May 30, 2025 • 40 mins
Watch Joe and Kailey LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.
Elon Musk said he will continue to advise President Donald Trump even after stepping away from the Department of Government Efficiency effort he has spearheaded.
“I expect to remain a friend and an adviser, and hopefully, if there’s anything the president wants me to do, I’m at the president’s service,” Musk, the chief executive officer of Tesla Inc. and SpaceX, said alongside Trump during a press conference Friday at the White House. “This is not the end of DOGE, but really the beginning.”
The comments raise questions over the extent of Musk’s plans to pull back from Washington and return to running his business empire. As the head of DOGE, Musk’s efforts to slash spending and cut government jobs has drawn pushback from federal workers and Democratic lawmakers as well as a consumer backlash to his business interests.
Bloomberg Washington Correspondents Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz deliver insight and analysis on the latest headlines from the White House and Capitol Hill, including conversations with influential lawmakers and key figures in politics and policy. On this edition, Joe and Kailey speak with:
- Bloomberg's Joe Deaux.
- Bloomberg Politics Contributors Rick Davis and Jeanne Sheehan Zaino.
- International Chamber of Commerce Secretary General John Denton.
- Co-Host of the Odd Lots podcast Joe Weisenthal.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast ketch ys live weekdays at
noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android
Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
You're in New York for last day before we have
to head back to Washington, which will be the center
of all of our attention. Scheduled half an hour from now.
I guess it's always our center of attention for Joe,
Matthew and myself, but especially when you have the President
of the United States, Donald Trump, and the richest man
in the world, Elon Musk, set to give a joint
press conference together. This could get interesting. One thirty pm
(00:48):
is when it's supposed to kick off. We'll see how
much we stick to that timing. But we know what
it'll be about Joe, and it's about the dough Is
X going? That's my question. He's at the White House.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
I just I have big questions about the optics here
is he standing next to the desk with the President
sitting that we have podiums in the Oval Office. It's
a curious venue, what happened to wear? What hat will
he wear? And will actual questions be taken by reporters
Like you said, it's set for one pint thirty, Probably
not on time, as few things are at the White House,
(01:18):
no matter who seems to be living there, But when
it begins, we'll bring it to you live, of course,
right here on Bloomberg. Then we reel into the five
o'clock speech at US Steel Kayley that's being billed as
a big rally and could keep us up a little
bit later than usual tonight.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, he has a tendency to speak for a while
at these kind of things. And we assume that we're
going to get more details about the US Steel nip
On partnership or deal, whatever it is, if the United
States is getting a golden share in this and we'll
still have full control over this company or not knowing that.
There does seem to have been a tone shift between
campaign President or I guess campaign Donald Trump, who said
(01:55):
this needs to stay in US hands, no way this
deal can go forward, versus President Trump, who is much
more open to this idea.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
After the Siphius.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
We've talked to Stephen Myron about this a couple of
days ago on Balance of Power and asked him about
the terminology here, and he didn't seem to care as
long as the jobs were preserved and the jobs added
the investment dollars were made. But this idea of a
golden share has got our attention, and I suspect we'll
hear about that later from the President. Joe. Doe is
watching all of this from his perch at Bloomberg, our
(02:23):
Metals and Mining reporter, with his eyes on us deal. Joe,
it's great to have you with us. Welcome to a
Balance of Power here on Bloomberg. Can you tell us
what you understand about the structure, because this sure looks
like a takeover at least when you look at the
dollars involved here, and not unlike the deals that had
been proposed, to Kayley's point, not favored by Donald Trump
(02:43):
or Joe Biden. But tonight he's going to be talking
about a partnership and a company that the US government
will help control. How does it work?
Speaker 5 (02:54):
Yeah, Joe, that is the question. What is the structure
of whatever this deal is? And I think we're still
a bit in the dark. We're maybe starting to see
some bits and pieces flow out. Of course, earlier this
week one of the senators here from Pennsylvania had mentioned
the fourteen billion dollars supposedly being invested by Nippon Steel
into US steal. But I think listen, the investor class
(03:14):
is watching very closely. They do want to know what
this deal actually means. The golden share. Let's think of
it more like a mitigation agreement, right, that's the National
Security Agreement Golden share. I don't know if it's actually
a golden share. That might just be branding. But the
point here is what is the United States federal government
place going to be in this entire thing? Are they
going to have veto powers over how much production can
(03:35):
be shut down or not shut down? Are they going
to have veto powers over jobs? How many can be
cut in bad times and good times. I mean, right now,
all we're talking about is does the deal get done
or not? But after the deal is supposedly done, this
goes back to being a steel company. And steel companies
are still commodity companies that go with the ups and
downs of the market.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Well, that's very true, and of course it being a
steel company is why initially, at least President Trump like
President Biden before him, was opposed to this deal because
they said there's great national security implications and interests the
United States have in retaining its own steel production capacity.
I want to ask you about a different element of
the commodity space though, specifically critical minerals, Joe, because President
Trump today was talking about China not abiding by the
(04:18):
terms agreed to in Geneva in regard to the trade agreement,
the USTR Jamison Greer indicated that run of the big
sticking points maybe that critical minerals were not flowing in
the way that China promised they would after they restricted
them in retaliation for President Trump's very high tariffs. Do
we have a sense of the critical minerals flow, what
actually is happening?
Speaker 5 (04:40):
You know, over the past two weeks, I've been in
discussions with the various people that are in this critical
mineral space, the rare earth space, and they have indicated,
you know, listen, it's not like anything drastically changed with
the new trade deal. The new trade deal was very
specific about companies that would have certain things lifted on them.
But remember the export controls that we're implemented by China.
(05:01):
I think this is what they're really getting out here
with these seven rarers. They're implemented the day after the
President of the United States mentioned the reciprocal tariffs. Those
export controls went on every nation, it wasn't just the
United States. So I think there's a procedural thing here
that might be under discussion with Chinese officials and US officials,
which is this isn't just a US thing, So it's
(05:23):
not just a specific US discussion. So right now, as
we understand, it's not clear that these export controls have
been lifted, but it's also not clear that it was
ever agreed to in the beginning that they would be
lifted in the way that the President seems to be suggesting.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
All right, Joe Doe, we appreciate Bloomberg medals and mining
reporter doing God's work literally on the side of the
road in Pennsylvania where President drump will be today with
an umbrella in hand. Our audience on Bloomberg Radio is
missing how hard Joe is working for US today, surviving
the elements to cover this US deal visit that will
be happening later. We really appreciate it, but of course,
before we can get to US deal later this afternoon,
(05:58):
we have to get through a joint press conference between
President Trump and Elon Musk. First is scheduled to begin
just over twenty minutes from now, and we want to
get into it with our political panel. Bloomberg Politics contributors
Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us. Rick, of course,
is a Stone Court Capital partner in Republican strategist. Genie
a Democratic analyst and Senior Democracy Fellow at the Center
for the Study of the Presidency and Congress. His days
(06:21):
as a special government employee, Genie are about to be over.
They're going to talk about all of the work the
Doge has done over that time to shrink the size
of the federal government. We do know thousands of people's
lives have actually been affected by layoffs in the federal government.
But it doesn't seem that the kind of money Elon
Musk said he was going to save he got anywhere
(06:41):
close to actually saving. So what kind of victory lap
is this really going to be?
Speaker 6 (06:47):
You know, I, Kaylee, I keep wondering, what does Donald
Trump give him for a farewell address, Like a little
chainsaw for his desk or you know, I don't know,
something like that. Coupon's for free nights at the Lincoln Bedroom,
you know, and so baffled by this because of course,
what Elon Musk is trying to do is to leave
gracefully so that he can reconstruct his image and of
(07:11):
course impact those sales in a positive way to have
a press conference.
Speaker 7 (07:16):
Now.
Speaker 6 (07:17):
I don't know how this helps him rehabilitate his image.
But of course the reality of Doge is that the
two trillion and cuts promised by some calculations. People are saying, so,
let's say, by Elon musk calculation, it was close to
one hundred and six under sixty billion in the end,
But other people are saying, in fact, he cost or
Doge cost money simply because of those IRS cuts to
(07:41):
people that hurt the ability of the IRS to take
in income. Either way you slice it, it is far
less than he promised. And of course they have a
bill going to Congress now. But I am not convinced
Doze is going to live on beyond Elon Musk and
his chainsaw rick.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
How is this going to work, chainsaw or not? This
is the oval office. The President's going to be sharing
space with a non elected official, he said, not a
world leader. Are they going to sit on the chairs
in front of the fireplace like you've got a prime
minister in town. Does he have Elon stand next to
the desk? This could be awkward.
Speaker 8 (08:19):
Well, we've seen White House Oval Office events in where
Elon stands next to the desk. In fact, you know,
even X usually against the standing room only treatment inside
the Oval office. And we've seen many occasions where Donald
Trump would have people in his administration or from other
(08:39):
countries come into the Oval Office and stand around the
President's desk while he sat. So I think the physicality
of the same will be interesting to watch right because
I think there must be some pecking order for what
treatment you get if you're on the good list or
the bad list.
Speaker 7 (09:00):
Lately, the back list.
Speaker 8 (09:01):
Is when you're sitting next to one another in the
most formal posture. And he's not going to attack Elon Musk.
