tv Bloomberg Surveillance Bloomberg September 29, 2020 7:00am-8:00am EDT
♪ >> worst-case scenario is a double-dip recession. it is not our base case, but it is worst-case. >> investors expressing their views are starting to show more bearish sentiment. >> rates maina verizon. that is an -- rates may never rise. that is entirely possible. >> the unemployment stats are everywhere. >> september has been a month of consolidation, and nothing october is going to be the same. it is going to be bumpy. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz. jonathan: from new york and london, for our audience worldwide, good morning, good morning. this is "bloomberg surveillance ," live on bloomberg tv and radio. alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. it is fight night in cleveland, ohio. the debate in about 14 hours' time. quite the spectacle lined up. 1960you go right back to when this world changed with tv and radio, and what we saw with
kennedy/nixon. i don't know if we will see element of that, but you will see way over the 80 million four years ago for clinton and trump. the interest is ginormous. jonathan: it is a spectacle. it is golden tv. does it have consequences? that is the question. monmouth university come out with a pole that said just 3% they are very likely to hear something that will impact their eventual vote choice. we will all be watching. will it have consequences? tom: let to get the theater out of the way right now. this is very important. this is case western reserve university, one of our great science and engineering institutions, and the richest , secretary 1800s hayes to roosevelt. this is the history of dow chemical as well. and in the 20th century, it is a
city that has been flat on its back for a decade -- for decades. joe biden if can speak to these people, and president trump as well. jonathan: in d.c., there is still something to talk about away from cleveland. apparently there's going to be talks of some sort on and what -- down in washington. lisa: house democrats proposed a relief plan, and nancy pelosi and stephen mnuchin will be talking about this. the democrats did concede some aid will bew much given to state and local governments. the u.s. annual treasury market conference will begin. you can see volumes in trading absolutely surged, and now they are down to nothing. they are going to be talking about what can be done to prevent further volatility like what we saw earlier in the year. at 9:00 p.m., i don't know if you are aware, there is a u.s.
presidential debate in cleveland. but to your point, when you said only 3% might be decided as a result of this debate or influenced by it, this is such a close call. this election could potential he come down to a hanging chad type of situation. 3% matters. jonathan: that is the excitement for later today. get a coffee, a red bull, whatever your poison, and take a look at the market. equity futures doing absolutely nothing. the s&p 500 unchanged on futures. in foreign exchange, euro-dollar $1.17. there's the snooze that is the treasury market. i know you love it. 0.6528% is your yield on an unmoved 10 year treasury. tom: i would note as we struggle for dynamics that the real yield has come back a little deeper negative in the last number of tos, from a -0.90%, now down
-0.97%. futures again just flat, flat. jonathan: let's bring in mike pyle, like rock mobile chief investment -- mike pyle, blackrock global chief investment strategist. what is the connection between this and the election just weeks away? mike: the approach with the debate is to recognize at some level, to your 3% point earlier, the polling in this race has been very stable in spite of extremely big fundamental news in the united states. i don't think we are expecting a ton of market volatility on the back of the debate. that said, fundamentally, whether we look out to the presidential election, look to lastgaspke maybe theulus, things like china, reasons we see for volatility continue to persist. tom: how do you frame for q1 and q2 of 2021?
