Latest / Merryn Talks Money / How Angry Should the UK Be With the Bank of England?

Transcript

How Angry Should the UK Be With the Bank of England? · Merryn Talks Money

0:05
Speaker 1: Welcome to Maren Talks Money, the podcast. I wish people
0:07
Speaker 1: who know the markets explain the markets. I'm MERI in
0:09
Speaker 1: some set work this week for our last episode before
0:12
Speaker 1: a little summer break, and don't worry, we will be
0:14
Speaker 1: back early September. We thought that we would answer a
0:17
Speaker 1: few questions from our listeners. We asked for questions and
0:20
Speaker 1: you sent them. So with me, the one and only
0:22
Speaker 1: John Steppek obviously, and throughout this episode we're going to
0:25
Speaker 1: be joined by some of our Bloomberg colleagues. We're going
0:27
Speaker 1: to help us out with the answers. So no chick
0:30
Speaker 1: chat today. You don't want to listen to me in John,
0:32
Speaker 1: You want to listen to us, our expert contributors. So
0:35
Speaker 1: let's get on with it. So our first question today
0:39
Speaker 1: is one that I think is probably on everybody's minds,
0:42
Speaker 1: And if it isn't on your mind, it probably should be.
0:44
Speaker 1: Why doesn't the Bank of England engage in aggressive QT
0:48
Speaker 1: quantitative tightening rather than just shoving up interest rates? Surely QT,
0:53
Speaker 1: by reducing the money supply, is a far faster mechanism
0:56
Speaker 1: to reduce inflation than the lagged effect of interest rates.
1:00
Speaker 1: Remember that the effective interest rates happens only over a
1:03
Speaker 1: year eighteen months possibly longer, which only affects variable rate
1:06
Speaker 1: mortgages and rolled over loans. Now with us to answer
1:10
Speaker 1: this question, or help us answer this question, should I say,
1:12
Speaker 1: is friend of the show? Bloomberg opinion columnist Marcus Ashworth Marcus,
1:17
Speaker 1: why not just do a little QT and be done
1:19
Speaker 1: with the whole thing?
1:21
Speaker 2: Well, at first, I don't think QE or QT necessarily
1:25
Speaker 2: has any direct effect on money supply, But let's move
1:29
Speaker 2: aside from that point, because that's the sort of in
1:30
Speaker 2: the weeds. The point is is that why would you reducing,
1:34
Speaker 2: therefore selling back to the market your massive stock of
1:38
Speaker 2: bonds when interest rates are significantly higher yields are sometimes
1:43
Speaker 2: three or four hundred basis points high in the world. Well,
1:45
Speaker 2: are you therefore the price is an awful lot lower
1:49
Speaker 2: now when rates are at five? You should have done
1:52
Speaker 2: it when rates are at zero. So my whole problem
1:55
Speaker 2: with the bag of it, well many, but certainly the biggest,
1:58
Speaker 2: the biggest one. Why thanks John, with why they decided
2:03
Speaker 2: to go ahead with interest rate hikes before they reduced
2:08
Speaker 2: the amount of of quantity easing purchases. I mean, they
2:11
Speaker 2: shouldn't have done the last lot of countina easing buying,
2:15
Speaker 2: you know, through the pandemic that was, they kept it
2:17
Speaker 2: on for way, way, way longer they needed to, as
2:21
Speaker 2: the then chief Economist Ernie Haldane made very clear in
2:24
Speaker 2: an effect or of left the building because of it.
2:27
Speaker 2: So not only do I think they shouldn't have carried
2:29
Speaker 2: on with QUE as long as they did, but however
2:30
Speaker 2: they should have.
2:31
Speaker 3: Gone on with QT right at the beginning and done.
2:35
Speaker 2: Much more QT content tightening before they even started as
2:39
Speaker 2: interest rate hikes, because it has just cost the taxpayer.
2:43
Speaker 3: Possibly hundreds I do need hundreds of billions of pounds.
2:46
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm reading estimates at least two hundred and
2:50
Speaker 2: fifty billion, if not higher.
2:51
Speaker 1: It was in the papers yesterday at one hundred and
2:53
Speaker 1: fifty billion, I think. And again, you know that took
2:56
Speaker 1: me aback slightly.
2:57
Speaker 4: I knew that'd because but I hadn't really taken into
2:59
Speaker 4: accounts quite how high the cost of QT would be
3:02
Speaker 4: for the taxpayer, that the state would be compensating the
3:06
Speaker 4: Bank of England for all these losses.
3:08
Speaker 2: Yeah, but the bank has paid the Treasury over one
3:12
Speaker 2: hundred billion because they've had a lovely coupon income of
3:15
Speaker 2: various things up to now. It is reversing it back
3:19
Speaker 2: an extraordinary rate. Just that. The actions in the last
3:22
Speaker 2: couple of weeks where they've sold some very long dated
3:25
Speaker 2: bonds back in the market have cost over a billion
3:28
Speaker 2: pounds just that in each each operation. Whereby the price
3:33
Speaker 2: they paid for the bond was over one hundred, the
3:35
Speaker 2: price they've sold it back to the market is below fifty.
3:38
Speaker 2: They've taken a huge loss and it's not even really
3:41
Speaker 2: been reported on. It's not even being recognized. This is
3:44
Speaker 2: directly costing the taxpayer. They should not be selling very
3:48
Speaker 2: long dated bonds when interest rates are as high as five
3:51
Speaker 2: percent and more are probably going to be more.
3:54
Speaker 3: It just makes no sense. They should calm down it.
3:56
Speaker 2: Stop it the passive concert honey, whereby they don't reinvest
4:00
Speaker 2: their existing holdings.
4:01
Speaker 3: Keep that up. That's great, that makes perfect sense. It's
4:04
Speaker 3: just the active bit.
4:06
Speaker 1: Then what happens to the rest of it, You think
4:08
Speaker 1: is should just stay there on the Bank of England
4:09
Speaker 1: balance sheet until it rolls off.
4:12
Speaker 2: It will roll off anyway, at about forty billion per
4:16
Speaker 2: year next year, next fantasy, it will be closer to
4:18
Speaker 2: seventy billion. If they do nothing which is what scared
4:22
Speaker 2: the market even more when rams Than Steve Ramsden Defuty
4:26
Speaker 2: Government came out and said if they were thinking of
4:28
Speaker 2: up in the active amount to perhaps over to bring
4:31
Speaker 2: the total to over one hundred billion, which.
4:34
Speaker 3: Is is just madness. So you know what they.
4:36
Speaker 2: Need to do is just set on the passive contenting,
4:39
Speaker 2: just like the FETs doing, just like the ECB starting doing.
