Latest / Trumponomics / Can Technology Actually Save Jobs?

Transcript

Can Technology Actually Save Jobs? · Trumponomics

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to Stephanomics, the podcast that brings the
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: global economy to you. Today, we're talking to the Harvard
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: economist and former U. S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers about
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: the state of the economy and economic policy making, and
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: especially looking for his take on the spread of automation
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: and the impact it could have on employment and the
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: whole global economy. But first, we've got a report from
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: one of Bloomberg's most experienced US economy reporters, Craig Torres,
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: who's based in Washington, d C. He couldn't help noticing
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: that despite all the talk of robots destroying jobs, the U. S.
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: Economy still seemed to be creating a lot of them.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: It made him want to see for himself how technology
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: was affecting the world of work and what it might
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: mean for the future of jobs. So, you know, a
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: real busy Monday, or a Tuesday like today after holiday
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: US in a day could be a certainly very busy Monday's.
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: I recently visited Washington Hospital Center, the biggest in the
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: nation's capital, with an emergency room that handles two forty
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: patients a day. I went there because I thought it
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: would help us start to solve one of the big
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: riddles in the US economy today. Why have we been
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: hiring so many people in recent years? Last year, the
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: US added two point seven million jobs. That happened at
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: a time when we hear a lot about artificial intelligence, robots,
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: and human less tasks in a variety of industries. I
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: suspected that there was something about technology that was labor
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: intensive and labor creating. I found it at Washington Hospital,
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: which is part of med Star Health, a big chain
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: in the d C region. They found a technological solution
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: that let them double the number of e ER patients
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: they could triage. It made doctors more efficient, but it
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: also created the need for more jobs, texts and nurses
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: to process the higher volume of patients. I met an
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: e R doctor named Ethan Booker who helped apply this
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: technology with strong results. So how many patients do you
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: see an emergency here every year? Eighty seven thousand patients?
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: Because that was a lot of humans and pain one
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: way or another. Med Stars emergency room has this role
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: known as the p I T or PIT that stands
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: for provider and triage. The pit physician's job is to
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: make a call all on the condition of a patient
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: rolling into the e R and get them routed into care.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: Do they have a broken bone or just to sore back. Imagine, however,
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: trying to process more than two hundred patients a day
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: any e RS by definition somewhat chaotic with lots of
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: urgency in the air and distractions can be huge. You know,
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: the patients came in the nurse, the doctors got their
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: orders started, but that work over there, as you can imagine,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: kind of embedded in right in the front door of
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: the emergency department was It was an entire nine hour
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: shift on your feet. Um there was tons of interruptions,
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: helping people with wayfinding, people coming back to you to
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: kind of understand where they were in the process, that
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: kind of stuff. So what they did was used technology
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: to create a remote pit. I walk with Dr Booker
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: through a maze of hallways. He opens a door and
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: inside I see Dr Jasmine Mallock quietly using a headset
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: to talk with a patient on the video monitor. It
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: is only about a five minute walk from the emergency room,
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: but it is a world away. There are no patients
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: on stretchers here, nobody's bleeding. The remoteness isn't the only
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: efficiency of this system. If the patient has been to
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: the hospital before, Malik has a medical record in front
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: of her, she can also order follow on testing immediately
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: with a click of a mouse. I talked to Booker
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: about the difference between working downstairs versus here upstairs in
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: a nine hour shift, going flat out on your feet
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: the whole time, UM, you might be able to get
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: to ninety patients. UM. The peak speed that you can
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: do on this is is. I've seen some hours where
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: patients where physicians of process twenty two patients in an hour.
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: Twenty two patients an hour. That would amount to around
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: two patients during a nine hour shift, more than double
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: what a doctor on the R floor could do. More
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: patients passing through triage means the hospital needs to hire
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: more people to process all of them. Here's Booker again.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: I think it's labor enhancing. Certainly didn't replace anybody, and
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: in places in which we were successful with this, there
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: there's a need for more labor. There is another myth
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: to bust here, one that is also about technology and jobs.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: Very rarely does a company like MedStar buy a piece
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: of technology off the shelf, plug it in and turn
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: it on a complex organization like a healthcare system, has
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: to adapt tech to its own needs, and in healthcare
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: there is a very high bar for security. So for
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: all the alluring stories about technology being instantly productivity enhancing
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: it rare, really is it takes hours of human labor
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: to configure it and make it safe. Med Star has
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: a whole innovation institute that is always looking for ways
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: to use technology to help doctors and patients. I spoke
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: with an executive there named John Locke. This is how
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: he describes that process. We have teams of people across
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: that organization working on kind of the next five to
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: ten years. And then how do we give people in
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: a big health system, and we're talking about plus people
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: a big organization, how do we give people room in
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: that to actually experiment and build some of these things out?