you look out past this derby, then what? mike: we think that looking out past this matters a lot, but also it is important to stay with and i on the long-term -- with an eye on the long-term. depending on the election result, let's just take two examples, the unified government under biden result versus a divided government hunter biden -- government under biden, that could have pretty significant repercussions. from an asset allocation perspective, we think it could matter a lot. lisa: how do you position ahead of this election, given the degree of uncertainty depending on the outcome? mike: we think at the top level, on the directional risk, we would point investors to the long-term term. over the long term, elections
haven't tended to matter a ton at the index level. but looking beneath the hood, we see real opportunities for a change of leadership in the equity market, depending on what we see in november. for example, going back to that point i made around reflation, and a democratic sweep scenario, the likelihood that we could see a rotation away from some of the mega caps toward the more bottom-up rally led by small and mid-cap, that looks to be a much more pronounced likelihood in that type of scenario versus some of the others. jonathan: it seems to me that if it is a republican sweep, i democratic sweep, you still sell treasuries. is that the case? mike: this is one of the cases where the precise configuration matters. in a world where we see divided government, where fiscal policy may be considerably less pronounced, where you could see premature retrenchment on fiscal policy like we saw 10 to 12 years ago, that is a world where
the treasury market be subdued and pinned closer to zero for quite some time. in a more reflationary scenario, and a more united government, that is a world where we expect curve steepening, some breakeven widening, and treasuries as a less attractive allocation more quickly than not. jonathan: right now is a difficult moment for investors because we are confronted with the near-term risk, and the near-term risk for many people is a contested out lump -- is a contested outcome which lasts months. it is clear at this point, consensus view, what matters is not who wins, but that somebody wins. then we start to think about who that somebody is and what they stand for what do you thing about that for investors right now? mike: we clearly think that the risks around a contested election scenario are material, and investors are appropriately
looking to that. this is going to be an election held under conditions of historic challenge with the pandemic going on. so what we are telling investors is to brace for an election week rather than an election day. that said, looking out over the longer horizon, we think ultimately, investors are going to be rewarded by staying invested through that volatility and looking to some of these underlying themes we have been discussing that are going to be much more long-lasting than just what happens november 3 and the period of days or weeks beyond that. tom: where in the income statement do you frame equities? do you walk down the income statement, or is it just impossible to guess forward one year, two years, three years? mike: a little bit both and. the conventional wisdom has been a little too focused on the bottom line when talking about u.s. equities, a little too focused on the tax impact, the
potential regulatory impact in some of the scenarios. it is going to be very important to look to the top line as well. we think a world where there is much more ample fiscal impulse, reflationary push, that could lift topline pretty much across the board in the u.s. economy and really balance out that bottom line view. lisa: does that mean that you don't see for off in some of -- you don't see froth in some of the tech sectors and sectors going gangbusters? none of that is froth to you? mike: i think what we would say is that those are a set of exposures that have been benefited by some pretty powerful macro trends. he ratcheting down of discount rates, the transformations that the coronavirus stock has unleashed. that said, i think there are scenarios where we could see higher taxes, more significant
regulation, in particular focused on the technology and mega cap sector around antitrust, what have you. those are the types of scenarios that, looking ahead to the election, could change market leadership in terms of taking the wind out of the sails of some of those exposures, but also potentially reorienting elsewhere. jonathan: good to get you on the program, especially this morning ahead of the debate. equity futures not doing a whole lot. what has got my attention, and many others here in london, is the single name volatility. we talked about this, the swing in hsbc in yesterday session. it was a catalyst, but to see wet stock move 8%, 9% -- have seen it with apple, to move 4%, 5% and 24 hours on what? nothing. it is the volatility on the surface playing out. tom: it is playing out. there's huge product excitement about the 5g. whether that is true or not, i don't know.