4:42
Speaker 3: The only one doing active is the Bank of England.
4:44
Speaker 2: They're costing the taxpayer literally billions and billions of pounds
4:49
Speaker 2: and they don't seem.
4:49
Speaker 5: To care in your view markers. So is this one
4:53
Speaker 5: reason why the guilts market has been somewhat warbler arguably
4:58
Speaker 5: than the treasury although or the the boond market for example,
5:02
Speaker 5: because you've got the less people forget. This is also
5:05
Speaker 5: happening at a time when most governments around the world
5:08
Speaker 5: need lots more money anyway. So we're going from a
5:12
Speaker 5: time when government bond markets have been relatively take the
5:15
Speaker 5: huge buyer elyst resort in the form of central banks,
5:18
Speaker 5: and now suddenly the buyer elyst resort has turned into
5:21
Speaker 5: the seller of the place and sensitive seller just as
5:26
Speaker 5: governments and interview is a lot more money correct.
5:29
Speaker 2: They are competing directly with the Debt Management Office, which
5:31
Speaker 2: is having to sold the most guills.
5:33
Speaker 3: Ever, the fact the Bank of England's turned.
5:35
Speaker 2: For the biggest buy to now being a very active
5:37
Speaker 2: seller competing with the government.
5:39
Speaker 3: Just makes it worse. Now you can't just buy the
5:41
Speaker 3: Bank of England. You know.
5:42
Speaker 2: The government shouldn't be borrowing quite so much money pass
5:44
Speaker 2: but as they simply wont refuse to cut spending, it's
5:47
Speaker 2: not to the Bank of England's role to make the situation.
5:50
Speaker 3: Worse, and they are making it worse.
5:52
Speaker 2: I mean, right just before the Quality Quartain famous mini Badger,
5:58
Speaker 2: the Bank of England may sitch to go ahead with
6:00
Speaker 2: active constant of tidy and raid interust rates.
6:03
Speaker 3: It's somehow managed to slide away from any form of
6:05
Speaker 3: the blame.
6:06
Speaker 2: They are continuing to sell guilt actively every week, competing
6:11
Speaker 2: with the Debt Management Office, and they're doing it in
6:14
Speaker 2: a manner which is just keeping yields in the UK
6:18
Speaker 2: significantly higher than US treasuries and way way way above
6:23
Speaker 2: German bunds.
6:23
Speaker 3: For instance. They should be somewhere in the middle of
6:25
Speaker 3: the two. They're now the highest of the three. And
6:27
Speaker 3: I think that's.
6:28
Speaker 2: Not all of that, of course, because there's huge supply
6:30
Speaker 2: unper government, but an unfortunate amount of it could have
6:33
Speaker 2: been avoided at the bank of being acted with dudare
6:35
Speaker 2: and kill and care.
6:37
Speaker 1: Basically, Marcus, you don't need to worry about their banking
6:41
Speaker 1: the not going their first share of blame on this podcast,
6:43
Speaker 1: they definitely get it. But listen, let's pose this question
6:47
Speaker 1: in a slightly different way. You said at the beginning
6:49
Speaker 1: of this conversation that you won't convinced that QEQ two
6:52
Speaker 1: had any effect on money supply in the first place. Now,
6:56
Speaker 1: let's go back to the type of QE that we
6:59
Speaker 1: use during the pandemic. So we called that, didn't we We
7:01
Speaker 1: called it people's QE. And then instead of getting bunged
7:04
Speaker 1: up in the banking system, the money went directly into
7:06
Speaker 1: people's pockets. And I don't think anyone could argue that
7:09
Speaker 1: that did not affect money supply, because it obviously did.
7:12
Speaker 1: So we had this massive increase in money supply via
7:15
Speaker 1: people's que shoving money directly into people's pockets and then
7:18
Speaker 1: sending the map to spend it into an environment where
7:20
Speaker 1: the supply chain was in trouble already. Now, if you
7:23
Speaker 1: go back to all of our careful studies of MMT
7:27
Speaker 1: modern monetary theory, and that how one deals with inflation
7:30
Speaker 1: under that scenario. The answer is to say, oh, look,
7:33
Speaker 1: we gave people too much money. That's a big part
7:35
Speaker 1: of inflation. Tell you what, let's go for people's QT
7:39
Speaker 1: and that means shoving up income taxes suddenly and dramatically.
7:44
Speaker 1: Now wouldn't that be the correct This is another question
7:48
Speaker 1: we had. By the way, a correct way to deal
7:50
Speaker 1: with inflation that has been driven by people's QE would
7:54
Speaker 1: be to shove up taxes effectively people's QT.
7:58
Speaker 3: Right, I don't really understand that there's necess thing as people.
8:01
Speaker 1: Can just made that up markets, I just made it up.
8:05
Speaker 1: I bring up an opposite to people's.
8:08
Speaker 2: Q The Bank of England, they actually done need the
8:14
Speaker 2: best economic work on this by raising the size of
8:18
Speaker 2: the balance sheet with an asset and against a liability
8:21
Speaker 2: that doesn't necessarily increase the money supply. The mone us
8:23
Speaker 2: buy only increases or money is only created when a bank,
8:27
Speaker 2: as in a commercial bank, lends money to a corporate
8:30
Speaker 2: an individual and creates money. The bank of itself by
8:33
Speaker 2: buying bonds isn't creating money. It's just widening the size
8:37
Speaker 2: of its balance sheet, which has a knock on effective,
8:39
Speaker 2: which you will know, but it's very hard to sort
8:41
Speaker 2: of quantify that. Nonetheless, you know, they have over eight
8:47
Speaker 2: hundred billion pounds worth of assets sitting on a balance
8:50
Speaker 2: sheet that is obviously going to kind of have a
8:52
Speaker 2: knock on effect. You know, it's just very hard to
8:54
Speaker 2: put it into clear and simple terms. But you know,
8:59
Speaker 2: as far as sorting out, you know, the money supply,
9:03
Speaker 2: that is a separate dynamic.
9:05
Speaker 1: I think, okay, John, surely putting up taxes sharply would
9:11
Speaker 1: deal with inflation in the short term.
9:13
Speaker 5: I mean, I don't think it's well, I don't think
9:16
Speaker 5: that's straightforward, but more I just don't think the politics
9:19
Speaker 5: or the I mean, there are so many reasons not
9:22
Speaker 5: to do that. You can't just change the tax regime
9:26
Speaker 5: on the same way that you can change the interest
9:30
Speaker 5: rate regime, because that's kind of the best is it's
9:32
Speaker 5: a distributional issue. So it's well, we need to figure
9:36
Speaker 5: out who has actually benefited from, you know, the kind
9:39
Speaker 5: of asset inflation. So the idea that you should stick
9:42
Speaker 5: you know, the highest raight income tax up by five percent,
9:45
Speaker 5: say every time inflation gets out of hand is just
9:48
Speaker 5: untenable as a as a policy.
