Bloomberg Surveillance TV: June 17, 2025
29:53 Share

This is an iHeart Podcast.

As a global leader in alternatives today, PGM is capturing the potential of tomorrow. So as you look to diversify your portfolio, PGM offers expertise in seeding, developing and managing a broad range of liquid and illiquid strategies. With over $320 billion in alts across public and private markets, we are helping clients achieve their long-term goals. PGM. Our investments shape tomorrow, today.

Switch to Verizon Business and get more from your internet without paying more for your internet. Get LTE Business Internet starting at $39 a month when paired with select business mobile plans. That's unlimited data and with it, unlimited possibilities. Start saving today with Verizon Business. Ranked number one in small business internet customer satisfaction by J.D. Power. Starting price for 25 megabits per second LTE internet plan with smartphone plan savings.

Did you know that 92% of U.S. hiring decision-makers expect to face challenges?

Finding qualified candidates this year? The costs of recruiting, advertising, interviewing, and onboarding can add up quickly. But Express Employment Professionals is your hiring solution. Go to expresspros.com today. Express streamlines your hiring process, saving both time and money. Whether you need contract staff or your core team member, visit expresspros.com.

Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts. Radio. News.

This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Farrow, along with Lisa Abramowitz and Anne-Marie Hordern. Join us each day for insight from the best in markets, economics and geopolitics. From our global headquarters in New York City, we are live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from 6 to 9 a.m. Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen. And as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App.

The FOMC widely expected to hold rates steady, but it does plan on updating its economic forecast. Krishna Guha of Evercore ISI joins us now. Krishna, are we expecting to hear absolutely anything other than we are in a dark room with a blindfold bumping into chairs just like the rest of you?

So I'm afraid you probably are going to get a lot more wait and see, a lot more to learn. You know, that sort of guidance from Fed Chair Powell, consistent with the idea that unless something radical changes, you know,

Not only is nothing happening at this month's meeting, but nothing's going to happen in July either. And then really in September, we have that decision point for the Fed as it's seen enough to want to cut rates at that point or not. I think what the market will be focused on at

This meeting is really the extent of the updates in the Fed's forecast, and in particular, where the policymakers are already shifting towards just a one-cut baseline rather than two cuts for this year. Chris, now, how much does it really matter? Because right now, the Fed seems highly uncertain, very much on the fence. They're...

sort of strategic analysis is shape-shifting depending on the day. And we're seeing data that hints at something of a labor market softening that's caused a lot of people to be a little bit concerned. I'm talking about continuing claims. We're going to get retail sales in just under two hours' time. How much is that almost more important than the rhetoric that we hear out of the Fed right now?

So I think you're certainly right. First of all, you know, the real action here is on the Trump economic agenda, above all trade, but also immigration, fiscal, you mentioned, you know, regulatory, other policies. And the Fed, to a large extent, is responding to those shocks.

learning from the economic data. How they are impacting economic activity so yes you know the fed is going to take its cue from the first the path of policies like trade policy secondly how this is built in through the macro data the market data but.

It does matter what reaction function the Fed is sketching out that it will apply in these different economic circumstances. You know, there's a relatively easy case where the labor market doesn't weaken at all. Why are you cutting in a period when inflation is going to move up under these tariffs? Conversely, if the wheels come off the bus in the labor market, for sure we know they're going to be cutting, even though there's going to be inflation.

inflation, provided the expectations remain well behaved as they are right now. The question is, in this middle zone, in this gray zone, how are they thinking about, you know, what would constitute a materially enough weakening of the labor market to want to cut, to lean against that getting any worse? And also, what do they think they're learning from the most recent data, which certainly is, uh,

are imperfect in the way you describe. But I'd say for May overall top tier employment report and inflation both a little more benign than might have been expected.

Chris Netsch, Chris, can you talk just for a moment about this divergence between the market rate and the policy rate? We've always joked in our work that who needs Fed speakers when you have the two-year yields. Is there a level on the two-year yield down where you'd say, okay, the Fed is now behind the curve and needs to get back in the easing cycle maybe faster than you thought?