to me, it is the shocking valuations of some of the european equities, particularly the banking establishments like commerzbank, like edges bc, that when you get -- like hsbc, that when you get good news, you get a pop off of those shocking low valuations. jonathan: who do you think the bar is lower for later this evening? many of the pundits are saying the president has lowered the bar for the former vp joe biden. tom: the bar is lowest for kevin cirilli because he's going over to the rock and roll hall of fame to see the doobie brothers and having a nap. two of "the new york times," their tech story, you really wonder how that -- there tax story, you really wonder how that percolates and changes the first questions for vice president biden -- for
vice president biden. jonathan: equities just inching higher on the s&p 500. from new york and london, alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. heard on bloomberg radio, seen on bloomberg tv, this is bloomberg. ♪ ritika: with the first word news, i'm ritika gupta. president trump and joe biden go head-to-head for the first time tonight in the opening presidential debate in cleveland. the president has unwittingly done biden a big favor. he has lowered biden's expectations for performance, by painting biden as sleepy, doddering, and senile. that may lower the bar for many who have not seen him since the convention. house democrats are making another run at a coronavirus stimulus package. they released a scaled-back $2.2 trillion proposal. the legislation is designed to move along talks between house speaker nancy pelosi and
treasury secretary steven mnuchin. the house could vote on it this week on it this week. more coming out from "the new york times" on the president's tax revelations. it says "the apprentice" of trump a false image as a real estate mogul. the white house calls it a hit piece. the u.s. may target more than a dozen banks and declare the entire sector off-limits. the goal is to cut off iran's economy from the outside world, except in limited tech starters. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on bloomberg quicktake, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm ritika gupta. this is bloomberg. ♪
distributing it, with hundreds of millions of doses to follow very quickly. we are ready to go logistically. we have the military lined up and some incredible people just waiting to have it. over 100 million doses will be available by the end of the year. jonathan: the president of the united states. you can expect covid-19 to be of the list at the debate in cleveland, ohio. good morning to you all. alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. here's the price action. get a coffee. wake up. get a chamomile tea and go back to bed. equities not doing much. in the bond market, we're doing nothing. you have a weaker dollar through the bulk of g10, including the euro. again, $1.1709, and up around 0.4%. just a bit of dollar weakness this tuesday morning. -0.96% on the real yield.
right now on the politics of the moment and the debate, our kevin cirilli in cleveland, our chief washington correspondent. i want to go to the tax uproar. it's got to come up early in the debate. the single distinction to me seems to be the mystery of the loans and liabilities that the president has right now, and numerous people, including tim o'brien yesterday, talking about them as a national security risk. is it incumbent on the president to come out tonight and begin to outline what those loans and liabilities are? kevin: i think, based upon my reporting, it is largely predictable for how nominee biden and president trump will handle the issue of "the new york times" tax return story. , the president speaking to reporters -- the president, speaking to reporters, has dubbed this fake news.
he's argued that he has pay taxes. in contrast, the democrats are raising concerns guarding not just how much the president paid in taxes, but also the national security element in terms of the entanglement of a president of the united states having entanglements with other foreign powers. that is something that house democrats, as well as democrats and the senate, have been looking into for several years, but again, i think we know what each side is going to say. we had odd campaigning, odd conventions. is this where we start to see surprise policy announcements? ohio is struggling is a battleground state. does biden come out and surprise tonight with a plan? kevin: president trump has the task ahead of him in terms of trying to recover amongst independent voters his handling of the coronavirus pandemic. in contrast, vice president biden has the task in front of
him of trying to come out and say he would not be the holden to democratic-socialist's on the economic front. both are the two bars that sides must clear. in addition, the supreme court also going to be a crucial part of this debate, and should the debate wait into geopolitical matters, china and the handling of china is also an opportunity for nominee biden and president trump to really offer contrasting views for how they would handle america on the world stage. jonathan: just briefly, to return to that monmouth university poll we mentioned at the top of the hour, just 3% of people say they are very likely to hear something that will impact their eventual vote choice. who are they talking to tonight? who are the 3%? kevin: they are talking to cleveland, ohio. they are talking to southwest pennsylvania. morning, and this
