Latest / Trumponomics / Taking the Long View on America’s Economic Upheaval

Transcript

Taking the Long View on America’s Economic Upheaval · Trumponomics

0:00
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. I'm not worried about
0:09
Speaker 1: the markets over the long term. If we put good
0:12
Speaker 1: tax policy in place, deregulation and energy security, the markets
0:18
Speaker 1: will do pread.
0:28
Speaker 2: I'm Stephanie Flanders, head of Government and Economics at Bloomberg,
0:31
Speaker 2: and this is Trumpnomics, the podcast that looks at the
0:34
Speaker 2: economic world of Donald Trump, how he's already shaped the
0:37
Speaker 2: global economy and what on earth is going to happen next.
0:41
Speaker 2: And there you just heard Treasury Secretary Scott Besant on
0:44
Speaker 2: NBC's Meet the Press last week doing what Treasury sectaries
0:48
Speaker 2: are supposed to do, making little of scary moves in
0:51
Speaker 2: financial markets, insisting that everything's going according to plan. But
0:55
Speaker 2: it has to be said, I can't remember many of
0:58
Speaker 2: his predecessors having to do it quite so often or
1:01
Speaker 2: so aggressively in just their first few weeks in office.
1:04
Speaker 2: It feels an eternity ago that the smart money in
1:08
Speaker 2: devors at the end of January were so cockerhoop about
1:11
Speaker 2: the US, so bearish about everywhere else. US consumer confidence
1:16
Speaker 2: surveys were going up, so were the US market. But
1:20
Speaker 2: as we pointed out on this podcast a few weeks
1:22
Speaker 2: ago that has all gone dramatically into reverse, and now
1:26
Speaker 2: talk of Trump's session is everywhere, But it has only
1:30
Speaker 2: been a few weeks. And those problems that President Donald
1:32
Speaker 2: Trump talked about on the campaign trail or they're not
1:35
Speaker 2: going to go away overnight or without some tough decisions. Traditionally,
1:40
Speaker 2: political advisers to any newly elected government would tell you
1:43
Speaker 2: best to get those tough decisions, all that bad news
1:46
Speaker 2: in as early as you can, as long as possible
1:49
Speaker 2: away from the next election. So this week we did
1:52
Speaker 2: want to take a wider view on the White House's
1:55
Speaker 2: economic policies, to look at the trumponomics long game. Is
1:59
Speaker 2: it possible that all of these bumps on the road
2:03
Speaker 2: are in fact taking us to a better long term
2:05
Speaker 2: destination after all? Well, to focus on this I think
2:11
Speaker 2: pretty important question. I have Tom Orlick, chief economist for
2:15
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Economics, sitting in London currently but normally in Washington,
2:18
Speaker 2: and he's particularly well placed to talk about this because
2:21
Speaker 2: he spent eleven years in China learning to take the
2:23
Speaker 2: long view. So Tom, thank you very much for joining us.
2:26
Speaker 3: Great to be here, Stephanie. I have to say before
2:32
Speaker 3: we start, I'm a bit surprised to see you here.
2:35
Speaker 3: When I came on Stephanomics, you were the host. Now
2:38
Speaker 3: I have been invited on Trump Panomics. I naturally assumed,
2:42
Speaker 3: given the name change, that the great Man himself would
2:45
Speaker 3: be here for a discussion. But still great to see.
2:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm sorry about that disappointment. But as
2:50
Speaker 2: we're going to talk about, he's been pretty busy. I
2:52
Speaker 2: said in the intro. I mean, if it was anybody else,
2:54
Speaker 2: you sort of feel like we wouldn't be very surprised
2:57
Speaker 2: that a lot of sort of negative things and difficult
3:00
Speaker 2: decisions were happening early in the administration rather than late
3:04
Speaker 2: when people have a chance of remembering them more clearly
3:07
Speaker 2: when they go to the ballot boxes. Are you surprised,
3:10
Speaker 2: as our chief economist, how negativity has taken hold so quickly?
3:15
Speaker 2: I mean I saw the BNP baiber chief economist a
3:18
Speaker 2: note of hers that's just come in my box saying
3:20
Speaker 2: it's been must be a record for how quickly it's
3:23
Speaker 2: taken for the Davos Consensus to be overturned.