They'll be playful and they'll be interesting. They won't ask
answer any of the questions that you want them to.
But they see this as a long standing relationship that
will continue on. Elon Musk and the President say they'll
(09:22):
continue to to discuss the affairs of state. And yes,
I do think this is part of what Elon Musk
believes is his rehabilitation back to the private sector where
he can become popular again for the things that he's
done to improve the country and the world, his inventions.
Speaker 7 (09:41):
And I think that would be the.
Speaker 8 (09:43):
Best outcome is for the president and I stay say,
Elon Musk convents really cool things, and I'm going to
drive a Tesla and someday I'll go to Mars.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Remember when the tesla's were lined up outside the White House.
Speaker 9 (09:55):
Good?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
I forget showroom. Yeah, we forget the things that have
already happened in this administr Rick. I do wonder though
about your thoughts on what Genie was saying, which is
that she doesn't believe that the Doge effort lives beyond
Elon Musk. Knowing there was a Doge caucus formed in Congress,
there were lawmakers ready to take up this mantle as
well really pursue this effort to shrink the government. Does
all of that just kind of fade to the wayside.
Speaker 8 (10:18):
It's been a whirlwind. In only a few months. Doge
went from basically running the entire federal government to being
an asterisk. And I think that's the real question now
is not so much the Hill because they like to
do their own thing, and the Doge Caucus, I think
was just a way to fit into the narrative with
Elon Musk being so powerful. But at the end of
(10:41):
the day, you do have DOGE employees. They're sitting in
these agencies. They are now under the thumbs of the
cabinet secretaries, which happened even while Elon was there. And
yet we do see active efforts on the part of
this administration to implement it reforms, including a very big
on track for Pallenteer brought in by Doge to basically
(11:04):
start unifying databases throughout the government. So if you blink,
you might miss it. But the reality is there is
a pretty significant effort underway that could substantially change things
like privacy and government access to your data and the
integration of data through different databases.
Speaker 7 (11:23):
That is going to be talked about for quite some time.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
What does Elon Musk have really to celebrate when it
comes to the doughs today, Genie, will it be cutting spending?
Because the promise was two trillion dollars on the way
in and it looks like sixteen billion on the way out.
When you consider the wall of receipts, or will it
be the fact that he took the chainsaw or the
proverbial sledgehammer and started to destroy agencies like USAID, which
(11:51):
was part of the aim of this administration.
Speaker 6 (11:54):
You know, I think he is going to try to
celebrate something that I don't I think deserves celebrating. And
I think you just heard it in Rick's answer. The
promise was the two trillion in cuts you just talked about, Joe.
The reality is far less, maybe two or three percent.
Even again some people saying it may cost taxpayers to
(12:16):
have doze in there, But what this is going to
cost us in addition to money, is issues of privacy
and the contract that Rick was just talking about is
a very good example. We don't know how this turns
out at the end, but the outcome of this, I
don't think is going to be known as it pertains
to our rights and liberties and for a very long time.
(12:38):
And what's frustrating and fascinating about this. At the same time,
under a GOP that has long been committed to a
smaller federal government, they opened the door to private company
to go in and take away some of the most
valuable information that we treasure and people don't want being shared.
(12:58):
So I do think that is going to be likely
the legacy, but I'm not sure it's the legacy that
Elon Musk is going to celebrate. And I would also
just add that nobody is going to miss Elon Musk
more than Donald Trump, except for the Democrats. I mean,
the real losers here with him leaving are the Democrats
who have enjoyed this enormously and would like nothing else
(13:19):
more than for him to stay so they can continue
to beat up on him.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
As he said, Yeah, Genie, what are they going to
run on in twenty twenty six if Elon Musk is
no longer a daily fixture in Washington headlines?
Speaker 6 (13:31):
Yeah, I mean, you don't get it better than the
world's wealthiest man coming in to make cuts fire people,
cut cancer research, food assistance to the poor, AIDS research
age funding. I mean, it was just, you know, Taylor
made for the Democrats. They're going to miss him enormously.
They'll just have to look back wistfully at Wisconsin and
(13:51):
be happy and proud that they control the Supreme Court
thanks to Elon Musk.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Probably this could be one of those events. Rick Davis
where Democrats are making ads for some time, if you
were helping to prepare the President and Elon Musk to
meet the press today, to what extent do they need
to be on message?
Speaker 7 (14:10):
Yeah?
Speaker 8 (14:10):
Look, I mean being on message in this administration is
different than what I was taught.
Speaker 7 (14:15):
How to be on message, that's for sure.
Speaker 8 (14:17):
And so you know, you would want them to say
things that would actually appear in a Republican ad, not
a Democratic ad, and that.
Speaker 7 (14:26):
Would require the discipline to say that.
Speaker 8 (14:28):
The you know, they came to Washington, Washington to reduce
the Scott size and scope of government. It's intrusion into
your daily life, and that's what they've done. I mean,
there are ways of spinning a meteorc rise in government
and a quick exit in a most positive way. My
guess is it'll be more entertainment value, which probably will
(14:51):
disappoint the Democrats a little bit. But if you can
sort of dodge that TV commercial in the making situation,
I think you'd be you'd be considered very successful.
Speaker 7 (15:04):
But I doubt it. I'm going south on this one.
Speaker 8 (15:07):
I think I think this is going to be a
circus and it's worth tuning in to Bloomberg to watch
it happen.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
Oh see, now I'm excited, Rick. Yes, indeed, we just
got our first view of the oval. They're setting up
the desk. Someone's going to be seated. That'll be Donald Trump.
Presumably where Elon Musk ends up is another question. Rick
Davis and Jeanie Shanzino a great panel Bloomberg Politics contributors.
We count down about ten minutes to the start of
this event. Assuming it's on time, we'll bring it to
(15:36):
you live here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg's TV
and radio.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Apple Cocle and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
We await here on Bloomberg TV and Radio the beginning
of a joint news conference between President Donald Trump and
outgoing DOGE leader Elon Musk, who is wrapping up his
time as a special government employee. This media event, of
course meant to commemorate that perhaps take a victory lab
but it also may be an opportunity for the press
to ask some questions both Elon Musk and President Trump
(16:21):
on undoge related issues, like maybe getting some clarity from
President Trump as to what exactly he meant when he
posted on true social this morning that China has totally
violated its agreement with US, the US, of course being us.
So much for being mister nice guy. Still looking for
clarity as to what exactly the violation China has committed.
Here is Joe, and how this factors into efforts to
(16:44):
advance a trade deal between the US and China.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
No more mister nice guy. That's right. The markets didn't
like that message. But this also comes Kaylee, just hours
after a federal appeals court turned over the Federal Trade
Court ruling that had the markets reacting as well yesterday.
The push and pull here, the confusing headlines continue now.
The tariffs are restored, at least temporarily, and so there
(17:11):
are great questions about how businesses are supposed to weather
this kind of uncertainty. Of course, the same we can
ask about investors.
Speaker 7 (17:18):
And I'm glad to say we're.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
Joined here in New York by John Denton, the Secretary
General of the International Chamber of Commerce. Mister Secretary, it's
great to see you. Thanks for being with us here
in New York. The ICC represents over forty five million
businesses in over one hundred and seventy countries. What are
they supposed to do well?
Speaker 4 (17:39):
Physical It's great to be the premium for President Trump
and elamsk PRIs conference, and we want to be sort
of zeroed in happy to participate in that discussion as well,
because the message I would be giving is the same
as giving you guys here. We've just survey the whole
of the ICC, and what we're finding is on a
(18:00):
you'll be surprised, uncertainty actually is attacks. So what we're
seeing on a global basis is heightened levels of uncertainty.
And in a way, the decision of the Court the
CIT yesterday and the other jurisdiction that there was a
matter herd and doesn't actually reduce the uncertainty. It actually
clouds it even further because what we're seeing now is
(18:21):
a lack of consistency. There will be changes in the
coherence about the frameworks that will we applied. And what
that says to business large and small is let's just
steady on. Let's take our time. Why don't we delay?
There's no cost to delay in a way. And of
course what we're seeing are things being basically kicked down
(18:43):
the road for another three months, which will generally mean
for another six months. And what that also means is
some thing's kicked down the road won't be picked up again.
So we are seeing that on a global basis. Of course,
there's different levels of uncertainty operating. There's a lot more
interest and uncertainty because people are much much more sort
of zeroed in here in advanced economies, in developing and
(19:05):
emerging economies particularly I've just been in Africa. It's clearly
probably bewilderment, not quite certain why we're being wrapped up
in this sort of stuff as well. But also you know,
we don't have the resources to worry about it. We
also have other stuff just to get done, and so
people just continue on. But what you're starting to see
basically people saying let's just not hire that additional person
(19:27):
or keep that open. It's interesting that the two matters,
or the matters that were actually heard in the various
courts on this issue came from small businesses. That tells
you is small businesses are really feeling this as well,
and they do not have the resources that large businesses have.
That it can't do war rooms, they don't do scenario planning.
It's just problematic. And even for large businesses, this is becoming.
(19:50):
This is not becoming. This is very complicated.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
Well, so when you say businesses, whatever the size, are
largely just kind of in wheat and ce mode. Still,
are we s any kind of material reorientation of supply chains,
thinking about shifting their sources of supply or where they're
looking for end markets for things that they are exporting.