9:51
Speaker 2: It would increase inflection, you know, if you want to
9:54
Speaker 2: the first thing, if you, for instance, you put up
9:55
Speaker 2: the it that hits inflation straight away, as it would
9:59
Speaker 2: on ego.
9:59
Speaker 3: Tax I don't think.
10:01
Speaker 2: But I mean modern monetary theory is not the modern
10:04
Speaker 2: nor monetary US is fiscal and it's not a theory,
10:07
Speaker 2: but I mean the whole idea of just whacking out taxes.
10:11
Speaker 2: But it's an interesting point because that addresses the fiscal
10:14
Speaker 2: side of the economy. All bankaming is doing is folding
10:17
Speaker 2: the monetary side. And I think the answers that you
10:21
Speaker 2: seem to come up here are very much more a
10:23
Speaker 2: fiscal thing, and that requires the government to do something,
10:25
Speaker 2: not the bangaming.
10:27
Speaker 1: Okay, Marcus, thank you so much about John. I'm going
10:30
Speaker 1: to leave you with the duty of getting in touch
10:32
Speaker 1: with all the people who wrote the MMT books and
10:34
Speaker 1: explaining to them. But everything they wrote was absolute, complete
10:37
Speaker 1: and total nonsense. So that's your job. Hate mail on
10:40
Speaker 1: that one all to John. Please, Marcus, thank you so
10:43
Speaker 1: much for joining us today. Now, another thing we've had
10:50
Speaker 1: a lot of questions on is this idea of whether
10:53
Speaker 1: one should hold bitcoin or gold over a ten year period,
10:56
Speaker 1: And some of you find it really irritating that I
10:59
Speaker 1: ask all of our guess this at the end of
11:01
Speaker 1: their interviews, and some of you find it unbelievably irritating
11:04
Speaker 1: that every single guest replies gold. Quite rightly. By the way,
11:09
Speaker 1: one day someone will say bitcoin and then you can
11:11
Speaker 1: all write in and complain about that, But for now,
11:13
Speaker 1: it's always gold. Now we're going to talk about something
11:15
Speaker 1: else today, but a little bit something else. We're going
11:17
Speaker 1: to add a third part into the question, and with
11:20
Speaker 1: us to talk about this is Bloomberg's Eddie Spence. Now, Eddie,
11:23
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us.
11:25
Speaker 3: Thank you for having me.
11:26
Speaker 1: Now I want to ask you the original question first,
11:29
Speaker 1: if I were to ask you, and obviously as a
11:31
Speaker 1: Bloomberg person, you can't necessarily have opinions, so I'm not
11:34
Speaker 1: asking you for an opinion as such, just for you know,
11:37
Speaker 1: an opinion. If you were to have either gold or
11:40
Speaker 1: bitcoin for ten years, which one would it be.
11:43
Speaker 6: It probably depends how much you're putting in and how
11:45
Speaker 6: much money you have. Like, honestly, if it's you know you.
11:48
Speaker 1: Have, you haven't got anything else, you haven't got anything
11:51
Speaker 1: else you have nothing else.
11:52
Speaker 6: Yeah, I would, Yeah, I would. I would probably probably
11:55
Speaker 6: offer gold in that situation because I'm pretty confident that
11:58
Speaker 6: in ten years gold isn't going to be worth zero,
12:00
Speaker 6: whereas with bitcoin there is like that tail risk. I
12:04
Speaker 6: suppose that you could lose everything you have. I mean personally,
12:06
Speaker 6: you know, I know people who got into bitcoin, like
12:10
Speaker 6: during that kind of crazy time in twenty twenty one
12:12
Speaker 6: I think it was, and you know, are still underwater.
12:16
Speaker 6: With gold, you may or may not be underwater, but
12:19
Speaker 6: your losses probably aren't going to be that big if
12:22
Speaker 6: you hold it over ten years, you know, no matter
12:24
Speaker 6: really which point you get in, at least in absolute terms.
12:27
Speaker 1: I suppose the way we can look at this to
12:28
Speaker 1: say that in ten years it is it is as
12:30
Speaker 1: close to an absolute certainty as anything has ever been
12:34
Speaker 1: that gold will still exist, and that certainty simply doesn't
12:37
Speaker 1: exist with with bitcoin, it may well not exist at all. Okay,
12:40
Speaker 1: so you're with the rest of our listeners, and that's great.
12:43
Speaker 1: So we won't get any complaints on that, or maybe
12:45
Speaker 1: we will, I don't know. So now I'm going to
12:47
Speaker 1: add in another element.
12:49
Speaker 3: Are you ready?
12:49
Speaker 1: This was like a game show Okay, if I added
12:52
Speaker 1: in a savings account to that, So over the next
12:55
Speaker 1: ten years you can either hold gold, bitcoin or a
12:59
Speaker 1: standard the UK savings account currently yielding that half the
13:03
Speaker 1: rate of inflation, right, so you get four percent of
13:05
Speaker 1: their moment and who knows what's going to happen then next.
13:08
Speaker 1: So you now have the choice of these three things,
13:10
Speaker 1: and just to repeat, you are not allowed anything else
13:12
Speaker 1: at all. Only one of these three things. Would you
13:16
Speaker 1: choose the savings account?
13:18
Speaker 4: Uh?
13:18
Speaker 6: Yeah, I think so, mostly basical because of the frame
13:21
Speaker 6: of the question. Right, if it is all your money,
13:23
Speaker 6: I'm not sure anyone anywhere would suggest making a portfolio
13:28
Speaker 6: one hundred percent gold just because there's no kind of
13:31
Speaker 6: absolute law that gold has to rise over the long term,
13:35
Speaker 6: you know. I mean that there's plenty of situations we
13:36
Speaker 6: could pick going back. You know, say, if you went
13:40
Speaker 6: long gold with everything you had in around, you know,
13:43
Speaker 6: the previous price peak, you would only just about coming
13:46
Speaker 6: back above water now, whereas with a savings account, you
13:48
Speaker 6: know that the yield is kind of guaranteed. You know,
13:50
Speaker 6: you're not really necessarily going long anything, right, you know,
13:53
Speaker 6: I would say that kind of punting around with money
13:56
Speaker 6: in that way is not necessarily the best thing to
13:59
Speaker 6: do if it is indeed one hundred percent of your wealth.