abc news/"washington post" poll has biden leading in pennsylvania by 10%. they are also talking to parts of florida and arizona. forasmuch is the pundits have said that debates don't matter, the fact is they do matter. this is a hallmark of american democracy, and in addition, there are still undecided voters. this is a 90 minute boat in which the moderator, chris wallace, will really be taking these nominees to task on a host of different policy visions. it is not just americans who will be tuning in tonight. around the world, this is an opportunity for folks to really see the direction that the country is going to be headed into. and finally, on the notion of undecided voters, should one of these candidates collapse, as both sides suggested the other will, this is a bar that has to be cleared in the sense that if they can't take on one another, how do they expect to take on the issues that a president
faces an office? lisa: you commented before your segment about how shut down cleveland is. it is not alone. cities across the country still shut down. is this is going bankrupt. the economy very much in the forefront. do you expect to hear anything from president trump tonight about how he feels about the $2.2 trillion plan put forward by house democrats and into the lucy? do you expect -- and 90 policy? do you ask -- and nancy pelosi? do you expect them to respond to that? kevin: you don't have to look at the vix to figure out how volatile this situation is. you just have to head to downtown cleveland, where only a handful of restaurants and bars are open. this is a city that is largely much more shut down that even washington, d.c. this is a point where they pandemic and the economic response are juxtaposed. as a result of that, look for
biden to really hammer home on the pandemic and the president to hammer home on a reopening issue. he will be traveling with senator tom cotton, republican from arkansas, i rising star within geopolitical circles, as it relates to china, and the handling of u.s. trade policy. in contrast to that, nominee biden has largely been preparing in earnest since thursday, i'm told by some of his campaign staffers. so two very different preparation styles, but the stakes very high for both. but especially for president trump, who has been, according to the polls, trailing. jonathan: did kevin cirilli just get the vix into his reporting. . ? ? are you proud -- reporting? are you proud, tom? lisa: tom keene said he had low expectations for you, kevin. i don't. i have high expectations, and i
expect you to be out for 24 hours and come back tomorrow. tom: tomorrow morning. kevin: i always know that lisa has my back. [laughter] tom: the reason he is so happy is the cleveland browns are worse than the philadelphia eagles. lisa: what are you drinking, tom? jonathan: kevin, great to see you. get some rest. kevin: thank you very much. jonathan: isn't that the most import question? tom keene, what are you drinking? tom: the joy of my arsenal coffee this morning, against the my deliverable. lisa: all right -- the mighty liverpool. lisa: all right. they lost. i understand. i think a team, and they lose. tom: liverpool is good. liverpool is like the boston red sox. lisa: so what are you drinking, bloody mary? tom: it's like a standard beer from cleveland. jonathan: it only took 25 minutes for this show to go off the rails.
jonathan: from new york and london, for our audience worldwide, good morning tea while. this is "bloomberg surveillance ," live on bloomberg tv and radio. alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. two hours away from the opening bell, here's your price action. equity futures taking a dip even 0.1%. not the euro-dollar reclaiming a $1.17 handle. a weaker dollar story through much of g10. the bond market, we keep joking about it, but it has really important consequence is for people trying to put together a portfolio. ten-year,the u.s. unmoved through the shakeout of the last several weeks. that present a lot of problems for people who try to find that diversifier. tom: i am so glad you bring this up.
john normand was brilliant this morning on this lack of anchor. i brought up mr. dalio and mr. prince, and how they have gone in search for new anchors. john normand said this is fraught with risk. these are not equivalents to full faith and credit anchors. jonathan: as lisa mentioned yesterday, there is a story out there at the moment that may be a new position is just cash. for all of that cash in money market funds that people thought would be deployed into risk assets, i do wonder how much of it will just sit there. tom: it is a wall of money as well. it is a huge wall of money, even as the wall of worry with fits and starts has built up as well. when we have someone of market excellence on, maybe we ought to get right to them. eric stein is at eaton vance of boston. his title is fancy, codirector of global income. but i would point out is eaton
vance and their invention of a lot of municipal bond or fully management, their invention of being tax managed in portfolio management, obscures how well they have on the balance front -- they have done on the balance front. there balance fund has been asked ordinary. tell me about the balanced approach right now. how feasible is it? thanks for having me on. i thought the comments in the intro were interesting, referencing john normand at j.p. morgan, his comments on the fact that the 10 year treasury hasn't moved even though we have seen this risk off the past couple of weeks. yesterday was a risk on moving markets. so i think investors are really saying, what are we going to get? are we going to get portfolio diversification from treasuries going forward? it doesn't seem like it. ab investors will move to other assets. i think chinese government bonds could be something interesting
as a portfolio hedge. i completely agree with you, they are not the same as u.s. treasuries, and i wouldn't want people to think that, but i think when you take a look at global fixed income markets, that looks interesting. the folks at the old eaton vance would fall off their chairs if they heard you talking about chinese paper as an alternative. what do conservative clients do if they can't nuy the nominal yield -- if they can't buy the nominal yield? eric: good question. isthe u.s., i thing it another option. as you mentioned before, cash is an alternative because it gives you so-called dry powder to jump in and buy assets when they get cheap. that said, we have a fed that is explicitly trying to inflate over 2%. there's been back and forth on how much, how committed are they, but with cash rates that are essentially zero, keeping in
