in the trade as a dark money group. it has anonymous donors. we don't know who they are. he's taken this and organized these resistant volunteers. 16,000 of them to do opposition research. essentially to dig for dirt on republican candidates both in the house and senate and also in state house races across the country with the idea of deploying that. what we in politics call an october surprise over the next couple weeks to try to prejudice voters against republican incurveents. david: you read the story, he has extraordinary people who are moonlighting. accountants, lawyers, all sorts of people who spend their spare time doing this. josh: it's an amazing story. one of the phenomenon that has risen up is this large
anti-trump, anti-republican movement called the resistance. we've seen the women's march. we've seen these people out knocking on doors and running for office. his insight was, there was one area where these people weren't being used and that's investigating candidates' backgrounds. what he did was kind of put out a quiet call to a lot of these resistant members, many of whom have remarkable professional experience. he has russian translators, forensic accountants, you know, pouring into public records, public disclosure filings from these candidates. in some cases arrest records, combing through their social media history, finding anything that would be damaging in the heat of a re-election campaign. that's what we have coming up a month from tomorrow. david: josh, i understand he's very devoted to this, very committed to this. a quote in your piece, what we're doing what the russians did but we will do it with real americans and real news, not fake news. how do you know that?
some of the way they use the information is feed it to journalists. some of the things i may may be reading in my newspaper may come from an opposition research group. josh: opposition research is part of the political trade that most people out in the world don't know about. but candidates for a long time -- this isn't a new innovation. candidates for a long time have had investigators who dig into the backgrounds of politicians, the most famous example that comes to mind, of course, was hristopher steele, the ex-mi-6 who had the dossier of president trump and his doings in russia. what burton has done is essentially crowdsource, crowdsource this work. it feeds into him and he in turn can pass it onto local reporters in these races and have an effect on the outcome. david: 16,000 people. congratulations. you will want to read this in bloomberg "businessweek."
he's josh green, the reporter behind it. we'll turn to our favorite video. prime minister may dancing to abba as -- does chef the confidence and will? boy, she showed confidence, dancing her stuff. she kept dancing on the stage for a while. ok. coming up, real yield," the show dedicated to fixed income. we'll discuss the big rise we've seen in bond yields this week. a big, big week in bond yields. live from new york, this is bloomberg.
jonathan: from new york. this is "bloomberg real yield." jonathan: solid revisions and a 48-year low unemployment rafmente treasury bears having their moment and some. yields breaking out for multiyear high and junk bonds looking rock solid. spread grinding down. we bring with a big issue. >> this is a report that's consistent with being pretty close to full employment.