14:01
Speaker 6: And plus, there's some quite odd things going on in
14:04
Speaker 6: the gold market right now that I think, you know,
14:06
Speaker 6: for people who have kind of conventional ideas about the
14:09
Speaker 6: way gold is supposed to work, you know, they could
14:11
Speaker 6: kind of come a cropper if they're kind of not
14:13
Speaker 6: aware of them.
14:15
Speaker 1: Oh, Eddie, what are these things?
14:16
Speaker 6: Well, the main one is that we have central banks
14:20
Speaker 6: kind of around the world, but mostly located in developing markets.
14:24
Speaker 6: You know, we're talking China, Russia, some Arab nations and
14:29
Speaker 6: a few others are buying up gold at a pretty
14:32
Speaker 6: strong rate right now and have been doing so for
14:34
Speaker 6: about a year. And you know you probably thinking, well,
14:38
Speaker 6: why why is this something that I need to be
14:40
Speaker 6: worried about. Well, the reason is is because gold is
14:43
Speaker 6: currently trading far higher than normal models of the way
14:46
Speaker 6: we would kind of model it suggests. And it's a
14:48
Speaker 6: very hard thing to model basically, all we because there's
14:50
Speaker 6: no you know, cash for or anything like that. So
14:52
Speaker 6: what we normally do is just say, well, look, how
14:54
Speaker 6: does gold move normally? When we look at these other
14:56
Speaker 6: kind of macro variables like the dollar treasury yields. It's
15:00
Speaker 6: trading way above that. And the reason is because central
15:02
Speaker 6: banks are buying a lot of it. If they stop,
15:05
Speaker 6: then gold could really really quickly return to worth and
15:08
Speaker 6: then depending on the way you see the kind of
15:11
Speaker 6: world economy doing, do pretty much nothing for a really
15:15
Speaker 6: long time, as it did after the financial crisis. You know,
15:19
Speaker 6: we had that run up and then it went down
15:20
Speaker 6: and then did nothing for years and years. So you're
15:22
Speaker 6: just going to basically sitting on a loss hoping for
15:25
Speaker 6: the next global clarity to happen.
15:28
Speaker 1: Yeah, I get that, But I suppose the one thing
15:30
Speaker 1: you can say about gold is that it does have
15:32
Speaker 1: this very long term history of maintaining its purchasing power
15:38
Speaker 1: relative to inflation, so it always holds its real value
15:41
Speaker 1: over the long term. Whereas if you look at a
15:43
Speaker 1: savings account today, you've been losing money in real terms
15:49
Speaker 1: on a savings account for many, many years now. And
15:52
Speaker 1: if we are moving into a world of financial oppressions
15:55
Speaker 1: discussed on this podcast previously by our interviews with the
15:59
Speaker 1: Russell Napien various, if we're moving into environment where we
16:02
Speaker 1: tend to over the long term see interest rates significantly
16:07
Speaker 1: below inflation over a decade. At the end of the decade,
16:11
Speaker 1: you may look at your sayings account and go, oh,
16:14
Speaker 1: that's not what I had in mind.
16:17
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, for sure, for sure. I mean, and if
16:19
Speaker 6: that is indeed the macro kind of backdrop that we're
16:21
Speaker 6: going to be getting accustomed to over the next ten years,
16:24
Speaker 6: then you know, gold in theory should perform very well
16:28
Speaker 6: in those circumstances. It is a pretty fickle asset, though,
16:31
Speaker 6: I mean, you know, I'm reminded of when it was
16:34
Speaker 6: before a Senate committee, Ben Bernanke, you know, at the
16:37
Speaker 6: time when he was the there was a president said
16:40
Speaker 6: himself that I don't really know why gold price is moved.
16:42
Speaker 6: You know, it has a tendency to do quite odd things.
16:45
Speaker 6: And one thing I should say is this conception that
16:48
Speaker 6: gold always retains its value of inflation is not necessarily true.
16:52
Speaker 6: And the reason we have this conception that it does
16:54
Speaker 6: it is we look at the long term price shot
16:56
Speaker 6: and see that generally it kind of goes up in
16:58
Speaker 6: these you know, or rise and then come down a
17:00
Speaker 6: bit and hit a plateau and go up again. If
17:02
Speaker 6: you actually look at the price of gold adjusted for inflation,
17:05
Speaker 6: you know, as we tend to think about kash a
17:07
Speaker 6: justice for inflation. It's not really a fantastic long tomasset.
17:11
Speaker 6: I mean, if you were just for inflation, the peak
17:13
Speaker 6: gold price is still back in the post inflation here
17:16
Speaker 6: in the seventies eighties, and we've never actually retained that
17:19
Speaker 6: peak if you were just for inflation. So that's definitely
17:22
Speaker 6: something people need to be aware of.
17:24
Speaker 1: Are you going to take the savings accunt Are you're
17:25
Speaker 1: going to take the gold? I mean, I'm not offering
17:28
Speaker 1: them to you, by the way, to come get yourself.
17:30
Speaker 1: It is not actually actually a game show which one
17:33
Speaker 1: would you take?
17:35
Speaker 5: I mean, I think it's a really interesting question because
17:39
Speaker 5: at first we get it and you think that well,
17:41
Speaker 5: I mean, a savings account is always going to return
17:43
Speaker 5: to your money in nominal terms, so you know when
17:46
Speaker 5: the media instinct is but we shouldn't be competed on
17:48
Speaker 5: savings accounts to gold or a bit coin. But when
17:52
Speaker 5: you then think about the real question is in ten
17:55
Speaker 5: years time, do you think that you can lie more
17:58
Speaker 5: and underlying valuesling or in fact, a more interesting question
18:02
Speaker 5: is perhaps would you take a savings account in US
18:05
Speaker 5: dollars or the pound or maybe even an R Curncy
18:08
Speaker 5: or choice or gold or bitcoin, And then I think
18:12
Speaker 5: that does become a question about what do you think
18:15
Speaker 5: is the most reliable form of money basically, And from
18:19
Speaker 5: that point of view, the only thing that would make
18:23
Speaker 5: me think twice about gold is that question of the
18:26
Speaker 5: ten year time horizon, because I definitely I take Eddie's
18:31
Speaker 5: point that gold is possibly expensive relative in as much
18:37
Speaker 5: as it's ever possible to value it, it's probably more
18:41
Speaker 5: towards the expensive end of its spectrum than it is
18:44
Speaker 5: towards the cheaper end of its spectrum. And so I
18:47
Speaker 5: think if the macro picture does end up not going
18:51
Speaker 5: gold way, then maybe I would sit there and think, well,
18:54
Speaker 5: like I'd be better locking into a dollar or is
18:57
Speaker 5: their ling because I can probably fix for five years
18:59
Speaker 5: about a five percent just now, you know, and then
19:02
Speaker 5: and then kind of know that it was going to
19:05
Speaker 5: be you know, it might have lost its value in
19:07
Speaker 5: real terms in ten years time, but I think both
19:09
Speaker 5: those currencies will still be here in ten years, whereas
19:12
Speaker 5: I definitely couldn't say that for a bitcoin if it
19:15
Speaker 5: was like one hundred years, I would definitely say gold.