3:27
Speaker 3: Yeah, I am surprised. I think before the inauguration there
3:30
Speaker 3: was two views about how the Trump administration was going
3:34
Speaker 3: to go. One view was that there'd be a lot
3:37
Speaker 3: of talk about tariffs and a lot of talk about deportations,
3:41
Speaker 3: but actually the real energy and the real action would
3:44
Speaker 3: be around tax cuts and regulation cuts, and so it
3:48
Speaker 3: was going to be noisy and it was going to
3:49
Speaker 3: be raucous, but in terms of the substance, it was
3:52
Speaker 3: going to feel pretty much like a traditional Republican administration.
3:56
Speaker 3: I think that was more or less the consensus in
3:58
Speaker 3: the markets, the consent amongst the Davos crowd. The other possibility,
4:02
Speaker 3: of course, and I didn't think people really took this
4:04
Speaker 3: very seriously, was that he'd actually try and do what
4:08
Speaker 3: he talked about on the campaign trail, sweeping tariffs, sweeping
4:12
Speaker 3: cuts in government spending, the most deportations since President Dwight Eisenhower,
4:17
Speaker 3: and eight weeks in, it seems like we're getting that
4:21
Speaker 3: second possibility. That's why the mood has swung so quickly
4:26
Speaker 3: from that optimism to pessimism.
4:28
Speaker 2: The manner of the sort of the execution, at least
4:31
Speaker 2: on the economic policy, I think has maybe distracted people
4:34
Speaker 2: from the kind of longer term view that we're going
4:36
Speaker 2: to take on this podcast, because we obviously have had
4:39
Speaker 2: changes of minds, last minute delays, or suspensions and exclusions
4:44
Speaker 2: for the tariffs. Certainly, I think that's distracted a bit
4:47
Speaker 2: from the extraordinarily successful kind of institutional first few weeks
4:53
Speaker 2: of this administration. I can't think of one. I mean,
4:55
Speaker 2: not so much on the economic policy. I can't think
4:57
Speaker 2: of the first few weeks of administration which has fanned
5:01
Speaker 2: out across the departments and agencies of government so effectively
5:06
Speaker 2: to impose its will in such a short period. I mean,
5:09
Speaker 2: we've obviously heard a lot about dose, but the efficiency
5:11
Speaker 2: with which this administration has approached the executive orders and
5:16
Speaker 2: the placing of people across vast swathes of government to
5:20
Speaker 2: pursue the administration's cultural and ideological objectives and learn anything else.
5:24
Speaker 2: I think if you were just a sort of change consultant,
5:28
Speaker 2: you'd have to be sort of tipping your hat at
5:30
Speaker 2: how effective that's been, regardless of where we end up
5:34
Speaker 2: or what gets broken along the way. Anyway, all of
5:37
Speaker 2: that probably deserves a podcast episode in its own right.
5:39
Speaker 2: But on the core economics on which he was elected
5:42
Speaker 2: I think people might take your point, but they would say, look,
5:46
Speaker 2: you know, the main thing. Certainly a lot of voters
5:48
Speaker 2: have been saying the main thing we were focused on
5:50
Speaker 2: was inflation, and if anything on inflation, you seem to
5:54
Speaker 2: be pushing things the other way. So just lay out
5:57
Speaker 2: for us the case for thinking this administration's being a
6:00
Speaker 2: bit more strategic than it looks.
6:02
Speaker 3: So I think the first thing to say, Stephanie is
6:04
Speaker 3: that the Trump administration and Trump himself, has made a
6:08
Speaker 3: compelling case for what the problems are. Sometimes in analysis
6:13
Speaker 3: and commentary you see a comparison between Trump and Reagan,
6:17
Speaker 3: and the implicit point is, well, Reagan was a great
6:20
Speaker 3: Republican president. He was courtly, he was gentlemanly, he was optimistic.
6:25
Speaker 3: Trump wants to be a great Republican president. Why is
6:28
Speaker 3: he so bleak? Why is he so crude? And I
6:31
Speaker 3: think the answer to that question really lies in the
6:35
Speaker 3: very different economies which they inherited. Reagan inherited a US
6:40
Speaker 3: economy which was on the rise, a US economy where
6:43
Speaker 3: debt was just twenty five percent of GDP, A US
6:47
Speaker 3: economy which still had a trade surplus. Fast forward to
6:50
Speaker 3: twenty twenty five, and Trump's inherited a US economy which
6:53
Speaker 3: is shrinking as a share of the global total, A
6:56
Speaker 3: US economy where debt is one hundred percent of GDP
6:59
Speaker 3: and rising fast and a US economy which in twenty
7:02
Speaker 3: twenty four had a trade deficit approaching nine hundred billion dollars.