Yeah. So that's, that's a very good and important distinction to draw, right? The Fed obviously accepts the overnight funds rate, but the, it's the two year five, 10 and so on rates that are much more important for the economy as a whole. And of course those will also embed information as to how market participants are thinking about the outlook. What I would say is that the Fed doesn't try to micromanage, you know, the two year yield. Uh, it couldn't, even if it wanted to, uh,

And so I don't think that it's so wildly out of whack right now with what Fed officials might be thinking on a probability weighted basis. Because remember, the market isn't just pricing the baseline case, but they're pricing a range of risks, including the risk that we do, after all, end up falling into a recession that Fed has to cut a lot. So right now, I think the Fed will be comfortable to let the market operate as a little bit of an automatic stabilizer. You know, rates going down in the market when the news is weaker, rates moving up.

up, when the news is stronger or there's signs of some more inflation pressure, they're not yet at a point where they would feel the need to make a call on rates themselves in terms of the Fed fund set. Chris, do you think kind of in the spirit of the Fed might not make the same mistake, they might make new mistakes, that 2021, 2022 is coloring their thinking too much on this idea of kind of the inflation risk?

Maybe in a lot of respects, the appropriate word to use today, and we talked about this earlier, is actually transitory, given that tariffs are a one-time price hike or oil, yet they're so reluctant to do that because of the recent experience.

So, look, at some level, I think you're right. Right. Everyone fights the last war and the Fed can be guilty of that, too. There's no question that the fact that the Fed, you know, went out with a transitory story and lived to regret it last time is, I think, coloring their thinking some this time, too.

There are two important objective considerations that do weigh a bit in this direction. The first is that these tariffs are not simply on end products. They're also on intermediate goods, inputs into U.S. production. And it's those tariffs on intermediate goods that the economic research tells us can have more persistent effects on inflation, not just a one and done sort of, if you like,

increase effect. The other thing is that the Fed does have reason to wonder whether inflation expectations, wage bargaining, price setting behaviors are quite as well locked down now

after several years of elevated inflation as they were previously. And these starting conditions, economists will use the term initial conditions, do matter in terms of your risk management judgment. Krishna, just real quickly here, if I were cynical, I would think the Fed would just err on the side of being more hawkish in order to keep some of the inflation expectations restrained. Why isn't that the case, that we can basically expect them to say something that is going to be hawkish whether they think it or not?

So I think they are mildly hawkish. I mean, after all, they're telling us that they judge that the current setting of policy is moderately restrictive, modestly restrictive. Individual officials use different terms, but restrictive. Why is it restrictive? Well, it's restrictive precisely because, as you say, they want to try to lock down inflation expectations in

into the initial sticker shock from the tariff price increases when that comes. As I said, it hasn't really shown up in May. We do expect it to show up more over the next few months. Near term, that's certainly hawkish. But I think it's also important to understand that the Fed recognizes that a precondition

for being able to cut rates in response to labor market weakness at a time when spot inflation will be high because of the tariffs, is that you have to make sure that you've locked down the inflation expectations first. So yes, it's moving in order of priorities, lock down the expectations first, then look at business cycle management. If they get the first right, they will have the flexibility to do the second if it's needed. Krishna Guha of Evercore ISI, thank you so much.

If this government spending in defense goes towards things like R&D that have dual use civilian purposes, you could get spillovers that actually end up enhancing productivity in Europe and so have a more long lasting impact on growth.

To learn more about the intersection of national security and global trade, subscribe to PGM's The Outthinking Investor in your favorite podcast app.

Switch to Verizon Business and get more from your internet without paying more for your internet. Get LTE Business Internet starting at $39 a month when paired with select business mobile plans. That's unlimited data and with it, unlimited possibilities. Start saving today with Verizon Business. Ranked number one in small business internet customer satisfaction by J.D. Power. Starting price for 25 megabits per second LTE internet plan with smartphone plan savings.

plus taxes, fees, and economic adjustment charge. Terms apply. For J.D. Power 2024 award information, visit jdpower.com slash awards. Thrivent can help you plan your finances for the people, causes, and community you love. What makes Thrivent different? Financial services and generosity programs are combined to help you build a financial roadmap for the future while also creating opportunities to give back along the way. Visit Thrivent.com to learn more. Thrivent, where money means more.

Another leg that could potentially offset some of the deficit concerns are the tariffs and the revenue that could be possibly brought into the United States. Former senior Trump trade advisor Kellyanne Shah joining us now. Kellyanne, I'm curious what we've learned in particular from the trade discussions over as part of the G7 meetings in Canada. When it comes to the UK and the US, how much of a template is that?