What kind of decisions our business is willing to make?
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Well, the first thing people are looking at this, but
as they don't know yet what the final outcome will be,
a lot of it's exploratory and also to commit now
and to discover that subsequently the actual tariff that was
levied is actually unable to be levied and are going
to be repaid. It's like, let's just hold off here.
(20:34):
I mean, I've just been in Mexico with the business
community and government there. You know, we're working with them
saying well, hold on, we do know this with Mexico
Tariff's USMCA that anything any good that is USMCA compliant
will actually not have to penny tariffs. And we also
know as the fact that only forty nine percent of
goods from Mexico into the US are currently USMCA compliant.
(20:57):
But that's actually not because the goods are, it's just
the cost of compliance outweighed the benefits. They paid an
extra two and a half percent on the tariff for that,
but now they're going to go up. We're looking at, well, okay,
there are things we can do. We can actually lower
the cost of compliance. I mean, the ICC will create
a tool or apparatus to enable that to happen. So
businesses are looking with this mix of friction about how
(21:20):
they can work their way through it. But committing new
capital or re orienting your supply chain that becomes quite
difficult at this point in time.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
You said something really interesting right off the bat that
uncertainty is a tax. We keep talking to economists or
try to drive home the point that a tariff is
a tax. So is this approach effectively a double tax
on your members?
Speaker 4 (21:44):
Well, I mean double tax regime. We should all try
to avoid that. But effectively, uncertainty is a tax because
what you're actually the cost of things goes up as
you delay, And of course a tariff is a tax.
I don't think there's any disputing about that. The Christian
I think people are out here who pays the tax.
The end. What we're seeing even in the US economy
(22:05):
is consumers are going to pay that tax. And they're
starting to pay that tax because your audiency in supply chains,
it's outaucy in retail, increases in costs, and we're seeing
the sentiment move towards inflation and repressure. So that tax
is going to come through and be felt by people.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
Well, so when we consider the idea that President Trump says, whatever,
if you want to call it a tax or what
have you, it's going to bring more revenue to the US.
But the other goal of this entire thing is to
bring more business to the US, to have companies investing
in manufacturing capacity here, making things in America rather than elsewhere.
And I wonder what you're hearing from businesses in the
(22:41):
international community be out there desired to come to the
United States given this uncertainty that we're talking about.
Speaker 4 (22:49):
Well, let me be one hundred percent clear, this is
the greatest economy in the world. Of course, if you're
a business person, you want to have a piece of this,
and you want to have more of it if you
possibly can, and you want to invest in it. I mean,
I'm an Australian. Australians invest heavily in the US. But
what we want to know what are the rules around
(23:10):
which we can actually make these allocations of significant amounts
of capital. If the rules are not clear, the actual
risk factor goes up and the cost of capital goes up.
We applaud one hundred percent any government seeking to improve
the conditions that will enable investment to actually occur. I
want more in Australia. I actually want more in Africa.
(23:33):
We applaud that. But the way you attract capital and
businesses by having clarity around what the rules are and
also how you enforce the contracts that you were entered into.
That's what we want and that I'm sure is part
of prison and Trump's vision.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
Well, this is interesting and I can't imagine what it's
like to be in twenty twenty five in the age
of the second Trump administration. The Secretary General of the
International Chamber of Commerce, with the comments we hear about
global coming from not just the White House, but the
MAGA community, the populist community that elected him. Do you
(24:07):
feel like you're on an island as the face of globalism?
Speaker 4 (24:10):
No, I mean the world is so interconnected you may
the way you describe it may change a little bit.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Is he on an island in a world of globalism?
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Well, there's one thing that's for sure. The US is
one of the most connected economies in the world. So
the President does not sit on an island. He sits
on one of the most connected economies in the world.
And that's actually one of the great strengths of the
US economy. In any issue about balance of power, the
most connected economy will be the most powerful economy. So
we hope that will continue. But the reality is planes
(24:42):
still need to fly across borders. That's part of globalization.
Male gets delivered. You require multilateral agreements that all happens.
Let's not forget that the plumbing is still there, what
we might call it a bit different. But also there
is actually a fair point the President makes which I
think we should we actually share a Well, we need
to make certain there are more winners out of the
(25:03):
process of opening borders and enabling trade to take place
across borders. But what we also know is that this
has been one of the great enablers of economic development
in the last one hundred years. The reason we've been
able to move Africa a long way out of poverty
is because they're part of a multilateral or trading system
that functions. The reason we've actually seen a decline in
(25:25):
poverty globally is because we actually have got rules based
trading systems operating. Nobody wants to see that go And
I'll tell you what. The US accounts for thirteen percent
of global trade. The eighty seven percent of the rest
want to keep this going, and one of our jobs
is to keep it going.
Speaker 8 (25:41):
Well.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
You've brought up Africa a few times now, which obviously
is seen as kind of a landscape of competition between
the US and China as to who can gain the
foothold in Africa. Are you seeing evidence of companies anywhere,
not just in Africa, but businesses looking to reorient themselves
more towards China and away from the United Sea. As
you talk about the US being the biggest, most connected,
(26:02):
powerful economy in the world, do you see risk that
the US could easily see that to the second largest
economy correct, But I.
Speaker 4 (26:08):
Think the reality is over the last ten twenty years
there's been a re orientation of trade anyway, there's a
lot more what's called south south trade, and of course
what we see now as the major trading partner for
a lot of even Latin American countries is actually China.
It's not one or two. But what's really interesting is
if you want functioning economies, you want a market based
(26:29):
system which is governed by a political system, which is effective.
Market based economies actually lead to more economic development. One
of the greatest calling cards for democracy is actually effective
market based systems. And of course the greatest alignment on
democracy is with countries like the US, Australia, European Union.
(26:51):
They're not with a state led economic models. So the
more we can encourage economic development. And frankly, the point
I've been making in Africa i've in honor to meet
with President Rudeau. I've also been in South Africa because
I'm part of the G twenty process, is that the
development assistance economic model is really diminished. Now it's got
to be replaced by something, and that's got to be
(27:12):
the private siktorl In model. And frankly, I think We're
at one with the US US administration on that as well.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
This has been fascinating. I hope you let us know
when you're back in the US we should continue this conversation.
Speaker 4 (27:22):
Thanks ch Are we being knocked off now for the.
Speaker 9 (27:26):
Look they're going to start a little late.
Speaker 7 (27:28):
Absolutely, Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
A break, but it was great speaking with you. John Denton,
Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce. Here with
us at our global headquarters.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple,
Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen
on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
live on YouTube.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Balance of Power here on Bloomberg Radio satellite radio channel
one twenty one and on YouTube. It's a good time
to do this, by the way, because Joe Wisenthal is
coming up next to It's Bloomberg Business News Live. To
catch our live stream from today New York. It's one
of the great treats of being here. Whenever I have
the opportunity to come to world headquarters, to come to
the big city, you got to get a good pastrami sandwich,
(28:20):
and you're really lucky if you get to spend some
time with the stalwart Joe Wisenthal, Bloomberg Executive editor for
Digital News. That's you have like a big title like that.
Speaker 9 (28:28):
No, it's not, you know what actually this is? Can
I take this moment? Yeah, I've been like trying to
exercise this aspect of my bio of really hard time,
and I keep finding random databases where that's stuck in
and then it disappears. I'm just the co host of
the Outlaws podcasts, right, and bandleader and I'm one of
the singers for the country music band Lights.
Speaker 7 (28:47):
I love that.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Yeah, you're the telecaster in the lineup at Bloomberg.
Speaker 4 (28:51):
That's right.
Speaker 9 (28:52):
I'm sure the Telly someone else plays the stratas.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
Right, fantastic. Well, it's great to see you, and I'm
delighted you could come in. We always learn something when
we spend some time with Joe. And yes, the podcast
is called Odd Lots, but you probably know that because
you subscribe to it. There's this idea of the taco
trade has fascinated a lot of us, and I wonder
if because you're not the best thing about you is
you don't care about a lot of the stuff that
(29:15):
we care about. You're really coming at this from the
market's perspective, so I can ask you if that's real
or not.
Speaker 9 (29:20):
So what I would say is that it does feel
like every headline about trade period is like taken less
seriously than the last headline. But I would even include,
you know, the various court rulings that we've seen. So
for example, there was that court ruling I guess it
was on Wednesday night that said the tariffs were legal. Now,
if that had come out and say the middle of April,
(29:43):
I think that would have been this huge deal, right,
it would have been massive, And it was like, oh,
look at this whole court, and it just overturned the
entire thing. They got a little markt bounds that didn't
last that long. Yeah, and then there was another reversal
the night. So what I would say is that every
there's sort of this I'm trying to think of like
the analogy in science, but the sort of diminishing impulse
(30:04):
with every headline about tariffs. It's like Trump says the
Chinese deal is off track. It would have been a
huge deal I think in April. Now it's like just
one of the headlines.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
Absolutely right, Yeah, so then there's some truth to this
boy who cried tariff thing. It does feel only run
the same place so many times.