19:17
Speaker 5: It's more that question of itically in a decade I'm
19:20
Speaker 5: not sure what we'll have lost or retained its value
19:24
Speaker 5: better at this point. I mean, probably would still see gold,
19:28
Speaker 5: but it struggled a bit more A tough to think carder.
19:31
Speaker 1: And there's all we don't want that, they don't want that.
19:34
Speaker 1: And listen, I can give you a lot of things jump,
19:36
Speaker 1: but I can't give you one hundred years.
19:39
Speaker 5: What would you do this point?
19:42
Speaker 1: Well, ten years is such a tricky one, isn't it.
19:45
Speaker 1: In the shorter term, I would probably take the savings
19:48
Speaker 1: account because if you look at our interview with mervon
19:51
Speaker 1: King last week, and you look at all the people
19:54
Speaker 1: now picking up that interview and looking at money supply,
19:56
Speaker 1: et cetera, you begin to see that going into the
19:59
Speaker 1: next couple of year, deflation has become a genuine risk.
20:02
Speaker 1: So the the all very low inflation anyway, so our
20:05
Speaker 1: conversations around financial repression and around interest rates being significantly
20:09
Speaker 1: lower than inflation. There may be a period coming up
20:12
Speaker 1: where suddenly that four percent four and a half percent
20:14
Speaker 1: you can get on your account looks pretty good. And
20:17
Speaker 1: I was looking through you know, my accounts, I'm getting
20:19
Speaker 1: perfectly good rate on the national savings with my wealth manager.
20:23
Speaker 1: I'm getting on my cash I'm getting just below the
20:25
Speaker 1: base rate, so you know, for four and a half,
20:28
Speaker 1: five percent is not an out there rate to be
20:30
Speaker 1: getting right now. And if you see inflation coming down
20:33
Speaker 1: as fast as we think it will you and I
20:35
Speaker 1: unexpectedly fast for most people, that's going to look pretty good.
20:39
Speaker 1: But over ten years, it's much more likely that the
20:41
Speaker 1: financial repression environment that Russell Napier speaks about so so
20:46
Speaker 1: brilliantly will happen. So I think over a decade, I'd
20:49
Speaker 1: probably end up going gold, but quite uncertainly, not not
20:53
Speaker 1: with a very a deep degree of certainty, which because
20:57
Speaker 1: as you know, is unusual for me. Now, before we
20:59
Speaker 1: get any further, I just want to ask you to
21:01
Speaker 1: one thing. One thing. Here's a wild card jerked in
21:04
Speaker 1: for you.
21:05
Speaker 7: Silver.
21:06
Speaker 1: What about silver?
21:07
Speaker 3: Now?
21:07
Speaker 1: That's been performing very interestingly recently, And we get lots
21:10
Speaker 1: of questions about why don't you all talk about silver,
21:13
Speaker 1: which is operates not just as a long term currency,
21:17
Speaker 1: but also as an industrial metal and as also other
21:19
Speaker 1: elements to it. So if you're going to talk about gold,
21:22
Speaker 1: you can't not talk about silver, Eddie. Is it too
21:25
Speaker 1: much to ask you to add silver into that mix?
21:27
Speaker 3: Sure? Yeah, no, I wouldn't.
21:28
Speaker 6: I wouldn't touch silver with a barge pool with my
21:30
Speaker 6: own personal savings, not because not because it's you know,
21:34
Speaker 6: inherently a bad investment, but just because gold is a
21:37
Speaker 6: lot more volatile than when we look at currencies against
21:40
Speaker 6: each other. Gold tends to be a lot more volatile
21:42
Speaker 6: than that, and silver is a hell of a lot
21:45
Speaker 6: more volatile than gold. You know, I mean literally week
21:48
Speaker 6: to week, month a month, you'd be looking at kind
21:50
Speaker 6: of double digit swings in the value of your savings
21:54
Speaker 6: in absolute terms, which you know, frankly it was everything
21:57
Speaker 6: I own. I wouldn't be particulally happy about that, I
22:01
Speaker 6: don't think. And also, I mean, it's just gold relatively speaking.
22:06
Speaker 6: Is it's pretty easy for us to kind of think
22:09
Speaker 6: about in terms of what we think about macro variables.
22:13
Speaker 6: With silver, there's a lot of very idiosyncratic stuff going
22:15
Speaker 6: on that you know, I would not want to be
22:17
Speaker 6: having to try and keep track of, you know, week
22:20
Speaker 6: a week, if you know, it was my entire networth.
22:22
Speaker 6: So but you know, it has a lot of very
22:24
Speaker 6: passionate fans who I'm sure will kind of follow this up.
22:29
Speaker 6: But yeah, it's a dangerous game.
22:30
Speaker 3: To play.
22:31
Speaker 1: Yeah, questions and comments on silver, do you please send
22:33
Speaker 1: them in and we will we will maybe do a
22:35
Speaker 1: little more on silver and gold together at the in
22:38
Speaker 1: the auction John I added silver and would you also
22:40
Speaker 1: not touch it with a badge pole.
22:42
Speaker 5: I think that basically I've ever heard the bit silver
22:44
Speaker 5: was sebastin Lay in one of the of Troy, one
22:48
Speaker 5: of the confidences that we had years ago, and he said,
22:52
Speaker 5: and Severistian is quite you know, it comes across Philly
22:55
Speaker 5: solberly and.
22:56
Speaker 1: Seriously, steady guy.
22:57
Speaker 5: He's a steady guy and he turnder his it. Silver
23:00
Speaker 5: is gold on crack, And I just thought, okay, if
23:04
Speaker 5: you're saying that, then you know, it kind of just
23:06
Speaker 5: goes to the show. I mean it's I think it's
23:08
Speaker 5: it's a lot of fun. But also I mean Dominic Frisbee,
23:10
Speaker 5: who's also an old friend of ours, always used to
23:13
Speaker 5: say that it's like this kind of you know this
23:16
Speaker 5: this friend school friend, you had, had loads of potential
23:18
Speaker 5: and we're going to go everywhere, and then one day
23:21
Speaker 5: you come across them kind of one in the park,
23:23
Speaker 5: we are a bottle in a plastic bag and it's
23:24
Speaker 5: kind of it's going nowhere. So no, it's a fair silver.
23:29
Speaker 5: It's a strange asset, it's a strange a set.
23:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I should just tell you, by the way,
23:34
Speaker 1: that the Edinburgh Fringe is coming up and Dominic will
23:36
Speaker 1: be performing there. So if you Edinburgh, He's always was
23:39
Speaker 1: very funny and John and I will be performing as well.
23:41
Speaker 5: What John, we will and we are very funny.
23:44
Speaker 1: We are very funny. And we're early on for two
23:46
Speaker 1: days and seventy percent of tickets are sold already, so
23:49
Speaker 1: get out there and buy them if you want them. Eddie,
23:52
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us today. That was
23:54
Speaker 1: absolutely great, really interesting, and I think once again we
23:57
Speaker 1: do not have a bitcoin fan. Our next question is
24:05
Speaker 1: a theme that we have touched on before that we're
24:06
Speaker 1: going to keep touching on, and that is incredibly important
24:09
Speaker 1: for all our financial futures active versus passive. So the
24:13
Speaker 1: question is our passive funds like Vanguard. I think he
24:17
Speaker 1: means such as, by the way our passive funds such
24:20
Speaker 1: as Vanguard want to represent equity, is still a good
24:23
Speaker 1: idea or not now here to discuss this with us
24:26
Speaker 1: first time on the show. Thank you, Joe is Stocks
24:29
Speaker 1: reporter Joe Easton. Let's just start with a yes.
24:31
Speaker 7: Sorry, no, I think no is my answer.
24:38
Speaker 1: Oh, okay, that's not what I That is not what
24:40
Speaker 1: I expected. I thought you were going to come on
24:42
Speaker 1: as a fan of passive and John was going to
24:45
Speaker 1: have to explain to you why you were wrong.
24:47
Speaker 5: Actually, I was quite confused as that, because I quite.
24:53
Speaker 7: Interesting.
24:55
Speaker 1: Would you like to start this whole thing all over again?
25:00
Speaker 7: No, I mean I don't think they are good, but
25:02
Speaker 7: I'm happy to thrash it out.
25:04
Speaker 1: Okay, explain to me. So before you you were a
25:08
Speaker 1: fan and the stage of the market of active investing
25:10
Speaker 1: over a passive explained.
25:11
Speaker 7: To us definitely. Yeah. So I think that the main
25:15
Speaker 7: reason to invest in a passive fund essentially was firstly
25:20
Speaker 7: because of the fees are so low, so you don't
25:22
Speaker 7: really pay a fancy analyst who's got a job title
25:27
Speaker 7: as a fund manager to pick stocks, so the fees
25:30
Speaker 7: at Van Goard have always been very low or almost zero.
25:34
Speaker 7: The other reason to own a passive fund is because
25:38
Speaker 7: essentially everything's going up, so just follow the market higher.
25:42
Speaker 7: A lot of that everything's going up kind of trend
25:45
Speaker 7: was in growth stocks, but given that interest rates have
25:49
Speaker 7: obviously readjusted in the way they have the growth element
25:52
Speaker 7: of the market is essentially no longer there and given well,
25:57
Speaker 7: despite the fact that in the past three or four
25:59
Speaker 7: months the market has rebounded pretty strongly, there, in my eyes,
26:05
Speaker 7: is not much legs to the market recovery. And I
26:07
Speaker 7: think if you put your money in a passive tracker fund,
26:11
Speaker 7: you're essentially gonna see your money almost stay at the
26:14
Speaker 7: same level for the next two years. I don't see
26:17
Speaker 7: much upside in stocks, and I would rather put my
26:20
Speaker 7: money in a four percent interest rate paying deposit account
26:24
Speaker 7: in a bank and leave it there for the next
26:27
Speaker 7: two years. That's my view on it.
26:30
Speaker 1: Okay, So that's not even that's not even liking active investing,
26:33
Speaker 1: that's just not liking investing.
26:35
Speaker 7: Yeah, I would. I would also, I would add to
26:37
Speaker 7: that my active view. So I think that you can
26:39
Speaker 7: invest in a good active fund because I think it
26:42
Speaker 7: is more of a stock pickers world for all the
26:44
Speaker 7: reasons that I just said, and you need to really
26:49
Speaker 7: dig deeper to find decent stocks, and there are good
26:53
Speaker 7: passive funds that do that. And I would much rather
26:56
Speaker 7: have my money in a passive fund with good stock
26:58
Speaker 7: pickers behind it.
27:00
Speaker 1: Sorry, an active fund with good stock pick.
27:03
Speaker 7: My terminology mixed up there completely.
27:06
Speaker 1: This is really interesting because this has always been my
27:08
Speaker 1: big gripe with passive funds is that if you invest passively,
27:13
Speaker 1: there's no such thing. By the way, there's no such
27:15
Speaker 1: thing as passive, because every every choice is active, right,
27:18
Speaker 1: so someone's making the decisions somewhere, So there's no such
27:21
Speaker 1: thing as purely passive investing. But the majority of the
27:24
Speaker 1: choices are to be a momentum investor. And if you
27:27
Speaker 1: tell someone who is a passive only investor that they
27:29
Speaker 1: are effectively a momentum investor, that's kind of shocking for them.
27:33
Speaker 1: And the momentum recently, over the last decade or so
27:36
Speaker 1: has been behind long duration stocks, and so that's why
27:39
Speaker 1: passive has looked so successful. Momentum has really worked. But
27:42
Speaker 1: momentum investing actually it has a great record over the
27:44
Speaker 1: very long term, but it doesn't always work. And it
27:47
Speaker 1: looks like this coming environment will not be a good
27:50
Speaker 1: one for momentum investors. That would be my take on it.
27:54
Speaker 1: You know that the stocks that have been successful over
27:57
Speaker 1: the last decades are not going to be the ones
27:58
Speaker 1: that are successful over them next decade. I'm obviously being
28:01
Speaker 1: proven wrong so far. This year and will probably continue
28:03
Speaker 1: to be proven wrong. But that's the way I see it.
28:06
Speaker 1: And if that's the case, the last thing you want
28:08
Speaker 1: to be is a momentum investor, and if you are
28:10
Speaker 1: a passive investor, you are a momentum investor. John, I mean,
28:15
Speaker 1: I agree.
28:16
Speaker 5: I think that's a really reasonable take, and oddly I'm
28:20
Speaker 5: slightly throwing here. I think overall we probably don't really
28:25
Speaker 5: particularly disagree here. But I think the one thing I
28:29
Speaker 5: would say about passive versus active is that if you're
28:33
Speaker 5: going to choose to have your money and say, you know,
28:37
Speaker 5: the S and P five hundred, then it then comes
28:41
Speaker 5: down to what instrument are you going to choose to
28:45
Speaker 5: invest in that? So a lot of it kind of
28:48
Speaker 5: comes down it's not exactly the terminology, but for example,
28:51
Speaker 5: actually tell you what I took. The reader specifically said
28:54
Speaker 5: the vane Guard one hundred percent equity fund, and I
28:56
Speaker 5: looked at it because I assumed that it would be
28:58
Speaker 5: basically a global tracker. So I thought, right, so like
29:01
Speaker 5: seventy percent of this is going to be in US
29:03
Speaker 5: stocks because that's what the global track it looks like.