Yeah, good morning and thanks so much for having me. So the big announcement regarding trade at this year's G7 was, of course, that UK deal on auto parts, on auto imports and then aerospace. And then the executive order that the White House issued last night to accompany the deal also teased out that there would be relief on steel and aluminum for the UK at some point in the future.

but the details still forthcoming. So what this shows is the UK is still very much front of the queue ahead of any other government. The next closest we got was an announcement by Prime Minister of Canada that the US and Canada would be negotiating a deal within the next 30 days, which is a bit longer than we were originally expecting, but at least it's an agreement to agree.

Kellyanne, we also saw no deals from the likes of Japan, for example, and I'm sure the prime minister there would have liked to have seen something. And also the ability to reach a deal was cut short with the president leaving back to Washington, D.C. With a new hot war for President Trump to deal with and to think about, does it show the limitations of deals being led by the president? Will this ultimately slow down the timeline?

Yeah, and I thought what was interesting about the early departure, and obviously there are things flaring up in the Middle East that required his attention, was that the two deals that I thought could come together this weekend that were left on the cutting room floor in addition to Japan would have been India and Mexico, a deal on steel and perhaps fentanyl. He was set to meet with both Modi and Scheinbaum today. Those meetings, of course, won't happen. But I do think what it shows is some competing priorities. But look, he's got an entire team

team who is dedicated to these trade negotiations, USTR Ambassador Greer, Secretary Besson, Howard Letnick, they're not going to be as involved as some of the defense and national security advisors will be on this Iran-Israel conflict. So they are going to be focused exclusively on these trade talks. Now, of course, that doesn't mean that one doesn't influence the other, but there are separate lanes in his administration who can handle both.

Is it your assumption then that we do get those deals that you mentioned that we're close to by July 8th? Yeah, that is my expectation. And we really don't know what's going to happen in July. We had Secretary Besant during a hearing last week tease that for countries negotiating in good faith, they could see an extension of that period. But the president hasn't said one way or the other.

And I think negotiators are going to seek to put pressure on a number of governments where things are close in order to try to get the deal. And we've heard directly from the administration that India is close. And my expectation is that Canada and Mexico are also very much top of the queue if we're

no other reason than they're two of the U.S.'s most important trading partners. And we still do have sizable tariffs on both for goods that don't currently qualify for those USMCA deals. So that's going to be a big ticket item, not just for the U.S., but also for Canada and Mexico. Kellyanne Shaw, former senior Trump trade advisor, thank you so much for being with us in the Insights on what's going on with trade.

Joining us now is Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah of Iran. Reza, thank you so much for being with us. I want to start with a question. Are you in active discussions in any way to return to Iran in a leadership role if there is some sort of regime change in Iran? Good morning to you and to my fellow competitors following this program and all of your audience. There is a campaign for liberation.

that we've been committed to all these years. The moment is approaching very fast. The regime is on the verge of collapse. We see elements within the regime already talking defections. They get in touch with us. We see a leader who is now hiding in a bunker like a rat, while many high elements are taking flight from Iran. I think all of this is conducive to something that may very soon happen. And finally, my fellow compatriots will be able to

And, of course, there's a plan not only for this phase of our struggle, which is liberation from this regime, but what happens right next, the transition to what we hope will culminate in a democratic outcome. I have stepped in to lead this campaign at the behest of my compatriots.

I have a plan of action not only to manage this phase of transition, but also to plan for Iran's future recovery and prosperity. Wait, Reza. Which at the end has to go hand in glove with our democratic ideas. Just a question here. Who are the compatriots who've approached you to try to helm this leadership push?

Well, I think that you have people who have vested interests in preserving this regime because their whole survival depends on this regime all this time, whereas the millions of my compatriots who were the first victim of this regime have paid all these four decades a very heavy price.

We have seen many campaigns that people protested. The latest one was two years ago, the Women Like Freedom movement. And finally, I think today, with this clear weakening of the regime, and as I said, being on the verge of collapse, finally all these people who have risked their lives and honorably protested

put their lives on the line and did die for the cause, we'll be able to remember as heroes of this conflict because we will be liberated sooner than everybody thinks. And my entire commitment has been from day one to support my compatriots in the struggle for liberation. And we believe that the end is very near for the regime and our dreams of liberty will finally be realized very soon. Reza, on the ground what we've seen in Iran is those in Tehran, for example, trying to evacuate Israel, saying more recently that they would look

at targeting places there. You've seen fear, you've seen strikes, and you've seen death. How complicated and how difficult is it to ask a populist to rise up and rally behind you when they're the very same ones that are under threat right now? - Look, I think many of my competitors are smart enough to understand that if right now, if until now, and in fact many of your colleagues in the media have always asked me, how do you fight a regime that is so repressive, that is so ruthless, that executes, that threaten dissidents or activists at home,

To which I said, well, obviously the playing field has to be more equalized.