Speaker 9 (30:20):
It does feel like it, and it does seem like,
you know, if you're if the if. The message of
tariffs and the implied tool for negotiation is, look, we
are willing to take pain, to inflict pain on you
in order to give you some concession towards us. And
then each time you inflict domestic pain, and usually it's
expressed in the stock market pretty quickly, then you sort
(30:41):
of reverse yourself in a short period of time. I mean,
I just think it's you know, I'm not a I've
never taken a negotiation seminar or anything, but intuitively you
would think, okay to people on the other side of that,
take each one of these threats last serious.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
Yeah, the fact of the matter is since the pause, yeah,
I love the names, somebody has made a lot of money. Yeah,
and there's that's gonna be a big question about market
manipulation every time this happens as well, right, yeah, you know,
and you must hear from the volatility guys who are
in heaven right.
Speaker 9 (31:15):
Now, someone's gonna make a lot of money, you know,
on the questions of market manipulation. What that even means.
You know, some people are very some people are are
very conspiratorial, right like, oh, who within the Trump administration
knew what it was? All?
Speaker 4 (31:28):
Like that?
Speaker 9 (31:30):
But all of these conspiracy theories rests on some premise
of internal Whitehouse communication and coordination, right, the idea that
there is someone besides Trump and the White House one
knows what's going on in Trump's mind. What strikes me
is very unproven the existence of this, right because you say, like, Okay,
I'm gonna like, but I'm gonna trade ahead of a
trade announcement, I must know something that before Trump is
(31:52):
going to say it. Does anyone in the Trump administration
know what Trump was going to say before he says it?
Sometimes people in the Trump administration say things and then
he comes out and undercuts them. Yeah, a week an
hour later. So you know, I there's a very stranger market.
But I still tend to be skeptical of this idea
that there must be like people trading, because I'm skeptical
of this idea that anyone actually knows what's going to
(32:14):
happen in a meaningful way before they get a lot
of logic there.
Speaker 7 (32:17):
There's a lot of logic.
Speaker 3 (32:21):
That's going to happen again today at one thirty, about
an hour from right now. As we told you, we're
going to bring you into the Oval office for this
news conference with Elon Musk. It's like a good bye party,
I guess without the cake. His it's his last day
on the job here with one hundred and thirty day contract.
You know what the argument with Elon and the question
is about conflict of interest. This guy's the richest man
(32:42):
in the world. What the heck does he care about
making a couple of extra dollars in the government.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
Is that fair?
Speaker 9 (32:47):
It's an interest, you know, there's an argument has actually
been used a lot to justify Way and certain people.
And yes, like he's already right, So.
Speaker 4 (32:55):
Here's it's a room full of billion.
Speaker 9 (32:56):
Yeah, it's a room a billionaire. You know, I've never
like found that to be particularly skeptical, like, oh, they're
all really rich, they care about making money. It's like,
I don't know, I don't think they got to be
billionaires by not caring about making money. Right, all that
being said, it does seem like Elon has become particularly
ideological in various ways. I mean, I think he's getting
very obsessed with the deficit over the years, and I
think he's like, you know, even a way.
Speaker 3 (33:17):
You were compelled by what he said a couple of
days ago, this big beautiful bills.
Speaker 7 (33:20):
And something happened.
Speaker 9 (33:21):
And I think over the last year where he got
like really freaked out about just the sheer size of
the nation.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
Well he got to see it up close, right, I mean.
Speaker 9 (33:28):
Or he saw some chart that someone tweeted it and
I was like, oh, that's a line that's scary. I
mean seriously, like that could be that too. I mean,
the screen poisoning. It's like it comes for us all.
We spent too much time on the internet, right, he
spends a lot of time on the internet. He got
like really obsessed with something. You know, he seemed various
things seem to have happened in his life that have
put him into an more ideological posture than maybe he
(33:50):
once was when he was just a guy building a
business and trying to figure out ways to work with
or work around the federal government. So but you know, look,
it's not clear what was particularly accomplished by any measure
either in terms of a deficit reduction or quote making
the government you know, government efficiency.
Speaker 4 (34:06):
Right, Doge.
Speaker 9 (34:09):
So, I don't know if he feels as though he
has accomplished anything, or Doge as accomplished anything, but at least,
you know, like you said in that interview recently, I
guess he was with a CBS. Yeah, you know, certainly
on the deficit tide. He's disappointed.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
All right, So we're going to get to do this
in real time with Joe Wisenthal James. Right, we have
headlines crossing the terminal.
Speaker 4 (34:27):
Right, here we go.
Speaker 3 (34:29):
US plans wide are China tech sanctions? Here we go,
indeed with subsidiary crackdown. People familiar. Joe describe a bid
to target subsidiaries. A new rule here would cover them
subsidiaries of Chinese firms under US curbs. Yeah, he just
posted the president the Democrat inspired and controlled Congressional Budget
(34:50):
Office purposefully, he says, gave us an extremely low level
of growth, and he's complaining about the CBO as well.
But I want to focus on China because it's.
Speaker 9 (34:59):
Funny said this Nshina. Even Trump can't focus on China,
Isn't that the funny thing?
Speaker 4 (35:03):
Right there?
Speaker 9 (35:04):
Like this headlines like, meanwhile, let me just exactly.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
But yes, but the market's obsessed with China, so does
discount as a who hum or, do we are we
going to freak out here? Because we're looking like we're
getting down to.
Speaker 9 (35:14):
World and down about one percent? It's not nothing.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
I mean, I think that could be any Friday in all, Yeah.
Speaker 9 (35:21):
It could be any Friday, absolutely, And we're still so
far above those April lows, but you know, certainly below
still the highs in February. Well, I would say is
taken all together today, all of the headlines that we've
seen today, Yes, now this headline, the headlines earlier about
things terrispacts. You know, I think it's reasonable for the
(35:42):
market to sort of again maybe reprice things lower. And
you know, maybe Trump wants to look tough again because
people are talking about the taco trade.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
Or whateverxactly that could keep coming out angry today.
Speaker 9 (35:53):
Could that could be an element of it here? For sure,
that's going on.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
So, as Joe mentioned, S and P five hundred down
one percent, Nasdaq is down one and a half percent.
Ryan Terminal user Uh just pops in to say the
Odd Lots podcast on Elon was amazing.
Speaker 9 (36:08):
Many people are saying, They're all.
Speaker 3 (36:11):
I keep hearing this. What do you make of the
story that the New York Times expose a today the
drug use the kids. Uh, that's not going to help
the repair tour here, the rehabilitation tour, is it?
Speaker 7 (36:27):
No?
Speaker 9 (36:28):
I mean, look, the guy's got a lot on his plate.
I'm not surprised if his personal life.
Speaker 1 (36:32):
Is a mess.
Speaker 3 (36:33):
Yeah, right, right, investor care, A.
Speaker 9 (36:37):
Lot of people have speculated all these things for a
long time. Yeah, you know X theories about him.
Speaker 7 (36:42):
You're still fascinated by him though.
Speaker 9 (36:43):
Right, He's a really interesting historical care. I mean, here's
the depressing part to me is actually I'm just saying
the part, you know, like there is this hope in
the United States that we can have some sort of
you know, hard tech renaissance, industrial renaissance, soveral manufacturing renaissance.
There is no question in my mind that Elon Musk
(37:04):
is the best avatar, so to speak, for sort of
American industrialization. He built one of the biggest car companies
in the world during the twenty tens when most tech
companies etcare in the US we're just focused on software.
It's extremely impressive. SpaceX is the most one of the
most impressive companies in the world, you know, his rocket
company whatever it's called, or sorry, the satellite coment, extremely impressive, Darling. Sure,
(37:27):
it's a little grim to my mind when I think
about the future of sort of industrial capacity in the
United States that the one individual who has clearly been
an extraordinary success over the last fifteen years or so
in the United States is a such a political lightning.
Bold and b seems to be having a hard time,
(37:47):
you know, keeping it all together, which is understandable on
some level. But when you think, you know, we want
to have this capacity sustained decade after decade after decade. No,
we have like one guy. We have one guy. That's
all right, ad we have one guy who's head who
his company is leading the way with respect to rockettec
and reusable rockets and so forth. It's a little depressing that, like,
so much has changed on this person who's again both
(38:10):
politically and personally volatilely.
Speaker 4 (38:12):
Salesting's point of view.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
Now you're gonna leave me in two minutes and go
back to your lifestyles of the rich and famous, that's right,
But I'm just you know, in our remaining ninety seconds,
we just said a lot here, and after you leave,
I'm gonna get ten more headlines and he's gonna come
out with Elon and then there's going to be a
post when he goes to the US. Is this market
investible or do you just back off for a while
(38:35):
until he goes to sleep.
Speaker 9 (38:36):
Here's what I would say. Look, I don't know, and
no one should ever listen to my advice.
Speaker 7 (38:40):
But I would say there's two things.
Speaker 9 (38:42):
One it probably is you know, like you're not that
you're supposed to ignore all these things, right, That's what
every professional investor says, is that you're supposed to ignore
all of these things and then think long term is
all noise. But what I would say on top of that,
I don't maybe the market might be investable. Is this
an environment in which a business wants to make actual
real capital investment to be building a new factory? Do
you want to be expanding a headcount, et cetera. If there,
(39:03):
I think you can make more clearly the argument that
the answers know that there is so much uncertain to
be able the policy side that it's like, well why
not wait six months see if this smoke clears a
little bit before we actually make a commitment. So what
I would say is, I don't know about the market.
You're probably never really supposed to pay attention to the news.