cash is going to give you negative real yields going forward, so there is clearly option value in the cash, but you are not protected against inflation. you are not helping your future purchasing power directly by investing that way. jonathan: clearly, the last couple of weeks have demonstrated and reinforced to the argument that there is not much downside left to 10 year treasury yields, but let's question the consensus at the moment. in germany, i know a very different backdrop for inflation expectations, but we do have a 10 year nominal yield of negative around about 50 basis points. at the policy level in the united states, the fed doesn't want to go there. what's to say we won't see it in the market? eric: sure, it is possible if the fed buys more, if the fed commits to yield curve control out to the 10 year point. if we were having this conversation 10 years ago, we would think it is crazy talking about negative yields in
germany. i think completely discounting it in the u.s. would be wrong as well, but i think this most recent episode certainly is illustrative of the fact that in the short term, we are going to see -- i don't think we are going to see treasury yields go near their. wants real yields lower, not nominal yields so low. via sleeve they don't want nominal yields so high, but i think there in kind of a sweet spot. lisa: i want to go back to what you were talking about, that chinese bonds are a haven investment increasingly. you are not alone in thinking this. blackrock recently saying this is a good diversifier, and you are seeing that second-biggest market in the world owned by foreign ownership. how safe is this? are you investing in the renminbi, on clipping the coupon with a dollar hedge basis? how does this work? eric: you could do it either way.
you could not hedge and take the room and be risk, or you could hedge and take out that currency risk. i think it is a good diversifier from the perspective of 2018 we -- of 2018. we saw a selloff. then you go to 2019, and china was doing better. there yields were going up as global bond yields were going down. i think you get some diversification benefit. it can go both ways. if you look at what has happened since the pandemic, yields have backed up significantly while u.s. government bond yields -- lisa: how much is this a bet that the pboc will continue to offer enough stimulus to suppress yields even as growth accelerates? eric: fairpoint. part of the reason yields have gone up is that from a relative perspective, the pboc hasn't been as similar to -- as
stimulative as many global central banks. but if you are a u.s. dollar-based investor investing in local chinese bonds, to the extent they are little tighter from a monetary perspective, if yields go up a get -- go up a bit, from a dollar-based investment perspective, you are better off with the currency component. tom: eric stein with us of eaton vance. i miss spoke earlier of mr. dozer. one ofs dozer gardner, the founders of eaton vance. companies still a conservative eaton vance-like value play? eric: for specific questions, i will defer to our growth team. tom: nobody is watching, come on, eric. eric: we certainly have conservative investments. we also have investments for
more growth oriented investors. when you break down the equity market, you are exactly right. can almost bifurcate between tech stocks and everything else. but if you get a bounce, the diversification perspective, at some point we will get a cyclical rotation in the economy, and he will see ian equities and other parts of the u.s. equity market that are more sensitive to the cyclicals pick up relative to tech, but that ultimately has a place in the past. tom: is growth a yield alternative? eric: with government bond yields as low as we have talked about throughout most of this conversation, you are having income from stocks as another alternative to get income as opposed to just from bonds. so i do think when you pull base rates globally to zero, investors need income. there is still generational mobile band -- generational
demand for income, so i thing that is a good place to be. jonathan: eric, great to catch up today. send our best to the team, please. eric stein, eaton vance codirector of global income. i thought eric had something to say there at the end, but clearly they killed his mic. let's get to the markets. futures down four on the s&p 500. tom: jon, you ok? jonathan: i'm ok. one thing we haven't talked about today, the fiscal plan down in d.c. i want to try and understand whether either side actually once a deal or whether they are trying to position themselves for the electorate to say that we are not the obstacle to a deal. i find it really strange that both sides are saying we want to talk when the republicans have passed a bill for $650 billion, or at least tried to. democrats are looking at $2.2 trillion, and the administration
is somewhere in between. does that mean we get a deal, tom keene? tom: i read about it carefully this morning. this all came up late last evening. mnuchin and pelosi scheduled to speak today. i get the republicans, maybe they have a power selection, but for the democrats, it is clear as day, they have democrats in tough house races that are begging the speaker to do something. to me, that is a distention right now. jonathan: that is what i am getting at. is this a party that actually once a deal, or a party -- actually wants a deal, or a ts to be seenn looking like they want to deal for the electorate? lisa: clearly this is a move to say we have a deal that we want past, and it is republicans that are the obstacle. the question is, how realistic is it?