This is a case where for the first time in four years we see this regime be declawed, literally declawed. But it is also important to have the support of the world community, because until now many times my compatriots have been thrown under the bus when they had an opportunity to be back because of a policy of appeasement or containment. I think now the situation for the first time exists for the world to realize that it is no avail to expect this regime to change its attitude and behavior.

Ali Khamenei is at war with the world, not the Iranian people. He's the main culprit for being here and having Iranians also have innocent victims and civilians died, to whom my heart goes out, of course. But I think right now we need to be focused on the goal and the aim. We have a tremendous opportunity to overcome this regime. I think the world will be the sigh of relief with this regime no longer be there. We are carrying on.

If I can jump in here, because you say the goal and the aim is a regime change. What we have heard from Israel is that their goal is to dismantle the nuclear forces from Iran. Is it your understanding that a regime change is also a goal from the Israelis? And have you been in contact with them?

I'm not asking any foreign governments to state a policy of regime change, although I think many of them do believe that ultimately that would be the best formula to get rid of so many problems at the same time, and not just a nuclear threat, as a result of this regime, track record of behavior in the region and beyond, formatting terrorism, supporting

their proxies like Hezbollah or Hamas in the region and so on. But the disappearance of this regime, we're eliminating too many problems that this regime has caused in one shot. The first beneficiary of regime change are the Iranian people themselves. But we believe that our immediate neighborhood, the region, whether it is the Israelis or Arab

neighbors, and beyond that, the rest of the free world will understand that the Iranian people who, unlike this regime, want to be part of the civilized world with the same values and principles of liberty and freedom and human rights, unlike this regime, would be

certainly the element of change and, if you will, the alternatives to this regime. I think this is where the world needs to be focused now, beyond the immediate campaign that is a result of the stubbornness of Khamenei, who has dragged our country into it. But let's look at the positive aspect of once we get rid of this regime, how we can envisage a future where our

back to an element of stability and regional peace, which is in everybody's interest. That's what we often focus on. - Just to build on what Danny was asking, have you been in contact with the Israeli leadership?

We are reaching out to everyone and everyone, including the Israeli side, to understand where it is that we stand, what is the expectation of the Iranian people in terms of world support. I think it's pretty much the same thing that many struggling nations under totalitarian regime were looking at any country that understand that they have to stand with the people of a country that is trying to liberate itself. And again, whether it's the Israeli government or the American government or any other government for that matter, the question is,

Whose side are you going to stand with today, the Iranian people or continue to insist negotiating with a regime that is on the verge of collapse? There's also a question of what this new leadership looks like. Reza, are you talking about reestablishing the monarchy when that was controversial and it might not have full support from all parties, particularly the more religious elements of the Iranian society?

Well, I have never advocated for one form of a regime or another. What I did and have advocated, and in fact is part of my transition plan, is a process that is totally democratic. That means that the Iranian people have to have the ability to ponder upon whatever a constitutional assembly will propose as a constitutional formula. A future constitution, the form that the regime can take, what it will mean, and

Unlike 1979, when people had no clue or idea what an Islamic republic means, and by the time they figured it out, it was too late. This time, in full transparency, they'll have the option to look at what's the best model that fits them and let the ballot box decide in majority what the Iranian people will opt for. Will it be a republic? Will it be a constitutional monarchy? Or whatever it is. My objective is not to stand here as the result of that.

And my responsibility right now, my only focus is to see this process through so we can ensure that ultimately we replace this dictatorship with a democratic, and let me underline, a secular democracy, where there's a clear separation of religion from state as a prerequisite. Reza, to that point, past attempts to engineer regime shifts in the Middle East haven't

haven't often ended in liberal pro-Western governments. There are examples, many out there, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, all ending in things that look like fragmentation or current armed forces having the most power and being the ones that emerge in the chaos of a regime shift. What do you suggest that it is different this time?