You really should not be listening to the news ever,
and yet people do, at which we both appreciate. I
(39:25):
love this, but from a business perspective, you can understand
why I was like, all right, if I were like
thinking about, Oh, I want to build something new that's
going to expect to last me for years, maybe I
waited out a little bit.
Speaker 3 (39:35):
I'm so glad you could come over. The great American
band leader Joe Wisenthal. He also co hosts a podcast
called Odd Lots and it's a treat to spensive time
with just start way. Thanks for listening to the Balance
of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't
already an Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts,
and you can find us live every weekday from Washington,
(39:57):
DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot kah
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast ketch ys live weekdays at
noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android
Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
You're in New York for last day before we have
to head back to Washington, which will be the center
of all of our attention. Scheduled half an hour from now.
I guess it's always our center of attention for Joe,
Matthew and myself, but especially when you have the President
of the United States, Donald Trump, and the richest man
in the world, Elon Musk, set to give a joint
press conference together. This could get interesting. One thirty pm
(00:48):
is when it's supposed to kick off. We'll see how
much we stick to that timing. But we know what
it'll be about Joe, and it's about the dough Is
X going? That's my question. He's at the White House.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
I just I have big questions about the optics here
is he standing next to the desk with the President
sitting that we have podiums in the Oval Office. It's
a curious venue, what happened to wear? What hat will
he wear? And will actual questions be taken by reporters
Like you said, it's set for one pint thirty, Probably
not on time, as few things are at the White House,
(01:18):
no matter who seems to be living there, But when
it begins, we'll bring it to you live, of course,
right here on Bloomberg. Then we reel into the five
o'clock speech at US Steel Kayley that's being billed as
a big rally and could keep us up a little
bit later than usual tonight.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, he has a tendency to speak for a while
at these kind of things. And we assume that we're
going to get more details about the US Steel nip
On partnership or deal, whatever it is, if the United
States is getting a golden share in this and we'll
still have full control over this company or not knowing that.
There does seem to have been a tone shift between
campaign President or I guess campaign Donald Trump, who said
(01:55):
this needs to stay in US hands, no way this
deal can go forward, versus President Trump, who is much
more open to this idea.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
After the Siphius.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
We've talked to Stephen Myron about this a couple of
days ago on Balance of Power and asked him about
the terminology here, and he didn't seem to care as
long as the jobs were preserved and the jobs added
the investment dollars were made. But this idea of a
golden share has got our attention, and I suspect we'll
hear about that later from the President. Joe. Doe is
watching all of this from his perch at Bloomberg, our
(02:23):
Metals and Mining reporter, with his eyes on us deal. Joe,
it's great to have you with us. Welcome to a
Balance of Power here on Bloomberg. Can you tell us
what you understand about the structure, because this sure looks
like a takeover at least when you look at the
dollars involved here, and not unlike the deals that had
been proposed, to Kayley's point, not favored by Donald Trump
(02:43):
or Joe Biden. But tonight he's going to be talking
about a partnership and a company that the US government
will help control. How does it work?
Speaker 5 (02:54):
Yeah, Joe, that is the question. What is the structure
of whatever this deal is? And I think we're still
a bit in the dark. We're maybe starting to see
some bits and pieces flow out. Of course, earlier this
week one of the senators here from Pennsylvania had mentioned
the fourteen billion dollars supposedly being invested by Nippon Steel
into US steal. But I think listen, the investor class
(03:14):
is watching very closely. They do want to know what
this deal actually means. The golden share. Let's think of
it more like a mitigation agreement, right, that's the National
Security Agreement Golden share. I don't know if it's actually
a golden share. That might just be branding. But the
point here is what is the United States federal government
place going to be in this entire thing? Are they
going to have veto powers over how much production can
(03:35):
be shut down or not shut down? Are they going
to have veto powers over jobs? How many can be
cut in bad times and good times. I mean, right now,
all we're talking about is does the deal get done
or not? But after the deal is supposedly done, this
goes back to being a steel company. And steel companies
are still commodity companies that go with the ups and
downs of the market.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Well, that's very true, and of course it being a
steel company is why initially, at least President Trump like
President Biden before him, was opposed to this deal because
they said there's great national security implications and interests the
United States have in retaining its own steel production capacity.
I want to ask you about a different element of
the commodity space though, specifically critical minerals, Joe, because President
Trump today was talking about China not abiding by the
(04:18):
terms agreed to in Geneva in regard to the trade agreement,
the USTR Jamison Greer indicated that run of the big
sticking points maybe that critical minerals were not flowing in
the way that China promised they would after they restricted
them in retaliation for President Trump's very high tariffs. Do
we have a sense of the critical minerals flow, what
actually is happening?
Speaker 5 (04:40):
You know, over the past two weeks, I've been in
discussions with the various people that are in this critical
mineral space, the rare earth space, and they have indicated,
you know, listen, it's not like anything drastically changed with
the new trade deal. The new trade deal was very
specific about companies that would have certain things lifted on them.
But remember the export controls that we're implemented by China.
(05:01):
I think this is what they're really getting out here
with these seven rarers. They're implemented the day after the
President of the United States mentioned the reciprocal tariffs. Those
export controls went on every nation, it wasn't just the
United States. So I think there's a procedural thing here
that might be under discussion with Chinese officials and US officials,
which is this isn't just a US thing, So it's
(05:23):
not just a specific US discussion. So right now, as
we understand, it's not clear that these export controls have
been lifted, but it's also not clear that it was
ever agreed to in the beginning that they would be
lifted in the way that the President seems to be suggesting.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
All right, Joe Doe, we appreciate Bloomberg medals and mining
reporter doing God's work literally on the side of the
road in Pennsylvania where President drump will be today with
an umbrella in hand. Our audience on Bloomberg Radio is
missing how hard Joe is working for US today, surviving
the elements to cover this US deal visit that will
be happening later. We really appreciate it, but of course,
before we can get to US deal later this afternoon,
(05:58):
we have to get through a joint press conference between
President Trump and Elon Musk. First is scheduled to begin
just over twenty minutes from now, and we want to
get into it with our political panel. Bloomberg Politics contributors
Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us. Rick, of course,
is a Stone Court Capital partner in Republican strategist. Genie
a Democratic analyst and Senior Democracy Fellow at the Center
for the Study of the Presidency and Congress. His days
(06:21):
as a special government employee, Genie are about to be over.
They're going to talk about all of the work the
Doge has done over that time to shrink the size
of the federal government. We do know thousands of people's
lives have actually been affected by layoffs in the federal government.
But it doesn't seem that the kind of money Elon
Musk said he was going to save he got anywhere
(06:41):
close to actually saving. So what kind of victory lap
is this really going to be?
Speaker 6 (06:47):
You know, I, Kaylee, I keep wondering, what does Donald
Trump give him for a farewell address, Like a little
chainsaw for his desk or you know, I don't know,
something like that. Coupon's for free nights at the Lincoln Bedroom,
you know, and so baffled by this because of course,
what Elon Musk is trying to do is to leave
gracefully so that he can reconstruct his image and of
(07:11):
course impact those sales in a positive way to have
a press conference.
Speaker 7 (07:16):
Now.
Speaker 6 (07:17):
I don't know how this helps him rehabilitate his image.
But of course the reality of Doge is that the
two trillion and cuts promised by some calculations. People are saying, so,
let's say, by Elon musk calculation, it was close to
one hundred and six under sixty billion in the end,
But other people are saying, in fact, he cost or
Doge cost money simply because of those IRS cuts to
(07:41):
people that hurt the ability of the IRS to take
in income. Either way you slice it, it is far
less than he promised. And of course they have a
bill going to Congress now. But I am not convinced
Doze is going to live on beyond Elon Musk and
his chainsaw rick.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
How is this going to work, chainsaw or not? This
is the oval office. The President's going to be sharing
space with a non elected official, he said, not a
world leader. Are they going to sit on the chairs
in front of the fireplace like you've got a prime
minister in town. Does he have Elon stand next to
the desk? This could be awkward.
Speaker 8 (08:19):
Well, we've seen White House Oval Office events in where
Elon stands next to the desk. In fact, you know,
even X usually against the standing room only treatment inside
the Oval office. And we've seen many occasions where Donald
Trump would have people in his administration or from other
(08:39):
countries come into the Oval Office and stand around the
President's desk while he sat. So I think the physicality
of the same will be interesting to watch right because
I think there must be some pecking order for what
treatment you get if you're on the good list or
the bad list.
Speaker 7 (09:00):
Lately, the back list.
Speaker 8 (09:01):
Is when you're sitting next to one another in the
most formal posture. And he's not going to attack Elon Musk.
They'll be playful and they'll be interesting. They won't ask
answer any of the questions that you want them to.
But they see this as a long standing relationship that
will continue on. Elon Musk and the President say they'll
(09:22):
continue to to discuss the affairs of state. And yes,
I do think this is part of what Elon Musk
believes is his rehabilitation back to the private sector where
he can become popular again for the things that he's
done to improve the country and the world, his inventions.
Speaker 7 (09:41):
And I think that would be the.
Speaker 8 (09:43):
Best outcome is for the president and I stay say,
Elon Musk convents really cool things, and I'm going to
drive a Tesla and someday I'll go to Mars.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Remember when the tesla's were lined up outside the White House.