president trump said he would be ok with a $1.1 trillion deal, bigger than the skinny deal. will he concede to a little bit more in order to support the economy ahead of the election? i do think that the chances have gone up a little bit if you read the analyst papers, but it is a political stunt to some degree. jonathan: this matters from a market perspective because if it is just happy talk and just about politics, then it is just about politics because i have seen people get excited and start to thing about markets because either side is saying is it -- saying it is a good time to talk to each other. but if it is just politics, that shouldn't have any implication whatsoever. tom: we may hear about it tonight. you may get real promises of plans coming down in january or february. if i'm elected, free beer is a basic idea. we were talking about it off-camera. the urgency across this nation to get this fixed now is dramatically heightened in the last two weeks. jonathan: we can throw in the
u.k. and the whole of europe into the mix. coming up in the next hour, joe quinlan of merrill and bank of america private bank. this is bloomberg. ♪ ritika: with the first word news, i'm ritika gupta. tonight in cleveland, president trump and joe biden face-off in the first presidential debate. only a tiny fraction of voters say the debate is likely to change their minds. in a new poll from monmouth university, 87% say they are not likely to be swayed by the debate, and 3% say it is very likely. the global death toll from the coronavirus has now killed over one million. a researcher at the university of melbourne says the actual fatality could be double that. he says the fibrous -- the virus's ability to transmit through those that show no signs of having the disease leads to
actively hire cases. the blaze in california has caused hundreds of thousands of evacuations. the fire is located north of san francisco and has burned more than 36,000 acres. ae u.k. could be facing substantial tax increase because of the coronavirus, according to the institute for fiscal studies. the influential research group says it is possible that government spending will make up about 45% of gdp by the middle of the decade. it hasn't been that high since the 1970's. , the tampa bay winning the stanley cup for the second time. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on bloomberg quicktake, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm ritika gupta.
the prospect and about the future remains uncertain. jonathan: ecb president christine lagarde on the difficulty europe faces, and the whole of the global economy. from new york and london, good morning tea while. alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. all.ood morning to you alongside tom keene and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. we are down on the s&p 500 by a little more than 0.1%. in foreign-exchange, euro stronger, dollar weaker. euro-dollar just north of $1.17. there's the treasury market in action. yields going nowhere, unchanged. 0.65% on the u.s. ten-year. here's the depressing story for cities right now. here's a stat in "the wall street journal" this morning. overall, about 10% of manhattan as of workers were back september 18, according to a commercial business services firm.