I think Iranian society, not just for centuries of proving that they have, as a nation state, a concept of a nationhood, national identity, national pride and objective, a culture, a civilization, but also a polity. And a generation today, very shrewd and very clever,

By knowing what it is that will be in their interest, they see the world and how it has evolved. They have seen a successful campaign of liberation. They understand the key elements that sustains and preserves democratic order. And I believe today's Gen Z in Iran is more than ever equipped to understand not only the needs

but how and what it would take to implement that. Look, it's a collective project. Everybody have to roll up their sleeves and participate. The premise remains the same in the principles of liberty and human rights. But if each member of society is committed to see through it and actively engage in that process, that's where we can guarantee that it's going to be actually

a result that would be positive. I have absolute faith and confidence in my competitors and their wisdom and their know-how and their knowledge. They do need guidance, of course. They do need support, of course. They do need some level of leadership, of course. But at the end, they are the elements and instruments of change. And we are working together very closely to see that through. Reza Pahlavi, thank you so much for your time. Really appreciate you getting on with us.

If this government spending in defense goes towards things like R&D that have dual-use civilian purposes, you could get spillovers that actually end up enhancing productivity in Europe and so have a more long-lasting impact on growth.

To learn more about the intersection of national security and global trade, subscribe to PGM's The Outthinking Investor in your favorite podcast app.

Switch to Verizon Business and get more from your internet without paying more for your internet. Get LTE Business Internet starting at $39 a month when paired with select business mobile plans. That's unlimited data and with it, unlimited possibilities. Start saving today with Verizon Business, ranked number one in small business internet customer satisfaction by J.D. Power.

Starting price for 25 megabits per second LTE internet plan with smartphone plan savings, plus taxes, fees, and economic adjustment charge. Terms apply. For J.D. Power 2024 award information, visit jdpower.com slash awards. Thrivent can help you plan your finances for the people, causes, and community you love. What makes Thrivent different? Financial services and generosity programs are combined to help you build the financial roadmap for the future.

while also creating opportunities to give back along the way. Visit Thrivent.com to learn more. Thrivent, where money means more.

Pooja Sriram of Barclays joins us now with her own argument. Pooja, how do you interpret this? Thank you so much for being here, given the fact that there's something for everyone, which is kind of the theme that we've seen in a lot of the economic data recently. That's true. Well, so far, I sort of agree with what she said in the sense that right now it just looks like everything seems to be good. So far, so good is how I would put it. But it's hard to say how things are going to pan out sort of going forward.

I'll just, a quick take on the retail sales from my end is that we had expected a slightly weaker control group. So the fact that it actually did better than we'd expected is, again, maybe, you know, like she said, maybe a resilient consumer.

Income fundamentals, wealth fundamentals for consumers have been looking good. It's something we've said on and off. But I do expect at some point a pullback and a moderation in consumer spending to materialize. Did it happen in this sprint? It didn't.

Maybe there's a correlation though between the decline that we've seen in oil and gas prices and the increase that we saw, the strength that we saw in the control group because there's a theory that if you're not paying as much when you go to fill up the tank in your car, you have more to spend on other things. How much is that thesis threatened if oil prices start to spike at a time of conflict in the Middle East? No, that's a valid point. The one thing that I would add is that the spending on gasoline as a share of consumer spending

isn't as high as what most would think. It's about 2% to 3% for the consumption basket. So you would need a pretty persistent and a pretty big rise in oil prices for consumers to actually start feeling threatened and for them to actually start pulling back. It's what we call the discretionary income channel because you have to spend on oil. We think demand is relatively inelastic for oil. And so when you have to spend more on oil, you're forced to sort of pull back elsewhere. So that is a risk.

but we think it's developing. I wouldn't say that's a baseline right now. When it comes to a consumer that you expect eventually to weaken, what is the trigger for it? Because we already see some underlying weakness in the labor market, a little bit in there, things like the unemployment, some of the weekly initial jobless claims ticking higher. Companies are not hiring right now. There seems to be a freeze. What needs to change for that actually to trickle down into some weakness for the consumer?

Well, I think two things. We need to see this consistent discipline, gradual slowing in the labor market for the consumer to start feeling a little worried. The other thing which we've been saying that should happen eventually is as the prices start increasing because of tariffs, there could be some pressure on the consumer purchasing power.