Speaker 9 (09:55):
Good?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
I forget showroom. Yeah, we forget the things that have
already happened in this administr Rick. I do wonder though
about your thoughts on what Genie was saying, which is
that she doesn't believe that the Doge effort lives beyond
Elon Musk. Knowing there was a Doge caucus formed in Congress,
there were lawmakers ready to take up this mantle as
well really pursue this effort to shrink the government. Does
all of that just kind of fade to the wayside.
Speaker 8 (10:18):
It's been a whirlwind. In only a few months. Doge
went from basically running the entire federal government to being
an asterisk. And I think that's the real question now
is not so much the Hill because they like to
do their own thing, and the Doge Caucus, I think
was just a way to fit into the narrative with
Elon Musk being so powerful. But at the end of
(10:41):
the day, you do have DOGE employees. They're sitting in
these agencies. They are now under the thumbs of the
cabinet secretaries, which happened even while Elon was there. And
yet we do see active efforts on the part of
this administration to implement it reforms, including a very big
on track for Pallenteer brought in by Doge to basically
(11:04):
start unifying databases throughout the government. So if you blink,
you might miss it. But the reality is there is
a pretty significant effort underway that could substantially change things
like privacy and government access to your data and the
integration of data through different databases.
Speaker 7 (11:23):
That is going to be talked about for quite some time.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
What does Elon Musk have really to celebrate when it
comes to the doughs today, Genie, will it be cutting spending?
Because the promise was two trillion dollars on the way
in and it looks like sixteen billion on the way out.
When you consider the wall of receipts, or will it
be the fact that he took the chainsaw or the
proverbial sledgehammer and started to destroy agencies like USAID, which
(11:51):
was part of the aim of this administration.
Speaker 6 (11:54):
You know, I think he is going to try to
celebrate something that I don't I think deserves celebrating. And
I think you just heard it in Rick's answer. The
promise was the two trillion in cuts you just talked about, Joe.
The reality is far less, maybe two or three percent.
Even again some people saying it may cost taxpayers to
(12:16):
have doze in there, But what this is going to
cost us in addition to money, is issues of privacy
and the contract that Rick was just talking about is
a very good example. We don't know how this turns
out at the end, but the outcome of this, I
don't think is going to be known as it pertains
to our rights and liberties and for a very long time.
(12:38):
And what's frustrating and fascinating about this. At the same time,
under a GOP that has long been committed to a
smaller federal government, they opened the door to private company
to go in and take away some of the most
valuable information that we treasure and people don't want being shared.
(12:58):
So I do think that is going to be likely
the legacy, but I'm not sure it's the legacy that
Elon Musk is going to celebrate. And I would also
just add that nobody is going to miss Elon Musk
more than Donald Trump, except for the Democrats. I mean,
the real losers here with him leaving are the Democrats
who have enjoyed this enormously and would like nothing else
(13:19):
more than for him to stay so they can continue
to beat up on him.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
As he said, Yeah, Genie, what are they going to
run on in twenty twenty six if Elon Musk is
no longer a daily fixture in Washington headlines?
Speaker 6 (13:31):
Yeah, I mean, you don't get it better than the
world's wealthiest man coming in to make cuts fire people,
cut cancer research, food assistance to the poor, AIDS research
age funding. I mean, it was just, you know, Taylor
made for the Democrats. They're going to miss him enormously.
They'll just have to look back wistfully at Wisconsin and
(13:51):
be happy and proud that they control the Supreme Court
thanks to Elon Musk.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Probably this could be one of those events. Rick Davis
where Democrats are making ads for some time, if you
were helping to prepare the President and Elon Musk to
meet the press today, to what extent do they need
to be on message?
Speaker 7 (14:10):
Yeah?
Speaker 8 (14:10):
Look, I mean being on message in this administration is
different than what I was taught.
Speaker 7 (14:15):
How to be on message, that's for sure.
Speaker 8 (14:17):
And so you know, you would want them to say
things that would actually appear in a Republican ad, not
a Democratic ad, and that.
Speaker 7 (14:26):
Would require the discipline to say that.
Speaker 8 (14:28):
The you know, they came to Washington, Washington to reduce
the Scott size and scope of government. It's intrusion into
your daily life, and that's what they've done. I mean,
there are ways of spinning a meteorc rise in government
and a quick exit in a most positive way. My
guess is it'll be more entertainment value, which probably will
(14:51):
disappoint the Democrats a little bit. But if you can
sort of dodge that TV commercial in the making situation,
I think you'd be you'd be considered very successful.
Speaker 7 (15:04):
But I doubt it. I'm going south on this one.
Speaker 8 (15:07):
I think I think this is going to be a
circus and it's worth tuning in to Bloomberg to watch
it happen.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
Oh see, now I'm excited, Rick. Yes, indeed, we just
got our first view of the oval. They're setting up
the desk. Someone's going to be seated. That'll be Donald Trump.
Presumably where Elon Musk ends up is another question. Rick
Davis and Jeanie Shanzino a great panel Bloomberg Politics contributors.
We count down about ten minutes to the start of
this event. Assuming it's on time, we'll bring it to
(15:36):
you live here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg's TV
and radio.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Apple Cocle and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
We await here on Bloomberg TV and Radio the beginning
of a joint news conference between President Donald Trump and
outgoing DOGE leader Elon Musk, who is wrapping up his
time as a special government employee. This media event, of
course meant to commemorate that perhaps take a victory lab
but it also may be an opportunity for the press
to ask some questions both Elon Musk and President Trump
(16:21):
on undoge related issues, like maybe getting some clarity from
President Trump as to what exactly he meant when he
posted on true social this morning that China has totally
violated its agreement with US, the US, of course being us.
So much for being mister nice guy. Still looking for
clarity as to what exactly the violation China has committed.
Here is Joe, and how this factors into efforts to
(16:44):
advance a trade deal between the US and China.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
No more mister nice guy. That's right. The markets didn't
like that message. But this also comes Kaylee, just hours
after a federal appeals court turned over the Federal Trade
Court ruling that had the markets reacting as well yesterday.
The push and pull here, the confusing headlines continue now.
The tariffs are restored, at least temporarily, and so there
(17:11):
are great questions about how businesses are supposed to weather
this kind of uncertainty. Of course, the same we can
ask about investors.
Speaker 7 (17:18):
And I'm glad to say we're.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
Joined here in New York by John Denton, the Secretary
General of the International Chamber of Commerce. Mister Secretary, it's
great to see you. Thanks for being with us here
in New York. The ICC represents over forty five million
businesses in over one hundred and seventy countries. What are
they supposed to do well?
Speaker 4 (17:39):
Physical It's great to be the premium for President Trump
and elamsk PRIs conference, and we want to be sort
of zeroed in happy to participate in that discussion as well,
because the message I would be giving is the same
as giving you guys here. We've just survey the whole
of the ICC, and what we're finding is on a
(18:00):
you'll be surprised, uncertainty actually is attacks. So what we're
seeing on a global basis is heightened levels of uncertainty.
And in a way, the decision of the Court the
CIT yesterday and the other jurisdiction that there was a
matter herd and doesn't actually reduce the uncertainty. It actually
clouds it even further because what we're seeing now is
(18:21):
a lack of consistency. There will be changes in the
coherence about the frameworks that will we applied. And what
that says to business large and small is let's just
steady on. Let's take our time. Why don't we delay?
There's no cost to delay in a way. And of
course what we're seeing are things being basically kicked down
(18:43):
the road for another three months, which will generally mean
for another six months. And what that also means is
some thing's kicked down the road won't be picked up again.
So we are seeing that on a global basis. Of course,
there's different levels of uncertainty operating. There's a lot more
interest and uncertainty because people are much much more sort
of zeroed in here in advanced economies, in developing and
(19:05):
emerging economies particularly I've just been in Africa. It's clearly
probably bewilderment, not quite certain why we're being wrapped up
in this sort of stuff as well. But also you know,
we don't have the resources to worry about it. We
also have other stuff just to get done, and so
people just continue on. But what you're starting to see
basically people saying let's just not hire that additional person
(19:27):
or keep that open. It's interesting that the two matters,
or the matters that were actually heard in the various
courts on this issue came from small businesses. That tells
you is small businesses are really feeling this as well,
and they do not have the resources that large businesses have.
That it can't do war rooms, they don't do scenario planning.
It's just problematic. And even for large businesses, this is becoming.
(19:50):
This is not becoming. This is very complicated.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
Well, so when you say businesses, whatever the size, are
largely just kind of in wheat and ce mode. Still,
are we s any kind of material reorientation of supply chains,
thinking about shifting their sources of supply or where they're
looking for end markets for things that they are exporting.
What kind of decisions our business is willing to make?
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Well, the first thing people are looking at this, but
as they don't know yet what the final outcome will be,
a lot of it's exploratory and also to commit now
and to discover that subsequently the actual tariff that was
levied is actually unable to be levied and are going
to be repaid. It's like, let's just hold off here.
(20:34):
I mean, I've just been in Mexico with the business
community and government there. You know, we're working with them
saying well, hold on, we do know this with Mexico
Tariff's USMCA that anything any good that is USMCA compliant
will actually not have to penny tariffs. And we also
know as the fact that only forty nine percent of
goods from Mexico into the US are currently USMCA compliant.