7:07
Speaker 3: So Reagan was optimistic and that resonated with voters. Trump
7:11
Speaker 3: is bleak and pessimistic, and that resonated with voters. And
7:14
Speaker 3: when you look at the shift in the US economy,
7:16
Speaker 3: I think you can see the reason for that transition.
7:20
Speaker 3: So I think top marks on identifying the problems, on
7:23
Speaker 3: delivering the solutions, well, I think the Trump administration can
7:27
Speaker 3: point to some early and significant wins. They can point
7:31
Speaker 3: to TSMC, the giant Taiwanese semiconductor company, which has said
7:36
Speaker 3: it will invest one hundred billion dollars in the United States.
7:39
Speaker 3: They can point to Germany, which has said it's going
7:42
Speaker 3: to spend five hundred billion dollars on infrastructure and probably
7:46
Speaker 3: hundreds of billions more on defense. A long term objective
7:50
Speaker 3: of the US has been to have its allies pay
7:53
Speaker 3: more for the cost of their defense. They haven't achieved it,
7:56
Speaker 3: but Trump seems to be delivering. So they can point
8:00
Speaker 3: to some early and I think significant wins. But certainly
8:03
Speaker 3: you're right, the early days of the administration have been
8:06
Speaker 3: characterized by confusion, by missteps, by abrupt about faces. Think
8:13
Speaker 3: about the twenty five percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico
8:16
Speaker 3: which were abruptly removed. That's one of the reasons why
8:20
Speaker 3: the mood has swung from optimism to pessimism, and that,
8:24
Speaker 3: as you point out, is also one of the reasons
8:26
Speaker 3: why concern about inflation is rising again, with the University
8:30
Speaker 3: of Michigan survey showing households are really quite concerned that
8:34
Speaker 3: tariffs are going to be driving inflation higher.
8:37
Speaker 2: Again, the manner of the imposition of the tariffs has
8:41
Speaker 2: not been efficient. But what can we say about the
8:45
Speaker 2: architecture of what he's been seeking out to do. I mean,
8:48
Speaker 2: does it have a genuine chance of addressing that sort
8:52
Speaker 2: of long term trade gap that the US has had
8:54
Speaker 2: for so long, because that's one of the things that
8:57
Speaker 2: he's identified as a problem. But I guess the question
9:00
Speaker 2: would be whether tariffs is the solution.
9:03
Speaker 3: So if we go to the economic textbooks, tariffs are
9:06
Speaker 3: absolutely not the solution. The economics textbooks tell us that
9:10
Speaker 3: trade balances are not determined by whether you've got tariffs
9:14
Speaker 3: or you haven't got tariffs. Trade balances are determined by
9:17
Speaker 3: the relationship between saving an investment, and tariffs don't affect
9:22
Speaker 3: that relationship. So when you impose tariffs, what happens is
9:27
Speaker 3: currencies move to maintain a trade balance, which is consistent
9:31
Speaker 3: with that fundamental relationship between saving an investment. If you
9:35
Speaker 3: look at the economic textbooks, Trump is absolutely following the
9:38
Speaker 3: wrong approach. I think if we did have Donald Trump
9:41
Speaker 3: on this podcast, what he would probably say is, well,
9:45
Speaker 3: textbooks be damned, look at the results I'm delivering. TSMC
9:49
Speaker 3: are investing one hundred billion dollars in the United States.
9:53
Speaker 3: Apple have agreed to invest hundreds of billions of dollars
9:56
Speaker 3: in the United States. Other companies faced with the threat
9:59
Speaker 3: of tariffs also thinking about moving their supply chains back
10:02
Speaker 3: to the US. For decades, the United States has lectured
10:07
Speaker 3: China about the importance of relying less on exports and
10:11
Speaker 3: boosting its own consumption, and China's officials have listened politely
10:16
Speaker 3: and sip their tea and basically ignored them. What's happened
10:20
Speaker 3: since Trump came into power. Well, Premier Lee Chang at
10:23
Speaker 3: the National People's Congress in Beijing a few weeks ago,
10:26
Speaker 3: said the ego ren Wu. The first task is to
10:31
Speaker 3: Dali Chi Jung chal Fe vigorously increase consumption, and he's
10:35
Speaker 3: put some money behind that. The Chinese are targeting a
10:40
Speaker 3: discal deficit in twenty twenty five of eight percent of GDP,
10:44
Speaker 3: a lot more than six percent which was their target
10:46
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty four, and Li Chang's telling us that
10:49
Speaker 3: money is going towards consumption spending. So the textbooks tell
10:54
Speaker 3: us it won't work. Trump thinks it will. Some of
10:57
Speaker 3: the early evidence is lining up behind his case.