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: This technology strangely labor intensive. Yes, creating something new is
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: full of dissonance. It's not smooth and easy. If it
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: isn't smooth and easy, then why are millions of companies
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: working so hard to put technology in place? I wanted
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: to take that question to Lonnie Jaffee, a guy with
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: a long career and technology firms who was now at
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: Insight Venture Partners in New York. They invest about twenty
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: billion dollars spread over a hundred and fifty companies, many
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: of them makers of software. In the technology industry, we
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: see continuous enormous levels of deflation at all times. So
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: you know, in the cost of a gigabyte of storage
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: was something like five hundred thousand dollars per gigabyte, and
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: today it's less than three cents per gigabyte. It's hard
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: to wrap our minds around that level of a price drop.
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: But if you are a user of technology like that,
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: as the prices drop below certain thresholds, entirely new business
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: models get unlocked that we're not previously feasible. And those
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: can not just unlock new pools of revenue and opportunity
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: with your end customers, it can also unlock new pools
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: of labor. The interesting takeaway from me is that cloud
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: computing is making it cheaper and easier to put powerful
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: software into the hands of a lot of employees wherever
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: they are. Low cost pervasive technology might actually tilt the
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: mix of capital and labor we need to produce GDP
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: in favor of labor. That suggests America's tremendous job growth
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: might not be such a riddle after all. But before
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: ending my search, I wanted to explore how technology might
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: be affecting another part of the economy that's been creating
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: more jobs than most, the hotel sector. Here Well, I'm
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: good chorus from Bloomberg the Well. Eater is the chief
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: Information and Digital officer at Hilton, the hotel group. I
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: met her at their headquarters in McClean, Virginia. Lodging is
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: an incredibly labor intensive industry. I have a son, a cousin,
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: and a close friend in the business, and everything they
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: tell me suggests that getting the customer experience just right
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: is very human intensive. But Eater told me it was
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: also a business in which technology could be truly transformational.
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: I think what's possible with technology in for Hilton is
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: nothing short of staggering. Technology, in my mind, has yet
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: to truly immerse itself into the integrated experience for customers
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: in as profound a way as is available to us.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: Eater describes the options she wants to see widely available
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: to hotel guests in a digital age, such as checking
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: in on your smartphone app, which can also set your
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: room temperature or order a meal before you've arrived. That
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: personalized experience is only possible if customers share their preferences,
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: which means eater has to win their trust. On the
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: front of digital security, an area that also takes a
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: lot of labor, the thing that we have to perfect
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: is the ability for humans to interact around this technology,
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: so there isn't a stark contrast between the digital engagement
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: and the human engagement, so that the front desk team
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: member knows what you ask for within the application or
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: in the message, etcetera, and can respond above and around them.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: So technology can be labor enhancing in a high touch
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: business like lodging, and there might also be a sweet
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: spot when human labor and technology come together and employees
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: are freed from rope tasks such as check in and
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: can use their time to tell you about a good
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: lunch spot or maybe about a nearby music festival. Hilton's
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: business is about people serving people. It is very much
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: the culture of the business. It is very much the
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: culture of the experience, and we believe that humans. I
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: believe that humans provide that unique differentiation. It's the it's
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: the human connection based on empathy, really warmth and generosity
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: that makes a hotel experience stand apart. So we are
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: not designing technology to replace humans. That will not be
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: Hilton's business. Um, and I'm pretty happy about that. I
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: haven't a lie humans for Bloomberg News. I'm Craig trust Now.
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: I'm delighted to say I'm joined by my friend and
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: former boss, Larry Summers, the Harvard professor and former US
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: Treasury secretary who also served as the director of President
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: Obama's National Economic Council. Welcome to Stephanomics. Good to be
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: with you, Stephanie. We have just heard from Craig Torres,
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: who had a fairly upbeat view of the impact of
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: new technology on jobs. And I know from talking to
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: him that the reason that Craig got into this was
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: that he had just been looking week after week with
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: the US very strong job growth and as we know,
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: going with that weak productivity growth. But at the same
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: time as we've had all of this argument and concern
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: around technology and automation, and it just felt like it
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: was going against the sort of robots are coming for
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: your job's rhetoric that we hear about so much. So,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: where do you come out on this ongoing debate about
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: the impact of technology on jobs, I think your reporter
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: is more wrong than right. Um. I take the long view.
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: I was involved in discussions of automation when I was
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: an undergraduate in M I T in the nineteen seventies,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: and then we heard the view that Craig Torres takes
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: that technology would create more productivity, and I would create
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: more spending power, and I would create more jobs and
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: all would be well. Um. When people were saying that
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: in the nineteen seventies, five percent of men between the
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: ages of twenty five and fifty four we're not working.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: Now about thirteen percent of men between the ages of
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: five and fifty four are not working. And so technology
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: actually on net has led to a substantial amount of displacement.