(20:57):
But that's actually not because the goods are, it's just
the cost of compliance outweighed the benefits. They paid an
extra two and a half percent on the tariff for that,
but now they're going to go up. We're looking at, well, okay,
there are things we can do. We can actually lower
the cost of compliance. I mean, the ICC will create
a tool or apparatus to enable that to happen. So
businesses are looking with this mix of friction about how
(21:20):
they can work their way through it. But committing new
capital or re orienting your supply chain that becomes quite
difficult at this point in time.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
You said something really interesting right off the bat that
uncertainty is a tax. We keep talking to economists or
try to drive home the point that a tariff is
a tax. So is this approach effectively a double tax
on your members?
Speaker 4 (21:44):
Well, I mean double tax regime. We should all try
to avoid that. But effectively, uncertainty is a tax because
what you're actually the cost of things goes up as
you delay, And of course a tariff is a tax.
I don't think there's any disputing about that. The Christian
I think people are out here who pays the tax.
The end. What we're seeing even in the US economy
(22:05):
is consumers are going to pay that tax. And they're
starting to pay that tax because your audiency in supply chains,
it's outaucy in retail, increases in costs, and we're seeing
the sentiment move towards inflation and repressure. So that tax
is going to come through and be felt by people.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
Well, so when we consider the idea that President Trump says, whatever,
if you want to call it a tax or what
have you, it's going to bring more revenue to the US.
But the other goal of this entire thing is to
bring more business to the US, to have companies investing
in manufacturing capacity here, making things in America rather than elsewhere.
And I wonder what you're hearing from businesses in the
(22:41):
international community be out there desired to come to the
United States given this uncertainty that we're talking about.
Speaker 4 (22:49):
Well, let me be one hundred percent clear, this is
the greatest economy in the world. Of course, if you're
a business person, you want to have a piece of this,
and you want to have more of it if you
possibly can, and you want to invest in it. I mean,
I'm an Australian. Australians invest heavily in the US. But
what we want to know what are the rules around
(23:10):
which we can actually make these allocations of significant amounts
of capital. If the rules are not clear, the actual
risk factor goes up and the cost of capital goes up.
We applaud one hundred percent any government seeking to improve
the conditions that will enable investment to actually occur. I
want more in Australia. I actually want more in Africa.
(23:33):
We applaud that. But the way you attract capital and
businesses by having clarity around what the rules are and
also how you enforce the contracts that you were entered into.
That's what we want and that I'm sure is part
of prison and Trump's vision.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
Well, this is interesting and I can't imagine what it's
like to be in twenty twenty five in the age
of the second Trump administration. The Secretary General of the
International Chamber of Commerce, with the comments we hear about
global coming from not just the White House, but the
MAGA community, the populist community that elected him. Do you
(24:07):
feel like you're on an island as the face of globalism?
Speaker 4 (24:10):
No, I mean the world is so interconnected you may
the way you describe it may change a little bit.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Is he on an island in a world of globalism?
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Well, there's one thing that's for sure. The US is
one of the most connected economies in the world. So
the President does not sit on an island. He sits
on one of the most connected economies in the world.
And that's actually one of the great strengths of the
US economy. In any issue about balance of power, the
most connected economy will be the most powerful economy. So
we hope that will continue. But the reality is planes
(24:42):
still need to fly across borders. That's part of globalization.
Male gets delivered. You require multilateral agreements that all happens.
Let's not forget that the plumbing is still there, what
we might call it a bit different. But also there
is actually a fair point the President makes which I
think we should we actually share a Well, we need
to make certain there are more winners out of the
(25:03):
process of opening borders and enabling trade to take place
across borders. But what we also know is that this
has been one of the great enablers of economic development
in the last one hundred years. The reason we've been
able to move Africa a long way out of poverty
is because they're part of a multilateral or trading system
that functions. The reason we've actually seen a decline in
(25:25):
poverty globally is because we actually have got rules based
trading systems operating. Nobody wants to see that go And
I'll tell you what. The US accounts for thirteen percent
of global trade. The eighty seven percent of the rest
want to keep this going, and one of our jobs
is to keep it going.
Speaker 8 (25:41):
Well.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
You've brought up Africa a few times now, which obviously
is seen as kind of a landscape of competition between
the US and China as to who can gain the
foothold in Africa. Are you seeing evidence of companies anywhere,
not just in Africa, but businesses looking to reorient themselves
more towards China and away from the United Sea. As
you talk about the US being the biggest, most connected,
(26:02):
powerful economy in the world, do you see risk that
the US could easily see that to the second largest
economy correct, But I.
Speaker 4 (26:08):
Think the reality is over the last ten twenty years
there's been a re orientation of trade anyway, there's a
lot more what's called south south trade, and of course
what we see now as the major trading partner for
a lot of even Latin American countries is actually China.
It's not one or two. But what's really interesting is
if you want functioning economies, you want a market based
(26:29):
system which is governed by a political system, which is effective.
Market based economies actually lead to more economic development. One
of the greatest calling cards for democracy is actually effective
market based systems. And of course the greatest alignment on
democracy is with countries like the US, Australia, European Union.
(26:51):
They're not with a state led economic models. So the
more we can encourage economic development. And frankly, the point
I've been making in Africa i've in honor to meet
with President Rudeau. I've also been in South Africa because
I'm part of the G twenty process, is that the
development assistance economic model is really diminished. Now it's got
to be replaced by something, and that's got to be
(27:12):
the private siktorl In model. And frankly, I think We're
at one with the US US administration on that as well.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
This has been fascinating. I hope you let us know
when you're back in the US we should continue this conversation.
Speaker 4 (27:22):
Thanks ch Are we being knocked off now for the.
Speaker 9 (27:26):
Look they're going to start a little late.
Speaker 7 (27:28):
Absolutely, Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
A break, but it was great speaking with you. John Denton,
Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce. Here with
us at our global headquarters.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple,
Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen
on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
live on YouTube.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Balance of Power here on Bloomberg Radio satellite radio channel
one twenty one and on YouTube. It's a good time
to do this, by the way, because Joe Wisenthal is
coming up next to It's Bloomberg Business News Live. To
catch our live stream from today New York. It's one
of the great treats of being here. Whenever I have
the opportunity to come to world headquarters, to come to
the big city, you got to get a good pastrami sandwich,
(28:20):
and you're really lucky if you get to spend some
time with the stalwart Joe Wisenthal, Bloomberg Executive editor for
Digital News. That's you have like a big title like that.
Speaker 9 (28:28):
No, it's not, you know what actually this is? Can
I take this moment? Yeah, I've been like trying to
exercise this aspect of my bio of really hard time,
and I keep finding random databases where that's stuck in
and then it disappears. I'm just the co host of
the Outlaws podcasts, right, and bandleader and I'm one of
the singers for the country music band Lights.
Speaker 7 (28:47):
I love that.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Yeah, you're the telecaster in the lineup at Bloomberg.
Speaker 4 (28:51):
That's right.
Speaker 9 (28:52):
I'm sure the Telly someone else plays the stratas.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
Right, fantastic. Well, it's great to see you, and I'm
delighted you could come in. We always learn something when
we spend some time with Joe. And yes, the podcast
is called Odd Lots, but you probably know that because
you subscribe to it. There's this idea of the taco
trade has fascinated a lot of us, and I wonder
if because you're not the best thing about you is
you don't care about a lot of the stuff that
(29:15):
we care about. You're really coming at this from the
market's perspective, so I can ask you if that's real
or not.
Speaker 9 (29:20):
So what I would say is that it does feel
like every headline about trade period is like taken less
seriously than the last headline. But I would even include,
you know, the various court rulings that we've seen. So
for example, there was that court ruling I guess it
was on Wednesday night that said the tariffs were legal. Now,
if that had come out and say the middle of April,
(29:43):
I think that would have been this huge deal, right,
it would have been massive, And it was like, oh,
look at this whole court, and it just overturned the
entire thing. They got a little markt bounds that didn't
last that long. Yeah, and then there was another reversal
the night. So what I would say is that every
there's sort of this I'm trying to think of like
the analogy in science, but the sort of diminishing impulse
(30:04):
with every headline about tariffs. It's like Trump says the
Chinese deal is off track. It would have been a
huge deal I think in April. Now it's like just
one of the headlines.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
Absolutely right, Yeah, so then there's some truth to this
boy who cried tariff thing. It does feel only run
the same place so many times.
Speaker 9 (30:20):
It does feel like it, and it does seem like,
you know, if you're if the if. The message of
tariffs and the implied tool for negotiation is, look, we
are willing to take pain, to inflict pain on you
in order to give you some concession towards us. And
then each time you inflict domestic pain, and usually it's
expressed in the stock market pretty quickly, then you sort
(30:41):
of reverse yourself in a short period of time. I mean,
I just think it's you know, I'm not a I've
never taken a negotiation seminar or anything, but intuitively you
would think, okay to people on the other side of that,
take each one of these threats last serious.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
Yeah, the fact of the matter is since the pause, yeah,
I love the names, somebody has made a lot of money. Yeah,
and there's that's gonna be a big question about market
manipulation every time this happens as well, right, yeah, you know,
and you must hear from the volatility guys who are
in heaven right.