When both of these things materialize together is a world in which we think the consumer would feel cautious about spending, and that's when we should hopefully start seeing the personal saving rate tick up because you're trying to save up. Just be clear, does it actually need to happen? Because you have seen the sentiment measures sour quite a bit to start this year. They've been bouncing around since then, and there's

a whole host of reasons why maybe you shouldn't pay attention to them, but is the expectation for economic weakness or geopolitical strife, do any of those sentiment type issues weigh on the consumer or do they keep spending through it until the actual prices, the actual data changes? Well, it's hard to say, but I would think there has to be some amount of precaution that has to set in.

The other thing that we've been saying is the price level is already so high across a whole host of commodities, goods, and this is an aftermath of the pandemic, that now any additional price increase, we think the consumer is likely to be sensitive to that.

Just to, if you're just joining us right now, just to reset, we did get retail sales that came in on the headline level weaker than expected, down nine-tenths of a percent versus the expected six-tenths of a percent. That sounds negative. That sounds like a weakening. Oh, no. And then you take a look at the control group that came in stronger than expected, up 0.4% from the 0.3% that people had been expecting. The revisions to the prior month, as Danny was talking about, also were revised to be less bad

than they were initially. And it raises this question of what the response in markets is. The response is interesting, actually. What you're seeing is less of a bid to the two-year yield and more of a bid to the 30-year yield, which signifies that maybe people see this, and I'm really taking liberties here, as an excuse for the Fed not to cut rates as quickly because of that strike from the control group that could lead to longer-term weakness. Pooja, how much are you looking at that type of scenario that people say the longer the Fed is on hold,

the more longer term we see potential for a decline in inflation expectations and more weakness? Well, I think in the near term it makes sense for them to be on hold just because there is, you know, there's an obvious tension between what we think is going to happen to inflation and the fact that we're not seeing a very material slowing in the labor market. So I think in the near term it makes sense that they're on hold.

I don't quite buy the argument that it would necessarily lead to more weakness going forward. I think it eventually, it is going to give them a window to come in and cut rates.

Okay, so this is the argument some people have made, and this is sort of the question that we've been bandying around all morning. Why wouldn't the Fed come out and aggressively be hawkish to try to tamp down inflation expectations? And then later this year, if things do weaken, they can say, okay, just kidding. We actually do want to cut rates. I mean, why is that not the playbook for the Federal Reserve?

Well, we think they might actually come out and look pretty hawkish in the June meeting. Our own forecast is for the June SEP is to look relatively hawkish. We think the median dot would show only one cut in 2025.

And that makes sense. I think the signal that they would want to send out at this point in time is we are watching inflation expectations. We are cognizant that inflation could go higher. The labor market side of the mandate for the time being looks okay. And so, you know, I think the message from them is we're in no rush to cut rates.

And I think it's the flip side, right? Should things actually materially start to weaken, they could come in and cut rates. - It's interesting 'cause Bloomberg Economics has the same outlook, Anna Wong and her team there, but they said Chair Powell isn't as hawkish as the rest of the committee. So if you get one dot on the dot plot of cuts, expect Chair Powell to come up and kind of downplay and say, oh, we have a range of outcomes.

It doesn't matter, not least of which because he'll probably get political pressure coming from the White House should that be the outcome. Do you expect Chair Powell to also lean more hawkish in his communicate to the press after the decision? - I think that's gonna be a tough one. I think he's gonna stick to the messages that he's always been saying. We are in no rush to cut rates, we're gonna wait and watch. We need to see how the data evolve. So all of that. Yeah, I don't know if he's gonna particularly be dovish.

But I think he's going to stick to the message. The other thing I feel is, you know, most people would also look at the SEPs quite closely, at least analysts like ourselves. And we're literally counting the number of dots everywhere. So we get a sense of, I guess, how the committee is leaning as well. Counting dots. That's what we have to look forward to for tomorrow. Pooja Srirama-Farkley, thank you so much for being with us.

And as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App.

Switch to Verizon Business and get more from your internet without paying more for your internet. Get LTE Business Internet starting at $39 a month when paired with select business mobile plans. That's unlimited data and with it, unlimited possibilities. Start saving today with Verizon Business. Ranked number one in small business internet customer satisfaction by J.D. Power. Starting price for 25 megabits per second LTE internet plan with smartphone plan savings.

♪♪♪

Ready to bring your visions to life? Learn how at AmazonBusiness.com. What does being financially invested sound like? A retiree on a cross-country drive? Someone with new long-term goals? A student getting their start in?

This is an iHeart Podcast.