29:06
Speaker 5: And actually it is structured differently to that. It's like
29:09
Speaker 5: a full twenty five percent is in UK equities, fifty
29:12
Speaker 5: percent is in the US, and you get five percent Japan,
29:15
Speaker 5: nine percent emerging markets, and about eleven percent in Europe
29:18
Speaker 5: x UK. And that's not to say I'm not making
29:20
Speaker 5: a judgment as to whether that's a good mix or not,
29:23
Speaker 5: but the point is that's actually, in terms of compared
29:26
Speaker 5: to a global tracker, that's quite an active set of
29:29
Speaker 5: asset allocation because they're heavily overweight the UK, heavily underweight,
29:34
Speaker 5: the US, heavily underweight Japan actually in global terms, and
29:38
Speaker 5: alviously you haven't got very much in EM so I
29:42
Speaker 5: suppose it's it's this problem when we talk about passive
29:45
Speaker 5: versus active, it's like, well, how passive is that really?
29:49
Speaker 5: And then when you're talking about active managers and the
29:51
Speaker 5: track record versus passive, even in bear markets, they don't
29:56
Speaker 5: on average be passive. So you do have to have
30:00
Speaker 5: infidence that you're able to choose a good active manager.
30:03
Speaker 5: And we've discussed as before, and we do tend to
30:05
Speaker 5: conclude that, well, if you go in an investment trust and
30:09
Speaker 5: you know that's usually a raper kind of like you know,
30:13
Speaker 5: punt and ground for decent active or rather it's a
30:16
Speaker 5: structure that enables active managers to make the most of
30:19
Speaker 5: their best ideas. So I do believe that there's room
30:23
Speaker 5: for active management. But I think this question about the
30:26
Speaker 5: timing is perhaps I don't know. Maybe it's about red hearing.
30:32
Speaker 1: Isn't it when you there's a lot of them. As
30:34
Speaker 1: with everything, slightly depends how you do the numbers. So
30:37
Speaker 1: you can say that the average active fund regularly underperforms
30:40
Speaker 1: the average passive fund, but of course the average passive
30:44
Speaker 1: fund must by definition underperform the market, right because after
30:47
Speaker 1: fees is going to underperform the market. And if you
30:50
Speaker 1: instead of going for the average active fund by the
30:53
Speaker 1: number of active funds, but by the weight of assets
30:56
Speaker 1: in active funds, you can often come out with a
30:58
Speaker 1: very very different answer because the most successful active fans
31:02
Speaker 1: of the highest aum et cetera, very often do have perform.
31:05
Speaker 1: So it slightly depends how you do the numbers. There's
31:06
Speaker 1: no real black and white here. But Jo, I'm really
31:09
Speaker 1: interested in this idea that you would take a savings account,
31:12
Speaker 1: because our last question was about whether one would take bitcoin, gold,
31:16
Speaker 1: or a savings account over a ten year period, and
31:18
Speaker 1: I'm getting a feeling you might be on the savings
31:20
Speaker 1: account side there.
31:22
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean I wouldn't take bitcoin. That's one hundred percent.
31:25
Speaker 7: We can remove that one from the Yeah, no, fair enough.
31:30
Speaker 7: It's not exactly a contrarian view, but yeah, no, I
31:35
Speaker 7: think that the I think a four percent interest rate
31:39
Speaker 7: account looks pretty well. It's kind of thing I guess
31:42
Speaker 7: my parents would probably tell me to invest in because
31:45
Speaker 7: it is quite steady and stable. But I think it
31:49
Speaker 7: looks pretty attractive really. And also I know people that
31:53
Speaker 7: I do know lots of people that have invested in
31:57
Speaker 7: Track of funds, even Vanguard Track of Funds, and I
32:00
Speaker 7: think they are missing out on four percent every whenever
32:05
Speaker 7: on the on their money, and it's waiting for that
32:08
Speaker 7: to recover. And I just think, yeah, I think there
32:12
Speaker 7: is there's a lot of attractiveness in that.
32:15
Speaker 1: All right, But Joe, listen, what we're hearing here is
32:17
Speaker 1: you're a yield guy. You're clearly a yield guy. You'll
32:19
Speaker 1: do anything for four percent, right, anything.
32:22
Speaker 5: So I am what's coming.
32:24
Speaker 1: I was out there looking for my four percent, my
32:27
Speaker 1: solid four percent every year over the long term. You
32:29
Speaker 1: know where I'd go UK equities. I'll be just diving
32:33
Speaker 1: into the first one hundred four percent. Yeah, I mean
32:36
Speaker 1: this is this is what you want. Get your four
32:39
Speaker 1: percent in and you've got a possibility of capital gain
32:42
Speaker 1: there as well. How much better is that than sticking
32:44
Speaker 1: your money with that West just saying.
32:46
Speaker 7: It is good? Yeah, it's good. I do have coincidently,
32:49
Speaker 7: i'd be bank with that West.
32:50
Speaker 1: But if John and I banked with that West would
32:55
Speaker 1: have been chucked up by now exactly.
32:58
Speaker 7: Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you Yeah, I think UK stocks
33:01
Speaker 7: is you know, everyone says it about them obviously being cheap,
33:05
Speaker 7: but then it's only obviously cheap if it goes up again,
33:08
Speaker 7: because if it doesn't go up, then it wasn't cheap.
33:10
Speaker 7: It was just low priced and not a very goodbye.
33:14
Speaker 7: So I'm not Yeah, I'm not really convinced on UK
33:17
Speaker 7: because he's obviously the fifty one hundred, the old classic
33:20
Speaker 7: thing about international exposure, et cetera. Some of that probably
33:24
Speaker 7: is pretty pretty solid. But yeah, we're talking domestic stocks,
33:29
Speaker 7: and I wouldn't I probably wouldn't wouldn't touch that with
33:31
Speaker 7: a barge pole for the minute.
33:33
Speaker 1: A yield guy, but not a value trapped guy. Yes, Joe,
33:36
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us today. I really
33:38
Speaker 1: appreciate it, and how nice to have all of us
33:41
Speaker 1: agreeing that active might be better than passive over the
33:45
Speaker 1: next decade. The next decade has got a lot of
33:46
Speaker 1: work to do, hasn't it.