11:00
Speaker 2: You see, this is a difference between our economics podcasts
11:03
Speaker 2: and anybody else's economics podcast Other people, including the Rory
11:07
Speaker 2: Stewart and Alastair Campbell on their politics show last week,
11:10
Speaker 2: can talk a little bit about the Chinese economy, but
11:12
Speaker 2: only here would you get some of the key quotes
11:15
Speaker 2: in Mandarin. So I think we can chalk up some
11:17
Speaker 2: points on that one. I think when it comes to
11:19
Speaker 2: the rest of the world, the rest of the world
11:22
Speaker 2: might differ on this, but I think if you're looking
11:24
Speaker 2: at the world through a Trumpian lens, I think you
11:28
Speaker 2: would have to say there's been movement in his direction
11:31
Speaker 2: quite dramatically, so in Europe, maybe not for the reasons
11:35
Speaker 2: that you might want, but there's certainly been a structural change,
11:40
Speaker 2: most dramatically in Germany. It's approached to defense spending, even
11:44
Speaker 2: at the cost of overturning or ignoring for those purposes.
11:48
Speaker 2: It's long standing limit on debt, and as you identify,
11:52
Speaker 2: also a quite significant change of trajectory in China at
11:57
Speaker 2: home in the US. And he also point to any wins.
12:01
Speaker 2: I mean, some of the other things he's identified, the
12:04
Speaker 2: cost of government borrowing, Oil prices, low oil has been
12:09
Speaker 2: a theme of Donald Trump's pretty much all of his
12:12
Speaker 2: political and business career, the high level of the dollar.
12:16
Speaker 2: How's he doing on those things?
12:17
Speaker 3: So I think it's a mixed picture, Stephanie. Think about
12:20
Speaker 3: the stock market. Trump, in the past, when the market
12:23
Speaker 3: has been going up, has viewed the stock market as
12:25
Speaker 3: kind of a daily report card on his performance. Well,
12:30
Speaker 3: since Trump came into power, the S and P five hundred,
12:33
Speaker 3: the NASDAC, they haven't created, but they are markedly down.
12:38
Speaker 3: And that's the market saying, you know what, all of
12:41
Speaker 3: this uncertainty isn't going to be good for growth. All
12:44
Speaker 3: of these tariffs aren't going to be good for company profits.
12:47
Speaker 3: We're not optimistic. If we look at the dollar. Well,
12:51
Speaker 3: Trump's views on the dollar are a little bit You'll
12:54
Speaker 3: be hugely surprised to hear me say this, Stephanie. Trump's
12:56
Speaker 3: views on the dollar are a little bit internally inconsistent.
12:59
Speaker 3: On the one hand, he would like a weaker dollar
13:02
Speaker 3: to support export competitiveness and reduce that trade deficit. On
13:06
Speaker 3: the other hand, he would like the dollar to retain
13:09
Speaker 3: its status as a global reserve currency so that US
13:12
Speaker 3: borrowing costs stay low. And those things point in different directions.
13:16
Speaker 3: What happened since the election, Well, he's got the weaker dollar,
13:20
Speaker 3: probably not for reasons that he would like. The dollar
13:23
Speaker 3: is weak, not because the markets are acquiescing in his
13:27
Speaker 3: desire to boost export competitiveness, but because they're more pessimistic
13:31
Speaker 3: about the outlook for the US. And on oil prices, well,
13:35
Speaker 3: Trump wants cheaper oil prices. I think we want all
13:38
Speaker 3: want cheaper oil prices. Certainly the US households want cheaper
13:42
Speaker 3: oil prices. He thinks that drill baby drill, slashing regulations
13:47
Speaker 3: on oil producers in the United States is going to
13:50
Speaker 3: be a driver of increased supply, and that's what's going
13:52
Speaker 3: to bring prices down. Oil producers, Well, they're not so
13:56
Speaker 3: certain they'd certainly take the cut in regulations, but whether
13:59
Speaker 3: they're going to increase production that's a different question. So far,
14:02
Speaker 3: though oil prices have come down from around eighty dollars
14:05
Speaker 3: a barrel when he was elected to around seventy dollars
14:08
Speaker 3: a barrel as we're recording today, So again a move
14:11
Speaker 3: in the right direction, though not necessarily a reflection of
14:15
Speaker 3: early success for Trump's policies.