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: Whenever has happened in the last few years, I don't
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: think proves that much. And by the way, since productivity
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: growth has been very slow for the last few years,
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's been a period of particularly active
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: uh technological change, So I don't think that proves very much.
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: I think looking forward, we've got to recognize that almost
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: any activity that can be routinized can be mechanized, and
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: that has to put substantial pressure on many different job
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: categories and many different people. Now, there'll certainly be some
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: new jobs created, and probably some of the new jobs
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: that will be created will have high productivity and support
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: high wages. But for people who are really set up
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: to do routine work and not to do other work,
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: I think it's likely to be a very difficult period
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: going ahead. And do you think I mean to defend
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: Craig a little bit? Of course, he's not claiming that
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: the overwhelming effect of technology um will be positive for labor.
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: He was just he was kind of highlight he's highlighting
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: some examples where you could see technology kind of complimenting late.
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: And there's certainly people talk about these cases where now
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: you will have you know, there'll be more demand for
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: the very human jobs, and the very human jobs will
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: be more prized because you have all this sort of
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: technology supporting those human qualities. Your view is there doesn't exist,
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: and maybe we'll have more of them down the road,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: But the ELVM, they're not going to be more than
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: a small piece of the story in this short I
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: take the long view. Five or some of the people
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: weren't working in the group where you'd expect everybody to
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: be working and then thirteen for some of the people,
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: uh weren't working. And it's been a pretty inexorable trend.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: If you take that trend back to the nineteen forties,
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: the trend is even stronger. So I don't dispute the
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: idea that there will be some sets of jobs that
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: will become more productive, and that there will be some
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: jobs created, you know, being an eBay merchant, being a
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: Facebook programmer, building building sites. But I think the to
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: mentality of it, and particularly for the people who were
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: most on the margin of working versus not working, I
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: think it's likely to be difficult. You know, twenty years ago,
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: the big change that was happening in the global labor
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: market arguably was China and globalization. You know, was the
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: was the arrival of the Chinese labor force, if you like,
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: into the global economy. And I remember when I was
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: studying at Harvard and elsewhere, there was a consistent underestimation
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: of the impact that was going to have on the
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: global labor market. Now we have all of this evidence
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: from David Ort and all these other academic evidence about
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: how that wave of competition from China cost jobs here
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: in the US, and people didn't immediately bounce back, and
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: the costs were concentrated in a way that theory doesn't predict.
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: Now we have that data, how is it. Does it
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: help us be more aware of what's coming down the
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: track with this new wave of technological change or do
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: you think a whole lot of different lessons are going
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: to come out of that. I'm not sure. I think
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: the David Otter work that you refer to is about
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: to be and is already being subject to a wave
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: of revisionism. UH. People are taking account of the extra
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: exports as well as the extra imports. People are taking
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: account of the fact that a lot of the goods
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: that we import from China then become part of products
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: that we sell that are cheaper because of the imports
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: from products so China. So we import, so we use
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: more people because we sell more of the product. People
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: are taking account of the fact that the imports from
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: China held the price level down and that enabled the
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: FED to pursue easier policies. None of those effects were
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: really contained in the David out Tour research that's so
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: frequently UH cited. So I think you're going to see
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: some revisionism towards blaming China rather less for the problems
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: that have existed in the United States. Moving on from this,
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: we should talk about, you know, where you think the
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: US economy is right now. I mean, there's a lot
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: of debate about how much structural change there's been in
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: the labor market and how much further unemployment can go.
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: The recent FED change in its attitude towards that in
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: a sense, you know, seemingly willing to give it more
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: time before continuing to raise interest rates. Where do you
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: stand on that? Do you think the FED should be
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: even slower, even more cautious. I'm glad to see the
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: FED embrace the kinds of ideas of secular stagnation that
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: I've been talking about for some years now. I think
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: they've recognized that in an economy where fundamentally there's a
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: higher propensity to save than there used to be and
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: a lower propensity to invest than there used to be,
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: interest rates that once would have been very stimulative now
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: actually can be consistent with UH contraction, and therefore they've
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: got to be very careful about overly contracting the economy.
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: I think that's a good recognition by the FED. It's
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: also been good that the FED has recognized that inflation
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: looks awfully quiescent, and that the combination of no increases
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: in the minimum wage and forever huge restraints on union power,
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: the ability of companies to outsource more ruthlessly, aggressive shareholders
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: maximizing profits, all that has operated to put downwards pressure
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: on wages. And ultimately it's very hard to generate very
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: much product price inflation without having wage price inflation. And
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: so I think J. Powell has been in the right
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: place on that as well. I wish he'd gotten there
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: before they raised rates UM in UH December. And I
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: wish the President wasn't making it harder to do the
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: right thing by making doing the right thing look like
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: it's a craven political act, as he puts pressure on
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: the FED. But the Fed has to do what's right,
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: whether it makes politicians happy or whether it makes politicians unhappy.