33:48
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think they're still in a job, aren't they
33:51
Speaker 7: the active managers? I think.
33:56
Speaker 1: For a final question, kind of a fun one to
33:58
Speaker 1: get you going for the summer, it's this, just to
34:00
Speaker 1: mix it up, could you tell us what your favorite
34:02
Speaker 1: finance related books and films are? And we are told
34:06
Speaker 1: that we can't choose each other's books, and we also
34:09
Speaker 1: can't choose Adam Smith. They are a tough lots, aren't they, John?
34:14
Speaker 3: They are.
34:16
Speaker 5: You know this is free. We need to get some revenue.
34:18
Speaker 5: Let me promote my own book.
34:21
Speaker 1: Yeah, John and I are not going to recommend each
34:23
Speaker 1: other's books, but just to be clear, we have written
34:25
Speaker 1: them and you can go look them up. And also
34:27
Speaker 1: just be clear, we both love Adam Smith, but no
34:29
Speaker 1: one ever reads Adam Smith. You know, we did this
34:31
Speaker 1: show which I mentioned earlier in the show at the
34:33
Speaker 1: festival where we ask people it's an Adam Smith show, right,
34:36
Speaker 1: Everyone who comes is supposedly an Adam Smith. Fun and
34:39
Speaker 1: a fan and we ask people if they've ever read
34:42
Speaker 1: Wealth of Nations, etc. And almost no one ever puts
34:45
Speaker 1: up their hands, And whenever anyone does, you can find
34:47
Speaker 1: out pretty quickly they haven't read it by just asking
34:49
Speaker 1: them a few key questions. So we love Adam Smith,
34:51
Speaker 1: but I'm pretty sure that John's never read Wealth of
34:53
Speaker 1: Nations from beginning to end, John, have you no?
34:56
Speaker 3: I haven't.
34:56
Speaker 2: No.
34:57
Speaker 5: Model sentiments are did? That's my theme? Yeah, the whole
35:02
Speaker 5: thing that.
35:04
Speaker 1: It's at at university, presumably at university, very worthy right now.
35:11
Speaker 1: We asked around the newsroom and we asked people bought
35:16
Speaker 1: their favorite finance related books are So let me give
35:19
Speaker 1: you a couple. Simon Kennedy Misbehaving by Richard Taylor. That's
35:23
Speaker 1: a really good one. I see Anna Edward's A World
35:26
Speaker 1: Without Work by Daniel Suskind.
35:28
Speaker 2: Is that how you say that?
35:29
Speaker 3: Suskind?
35:30
Speaker 5: Suskind?
35:31
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't know.
35:32
Speaker 1: Neil Neil Callanan who we've had on the podcast before,
35:35
Speaker 1: now he's decent us A Long List money Men by
35:38
Speaker 1: Dan McCrum. I like that one. Barbarians at the Gate
35:41
Speaker 1: very popular. Everyone's read that. The man Who's solved the
35:43
Speaker 1: market Gregory Zuckerman The Cult of We We work in
35:47
Speaker 1: the Great Startup Delusion. Oh, I don't know. I think
35:49
Speaker 1: that would just irritate me so much. I'm not sure
35:51
Speaker 1: I could bring myself to read it, John, What are
35:53
Speaker 1: your favorites to My.
35:56
Speaker 5: My favorite book is Reminiscences of a Store Corporato. I
35:59
Speaker 5: love it's so good, so good. It's like Mark Twain
36:03
Speaker 5: writing about the stock market and such a glamorous era
36:08
Speaker 5: and also the things. If you read it, then you
36:11
Speaker 5: have to look up what actually happened to Jesse Livermore
36:15
Speaker 5: because it's it's the kind of book that gets you
36:17
Speaker 5: enthused about the idea of being like kind of daring
36:20
Speaker 5: do stock market trader, whereas his wider life is basically
36:23
Speaker 5: a massive tragic cautionary tail. I mean, I'd love to
36:27
Speaker 5: do a more end depth podcast about him. I keeps
36:30
Speaker 5: occasionally nudge someone say, Oh, we need to one these
36:33
Speaker 5: like Netflix serial documentary type ones, because Jesse Livermore's an
36:37
Speaker 5: endlessly fascinating character. But Yeah, to be honest, I think
36:40
Speaker 5: that's that's probably the one. I go back to it
36:42
Speaker 5: more than any other finance book.
36:43
Speaker 1: Yeah, No, that's a good one. I'm going to chuck
36:45
Speaker 1: in there Anatomy of the Bear by Ruzzl Nepier. It's
36:48
Speaker 1: an oly, very goody and he's one of our favorites drafts.
36:51
Speaker 1: It's such a good book. He's written other books more recently,
36:55
Speaker 1: but that's his standout. I think now I want to
36:58
Speaker 1: ask about movies. I haven't seen the Barbie movie yet, John,
37:02
Speaker 1: have you seen the Barbie movie yet?
37:03
Speaker 5: I hate so haven't no, But.
37:06
Speaker 1: I'd be really interested to see that, And I wonder
37:08
Speaker 1: if that's the kind of movie that will tell us
37:09
Speaker 1: a lot about finance, because one of the things I
37:11
Speaker 1: always thought about Barbie is how extraordinary she was as
37:14
Speaker 1: a toy, A woman with her own house, her own horsebox,
37:18
Speaker 1: her own pickup truck, her own everything. You know, So
37:22
Speaker 1: there's a behind the doll. There's a hell of a
37:25
Speaker 1: career paying for all this stuff.
37:28
Speaker 5: That portfolio kidiot, I believe.
37:30
Speaker 2: I don't know.
37:30
Speaker 1: I'd like to have a look at her money management,
37:32
Speaker 1: but I suspect that that's not what we're after today.
37:34
Speaker 1: I don't know if our audience are going to watch
37:36
Speaker 1: that kind of thing. Thanks for listening to this week's
37:44
Speaker 1: Maren doalgs Money. We'll be back on the eighth of September,
37:46
Speaker 1: but keep an eye on the podcast speed for any
37:48
Speaker 1: bonus episodes we might drop, because you never know, we
37:51
Speaker 1: might just do that. In the meantime, If you like,
37:53
Speaker 1: I share, rate, review, and subscribeer have you listened to podcasts?
37:56
Speaker 1: This episode was hosted by me Maren Sumset Web was
37:59
Speaker 1: produced by Samasadi, additional editing by Lake Maples. Special thanks
38:03
Speaker 1: to Joe Easton, Marcus Ashworth and Eddie Spence and of
38:07
Speaker 1: course John Steffick and of course a weekly reminder design
38:10
Speaker 1: up to John's daily newsletter money to still linked in
38:13
Speaker 1: the show notes