14:17
Speaker 2: Does it matter that these things are happening for the
14:19
Speaker 2: wrong reason, especially if it's early in the term. Famously,
14:23
Speaker 2: the good economic news that was in the economic statistics
14:26
Speaker 2: last year was not being felt by American households, and
14:31
Speaker 2: apparently was not felt in the results of the election either. Now,
14:36
Speaker 2: if there's some underlying bad news which is altering markets,
14:41
Speaker 2: pushing down the long term cost at borrowing cost mortgage rates,
14:45
Speaker 2: is it possible that people will actually notice those things
14:48
Speaker 2: and not the negativity in parts of the real economy
14:51
Speaker 2: that's leading to them, and he will end up with
14:55
Speaker 2: the kind of positive trajectory from here that many governments
14:59
Speaker 2: would like to have. You get your bad news in
15:00
Speaker 2: the first six months, nine months, and then everything seems
15:05
Speaker 2: to be getting better as you approach the next selection.
15:08
Speaker 2: I mean, in the previous Trump administration, and we've talked
15:11
Speaker 2: about it in the past with your chief US economist
15:13
Speaker 2: Dana Wong and others, you had a different ordering where
15:18
Speaker 2: the sugar rush of the tax cuts was all really
15:21
Speaker 2: quite early on in the administration, and some of the
15:24
Speaker 2: negativity caused by the tariffs, as Anna has pointed out,
15:29
Speaker 2: well that was delayed because of the legacy of the
15:33
Speaker 2: tax cuts sugar rush, But actually some of the bad
15:36
Speaker 2: news was coming in even before COVID. You know, in
15:39
Speaker 2: the latter part of the administration, you were actually starting
15:42
Speaker 2: to have the bad news, which is exactly what you
15:43
Speaker 2: don't want. So this could be another way in which
15:46
Speaker 2: the administration has learned from the limitations they hit in
15:50
Speaker 2: the first administration. Do you think that's a stretch They've
15:53
Speaker 2: got their timing better this time.
15:55
Speaker 3: I think there's certainly something in the idea that getting
15:58
Speaker 3: the bad news out of the way ahead of the
16:01
Speaker 3: midterms is a good political thinking from the Trump administration.
16:05
Speaker 3: I guess the nuance I would introduce is, I don't
16:07
Speaker 3: think we've had anything like all the bad news yet.
16:10
Speaker 3: Right If we think about the drop in the stock market,
16:14
Speaker 3: the fall in the dollar, the dash into US treasuries,
16:18
Speaker 3: it's all because of noise, uncertainty, sudden about faces. We
16:23
Speaker 3: haven't actually had the big policy shock yet. April the
16:27
Speaker 3: second is when we're getting the major tariff announcement potentially
16:32
Speaker 3: a significant increase in tariffs on all of the major
16:36
Speaker 3: US trade partners, including Europe, and on public spending. Well,
16:42
Speaker 3: Elon Musk in his Department of Government Efficiency have certainly
16:46
Speaker 3: put the fear of God into all of the federal
16:48
Speaker 3: employees in Washington, d C. And they've certainly captured a
16:51
Speaker 3: lot of headlines. But even based on their own estimate,
16:55
Speaker 3: which many analysts are skeptical about, they've only saved a
16:59
Speaker 3: little bit more than hundred billion dollars. And that's really
17:02
Speaker 3: pretty insignificant relative to the size of the cuts in
17:06
Speaker 3: government spending which Trump is going to need to deliver
17:09
Speaker 3: if he wants to get the fiscal deficit from six
17:11
Speaker 3: point four percent of GDP, which is where it was
17:14
Speaker 3: last year ninety three percent of GDP, which is where
17:17
Speaker 3: Scott Besson says it has to be so tactically politically,
17:22
Speaker 3: getting the bad news out of the way first is
17:24
Speaker 3: a good idea, but the caveat would introduces. If you
17:28
Speaker 3: think that bad news we've had so far is all
17:30
Speaker 3: the bad news, well I've got some bad news for you.