Speaker 9 (31:15):
Now, someone's gonna make a lot of money, you know,
on the questions of market manipulation. What that even means.
You know, some people are very some people are are
very conspiratorial, right like, oh, who within the Trump administration
knew what it was? All?
Speaker 4 (31:28):
Like that?
Speaker 9 (31:30):
But all of these conspiracy theories rests on some premise
of internal Whitehouse communication and coordination, right, the idea that
there is someone besides Trump and the White House one
knows what's going on in Trump's mind. What strikes me
is very unproven the existence of this, right because you say, like, Okay,
I'm gonna like, but I'm gonna trade ahead of a
trade announcement, I must know something that before Trump is
(31:52):
going to say it. Does anyone in the Trump administration
know what Trump was going to say before he says it?
Sometimes people in the Trump administration say things and then
he comes out and undercuts them. Yeah, a week an
hour later. So you know, I there's a very stranger market.
But I still tend to be skeptical of this idea
that there must be like people trading, because I'm skeptical
of this idea that anyone actually knows what's going to
(32:14):
happen in a meaningful way before they get a lot
of logic there.
Speaker 7 (32:17):
There's a lot of logic.
Speaker 3 (32:21):
That's going to happen again today at one thirty, about
an hour from right now. As we told you, we're
going to bring you into the Oval office for this
news conference with Elon Musk. It's like a good bye party,
I guess without the cake. His it's his last day
on the job here with one hundred and thirty day contract.
You know what the argument with Elon and the question
is about conflict of interest. This guy's the richest man
(32:42):
in the world. What the heck does he care about
making a couple of extra dollars in the government.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
Is that fair?
Speaker 9 (32:47):
It's an interest, you know, there's an argument has actually
been used a lot to justify Way and certain people.
And yes, like he's already right, So.
Speaker 4 (32:55):
Here's it's a room full of billion.
Speaker 9 (32:56):
Yeah, it's a room a billionaire. You know, I've never
like found that to be particularly skeptical, like, oh, they're
all really rich, they care about making money. It's like,
I don't know, I don't think they got to be
billionaires by not caring about making money. Right, all that
being said, it does seem like Elon has become particularly
ideological in various ways. I mean, I think he's getting
very obsessed with the deficit over the years, and I
think he's like, you know, even a way.
Speaker 3 (33:17):
You were compelled by what he said a couple of
days ago, this big beautiful bills.
Speaker 7 (33:20):
And something happened.
Speaker 9 (33:21):
And I think over the last year where he got
like really freaked out about just the sheer size of
the nation.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
Well he got to see it up close, right, I mean.
Speaker 9 (33:28):
Or he saw some chart that someone tweeted it and
I was like, oh, that's a line that's scary. I
mean seriously, like that could be that too. I mean,
the screen poisoning. It's like it comes for us all.
We spent too much time on the internet, right, he
spends a lot of time on the internet. He got
like really obsessed with something. You know, he seemed various
things seem to have happened in his life that have
put him into an more ideological posture than maybe he
(33:50):
once was when he was just a guy building a
business and trying to figure out ways to work with
or work around the federal government. So but you know, look,
it's not clear what was particularly accomplished by any measure
either in terms of a deficit reduction or quote making
the government you know, government efficiency.
Speaker 4 (34:06):
Right, Doge.
Speaker 9 (34:09):
So, I don't know if he feels as though he
has accomplished anything, or Doge as accomplished anything, but at least,
you know, like you said in that interview recently, I
guess he was with a CBS. Yeah, you know, certainly
on the deficit tide. He's disappointed.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
All right, So we're going to get to do this
in real time with Joe Wisenthal James. Right, we have
headlines crossing the terminal.
Speaker 4 (34:27):
Right, here we go.
Speaker 3 (34:29):
US plans wide are China tech sanctions? Here we go,
indeed with subsidiary crackdown. People familiar. Joe describe a bid
to target subsidiaries. A new rule here would cover them
subsidiaries of Chinese firms under US curbs. Yeah, he just
posted the president the Democrat inspired and controlled Congressional Budget
(34:50):
Office purposefully, he says, gave us an extremely low level
of growth, and he's complaining about the CBO as well.
But I want to focus on China because it's.
Speaker 9 (34:59):
Funny said this Nshina. Even Trump can't focus on China,
Isn't that the funny thing?
Speaker 4 (35:03):
Right there?
Speaker 9 (35:04):
Like this headlines like, meanwhile, let me just exactly.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
But yes, but the market's obsessed with China, so does
discount as a who hum or, do we are we
going to freak out here? Because we're looking like we're
getting down to.
Speaker 9 (35:14):
World and down about one percent? It's not nothing.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
I mean, I think that could be any Friday in all, Yeah.
Speaker 9 (35:21):
It could be any Friday, absolutely, And we're still so
far above those April lows, but you know, certainly below
still the highs in February. Well, I would say is
taken all together today, all of the headlines that we've
seen today, Yes, now this headline, the headlines earlier about
things terrispacts. You know, I think it's reasonable for the
(35:42):
market to sort of again maybe reprice things lower. And
you know, maybe Trump wants to look tough again because
people are talking about the taco trade.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
Or whateverxactly that could keep coming out angry today.
Speaker 9 (35:53):
Could that could be an element of it here? For sure,
that's going on.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
So, as Joe mentioned, S and P five hundred down
one percent, Nasdaq is down one and a half percent.
Ryan Terminal user Uh just pops in to say the
Odd Lots podcast on Elon was amazing.
Speaker 9 (36:08):
Many people are saying, They're all.
Speaker 3 (36:11):
I keep hearing this. What do you make of the
story that the New York Times expose a today the
drug use the kids. Uh, that's not going to help
the repair tour here, the rehabilitation tour, is it?
Speaker 7 (36:27):
No?
Speaker 9 (36:28):
I mean, look, the guy's got a lot on his plate.
I'm not surprised if his personal life.
Speaker 1 (36:32):
Is a mess.
Speaker 3 (36:33):
Yeah, right, right, investor care, A.
Speaker 9 (36:37):
Lot of people have speculated all these things for a
long time. Yeah, you know X theories about him.
Speaker 7 (36:42):
You're still fascinated by him though.
Speaker 9 (36:43):
Right, He's a really interesting historical care. I mean, here's
the depressing part to me is actually I'm just saying
the part, you know, like there is this hope in
the United States that we can have some sort of
you know, hard tech renaissance, industrial renaissance, soveral manufacturing renaissance.
There is no question in my mind that Elon Musk
(37:04):
is the best avatar, so to speak, for sort of
American industrialization. He built one of the biggest car companies
in the world during the twenty tens when most tech
companies etcare in the US we're just focused on software.
It's extremely impressive. SpaceX is the most one of the
most impressive companies in the world, you know, his rocket
company whatever it's called, or sorry, the satellite coment, extremely impressive, Darling. Sure,
(37:27):
it's a little grim to my mind when I think
about the future of sort of industrial capacity in the
United States that the one individual who has clearly been
an extraordinary success over the last fifteen years or so
in the United States is a such a political lightning.
Bold and b seems to be having a hard time,
(37:47):
you know, keeping it all together, which is understandable on
some level. But when you think, you know, we want
to have this capacity sustained decade after decade after decade. No,
we have like one guy. We have one guy. That's
all right, ad we have one guy who's head who
his company is leading the way with respect to rockettec
and reusable rockets and so forth. It's a little depressing that, like,
so much has changed on this person who's again both
(38:10):
politically and personally volatilely.
Speaker 4 (38:12):
Salesting's point of view.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
Now you're gonna leave me in two minutes and go
back to your lifestyles of the rich and famous, that's right,
But I'm just you know, in our remaining ninety seconds,
we just said a lot here, and after you leave,
I'm gonna get ten more headlines and he's gonna come
out with Elon and then there's going to be a
post when he goes to the US. Is this market
investible or do you just back off for a while
(38:35):
until he goes to sleep.
Speaker 9 (38:36):
Here's what I would say. Look, I don't know, and
no one should ever listen to my advice.
Speaker 7 (38:40):
But I would say there's two things.
Speaker 9 (38:42):
One it probably is you know, like you're not that
you're supposed to ignore all these things, right, That's what
every professional investor says, is that you're supposed to ignore
all of these things and then think long term is
all noise. But what I would say on top of that,
I don't maybe the market might be investable. Is this
an environment in which a business wants to make actual
real capital investment to be building a new factory? Do
you want to be expanding a headcount, et cetera. If there,
(39:03):
I think you can make more clearly the argument that
the answers know that there is so much uncertain to
be able the policy side that it's like, well why
not wait six months see if this smoke clears a
little bit before we actually make a commitment. So what
I would say is, I don't know about the market.
You're probably never really supposed to pay attention to the news.
You really should not be listening to the news ever,
and yet people do, at which we both appreciate. I
(39:25):
love this, but from a business perspective, you can understand
why I was like, all right, if I were like
thinking about, Oh, I want to build something new that's
going to expect to last me for years, maybe I
waited out a little bit.
Speaker 3 (39:35):
I'm so glad you could come over. The great American
band leader Joe Wisenthal. He also co hosts a podcast
called Odd Lots and it's a treat to spensive time
with just start way. Thanks for listening to the Balance
of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't
already an Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts,
and you can find us live every weekday from Washington,
(39:57):
DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot kah
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.