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: And on balance, I think the risks of excessive restraint
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: on the economy are are greater than the risks of
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: insufficient restraint. In addition to the considerations I already raised UM,
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: our goal in the United States is to have a
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: two symmetric inflation target. Symmetrics an important word. It means
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: that inflation is supposed to average two Why I ask
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: you the question if after ten years of recovery, when
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: the unemployment rate is lower than it's been in fifty years,
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: and we're in the eleventh year of expansion, if that's
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: not the time when we're gonna have inflation above two
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: percent after ten years, when we've had it below two percent,
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: when would such a time ever be? And it's like
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: the credibility of the FED with respect to an inflation
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: target actually depends on its ability to generate a bit
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: of acceleration of inflation and inflation expectations from here. I'm
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: not sure they're going to be able to do way,
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: but they should at least be quite trying. Larry Summons,
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: thanks very much for being on Stephanomics, and maybe one
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: of these days we'll get you back on the program.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: Good to be with you. So I'm joined now by
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: one of our top FED reporters, Gina Smellek, who's based
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: in New York and she has the important job, among
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: many other things, of writing our economic research rap every
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: week for Bloomberg, and recently she wrote about poor Man's
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: monetary policy. Tell us about that, Gina, Right, So this
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: is this idea from city groups. Will Embroider in a
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: recent research note that central banks are not going to
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: have a lot of ammunition at their disposal come the
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: next procession. And the point he's making here is that
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: rates are still pretty low around the world. The US
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: is obviously a little bit above zero, but you look
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: at the euro Area in Japan and they're still sort
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: of lingering below And so come the next crisis, the
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: central banks are really going to be forced to rely
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: heavily on their balance sheets, sort of tinkering around the
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: edges of composition in size, and aren't going to have
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: a lot of the tools that have traditionally been at
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: their disposal, which you know, most centrally includes rate cuts.
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: And I guess what's interesting about this, and you mentioned
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: a few other bits of research, including the recent paper
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: that that Larry Summers um co wrote and produced for
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: the Brookings Institute conference, that it's sort of this debate
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: about not having enough ammunition for the next crisis is
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: kind of clashing, sort of colliding with debates around what
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: the best economic policy is right now in the US
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: and the sort of more progressive thinkers um talking about
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: modern monetary theory and wanting to run big, bigger deficits,
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: you know, in a sense for political reasons, but you've
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: got economists saying you might want to do it to
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: help prevent the next crisis as well. Is that that
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: must be kind of interesting for you to see the
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: sort of everyone's coming for coming to the same conclusion,
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: which is we need to borrow more, just at a
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: time when I would have thought that President Trump was
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: already borrowing quite a lot, right. It's so interesting. These
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: conversations are also closely interconnected. And there's I think this
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: growing idea that central banks are dealing with what's called
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: a very low neutral interest rate. So that's the one
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: that neither stokes nor slows growth. It's really low for
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: demographic reasons because populations are aging and people tend to
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: save as they age, and that pushes that sort of
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: rate setting that they can achieve down a little bit.
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: One way to get that higher is by running a
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: bigger budget deficit, especially if it can if doing so
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: results in sort of infrastructure spending and other things that
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: can raise the productive capacity of an economy. But that's
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: hard to do in a world where you already have
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: really high to GDP ratios, and so I think there
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: are all these conversations around what does fiscal responsibility mean
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: in the world of twenty nineteen, and what is it
• 24:55
  Speaker 1: going to mean come the next recession? Like how much
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: can we play with this stuff around the edges? And
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: at what point do we push ourselves to a point
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: where we're just overextended on this fiscal front. And I
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: think that conversation is really reaching a fever pitch in
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: places like the US now, and I don't think it's
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: going to fade in any way come the next crisis.
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: I think this is this is a debate that we're
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: going to have with us for the foreseeable future, and
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: I suspect we are going to be talking about it
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: many times. Thanks very much, Gina Smellick. Thank you, thanks
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: for listening to Stephanomics. Please join us next week for
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: another episode about the forces shaping the global economy. In
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: the meantime, you can find us on the Bloomberg Terminal
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: website or app, and wherever you get your podcasts. We'd
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: love it if you took the time to rate and
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: review the show so it can reach more listeners. For
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: more news and analysis from Bloomberg Economics, follow as economics
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: on Twitter. You can also find me on my Twitter
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: handle at my Stephanomics. The story in this episode was
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: reported and written by Craig Torres. It was produced by
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: Magnus Hendrickson and edited by Scott Lanman, who is also
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: the executive producer of Stephanomics. Craig's original article on this
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: topic appeared in Bloomberg business Week. It was edited by
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: Ben Holland and Christina lind Black Special thanks to Larry Summers.
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: Francesco Levy is the head of Bloomberg Podcasts.