17:33
Speaker 2: To return to where we started. He has identified some
17:36
Speaker 2: pretty fundamental problems with the US economy, with the US
17:41
Speaker 2: economic model, and he has started to address them one
17:45
Speaker 2: way or another. If he's made significant progress on those
17:49
Speaker 2: in two or three years time, or even or four
17:51
Speaker 2: years time, you know, just as the Chinese do, judge
17:55
Speaker 2: the results of their policies over many years, sometimes decades,
18:00
Speaker 2: rather than a few weeks and months, all of this
18:02
Speaker 2: will be forgotten.
18:03
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, I think that's true, Stephanie. Do you mind
18:06
Speaker 3: if I come at you and Trumponomic's listeners with another
18:09
Speaker 3: historical analogy.
18:12
Speaker 2: We live for historical analogies.
18:14
Speaker 3: Okay, great, So look Paul Vulka. He was the son
18:19
Speaker 3: of a lowly county clerk or city official. He was
18:24
Speaker 3: a cigar chomper, He devoted his life to public service.
18:27
Speaker 3: So at first sight, there's not much to suggest a
18:31
Speaker 3: analogy between him and Donald Trump. The son of a
18:34
Speaker 3: millionaire teetotaler, and on the evidence so far, not someone
18:39
Speaker 3: who has a huge amount of respect for people who
18:42
Speaker 3: devote their lives to public service. But I think there
18:44
Speaker 3: is an analogy which is worth thinking about. Vulka came
18:47
Speaker 3: into office as Chair of the Federal Reserve and he
18:50
Speaker 3: faced a huge problem. Inflation was way too high. And
18:54
Speaker 3: he said, you know what, I'm going to get this
18:57
Speaker 3: under control. And there's going to be a huge cost
18:59
Speaker 3: to do doing so, but it's going to be a
19:01
Speaker 3: price worth paying. And he jacked up interest rates to
19:04
Speaker 3: twenty percent, an unemployment sared to eleven percent, more than
19:08
Speaker 3: one in ten US workers were out of a job.
19:12
Speaker 3: But it did the job, and inflation came back down,
19:15
Speaker 3: and Volka had laid the groundwork for decades of increasing
19:19
Speaker 3: US prosperity. And when people look back at that period now,
19:23
Speaker 3: they don't remember the missteps and the pain and the
19:27
Speaker 3: uncertainty of those initial moves to jack up interest rates.
19:30
Speaker 3: What they remember is the vision and the determination and
19:34
Speaker 3: ultimately the success. Right now, with Donald Trump, the focus
19:39
Speaker 3: is very much on the missteps and the uncertainty and
19:42
Speaker 3: the transition costs. But if, and this is a really
19:45
Speaker 3: big if, at the end of his four years in power,
19:48
Speaker 3: he can point to debt coming under control, deficits coming
19:52
Speaker 3: under control, and a world which is more secure because
19:56
Speaker 3: US allies have stopped free riding, and they're paying their
19:59
Speaker 3: share for the cost of that security. That's what his
20:02
Speaker 3: legacy is going to.
20:02
Speaker 2: Be, a straight line from Paul Volka to Donald Trump. Well,
20:10
Speaker 2: if there's a test for a good podcast, it's surely
20:14
Speaker 2: to take people to a destination that they find unexpected
20:18
Speaker 2: and could never have predicted. And that's surely we've done
20:21
Speaker 2: it on this occasion. Tom Rlick, thank you so much
20:23
Speaker 2: for joining us.
20:24
Speaker 3: Great to be here, Donald, Sorry, Stephanie.
20:33
Speaker 2: Thanks as ever for listening to Trumpnomics from Bloomberg. It
20:37
Speaker 2: was hosted by me, Stephanie Flanders, and I was joined
20:39
Speaker 2: by our chief economist, Tom Orlick. Trump Andomics is produced
20:43
Speaker 2: by Samasadi and Moses and Am, with help from Chris
20:46
Speaker 2: Martin Lou and Amy Keene and sound design by Blake Maples.
20:50
Speaker 2: Brendan Francis Newnham is our executive producer. The Lam