, and the hopes% that it would ramp up into year end, i think those hopes have taken a hit over the last couple of weeks. anecdoteeillance" minting it clear that cleveland seems to very -- anecdotes making it very clear that cleveland seems to be very empty as well. right now, yelena shulyatyeva joins us with bloomberg economics, they senior economist -- economics, their senior economist. i am really taken by what christine lagarde said about people losing income. it is just about aggregate demand, isn't it? yelena: absolutely. i think what happened early in the pandemic is the fiscal ,timulus provided a little bit quite a lot of a cushion, and we are still seeing the impact of that.
that is why we had the rebound in jobs. that is why things are not looking as bad as we thought. andthis is all waning now, we are going to start seeing some interlopers. we will see a decline in personal income. that means that the economy will slow down into the fourth quarter, and the economy will slow down into the next year. is 69%, 70% ofer the american pie. but you know the dynamic is in business investment. what is the state of business confidence that you see in america now? yelena: i think that is the sector that is rebounding simply because there is not enough inventory, but i think that will be one of the laggards. the consumer is coming back, whether it is slower not we can , but i thinkthat
the business sector will be lagging behind simply because there is so much uncertainty about the economic outlook, and usually what drives investment into businesses is some certainty about what is going to happen. maybe we will get some clarity after the election. lisa: after hearing jon and tom talking about how things are turning down, i have to go there. we are looking at the potential for a second wave increasing. it is already there in may be a -- in many parts of europe, and frankly in new york city. there was a report showing how much the unemployment rate could increase if we get a serious double-dip in virus cases. how much do you forecast unemployment to rise back up again if we get a material second wave? yelena: it will depend on how many businesses close down. as you guys were mentioning, things are not there as they used to be. ridee in long island and i
a long island train usually. they are empty. people are not coming back. and employees are benefiting from the situation, whereas smaller companies will have to fire workers. so with the waning ppp funds, we will see layoffs probably next month, and we could see the unemployment rate going up in case of a double-dip. lisa: we talked about the two point $2 trillion plan house democrats have bug out -- the $2.2 trillion plan house democrats have put out. how long-lasting can that be? the fact that we have seen household balance sheets improve, how long do we have until that is over? yelena: i think it is urgent now. time is of the essence, even though we don't see it in economic data. probably the september payrolls
report will be saying that we might see another positive for , weember, but as of october will start seeing negative prints, i think, and a lot of other statistics are showing that the length of unemployment is rising significantly. by september, the employment report, we will have a lot of people who are long-term unemployed. 26 weeks is already long-term unemployment, so that means people are not getting paid. they are not going to spend the money, and we will see a slowdown in economic growth already, even though we will need some fiscal funds, but we are already in a slowdown. jonathan: great to catch up. some depressing stats there, though. yelena shulyatyeva of bloomberg economics, great to see you. let's talk about what happened here. we had an unemployment stock without the corresponding income
shock he would typically expect. largely, almost exclusively because fiscal stepped up in an unprecedented way. what jelena is describing is more pain ahead, potentially for the labor market, but this time with the income shock because the fiscal bridge will not be there in the same way. that is the story we are living through right now in the united kingdom and elsewhere in europe. tom: and the parsing of it is tangible. one of our conversations for five days ago, we are seeing the unemployment rate of educated americans moving up above where it was in 2007, 2008, 2009 as well, so it is a different kind of american unemployment than the financial crisis. jonathan: ahead of payrolls friday, we go back to the perennial question for policymakers, not just in the united states, but worldwide. what do you do if things get worse? we all hope they will get
better. what happens if they get worse? the federal reserve, some people might say they are done. but this is a conversation that is really embracing the ecb and the governing council. what do they do next? lisa: it seems like central bankers have done what they can do. let's say they buy more corporate bonds. will that help people get more jobs at this point? if you talk to most people, they say it has a diminishing effect on the labor market. ultimately, it has to come from fiscal. how much pain do we have to have until we get to that point? jonathan: just for the record, abramowiczar blaming us of being down. lisa: oh, come on. tom: hey, i got down to if you
>> worst case scenario is a double-dip recession. it is not our base case, but it is the worst case scenario. >> we are probably getting towards the lower end of this correction phase. >> investors are starting to show more bearish sentiment. >> rates may never rise. that is entirely possible. >> we know there are millions unemployed, but the end of women stats are everywhere. >> september -- but the unemployment stats are everywhere. >> september has been a month of consolidation. i think october will be more of the same. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz.
IN COLLECTIONSBloomberg TV Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on