June 16, 2025 • 42 mins
Watch Carol and Tim LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.
US President Donald Trump said Iran wants to talk about deescalating the conflict with Israel even as the two sides exchanged deadly fire for the fourth consecutive day.
Asked about reports that Iran wants to work toward a resolution, Trump responded “yeah,” and added, “they’d like to talk, but they should have done that before. ”It’s painful for both parties but I would say that Iran is not winning this war,” Trump said at the start of a meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney at a Group of Seven leaders summit in Kananaskis, Alberta. Asked if the US would get more involved militarily, Trump said he didn’t want to discuss it.
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier Monday that Tehran is signaling it wants to de-escalate hostilities with Israel and is willing to resume nuclear talks with the US as long as Washington doesn’t join the Israeli attacks. It cited Middle Eastern and European officials it didn’t identify. A similar report by Reuters says Iran conveyed the message through Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Oman.
Oil fell on the WSJ report, with Brent futures dropping around 4% after rising over 10% Friday. US Treasuries pared earlier drops and European bonds gained as traders reacted to diminishing concerns about inflation.
About the same time as Trump was speaking, Iran’s semi-official Mehr News Agency cited a senior security official as saying the country is prepared to deliver a “major blow” to Israel following its recent strikes on Iranian cities and targets. Shortly afterward, air raid sirens sounded as Israel reported it had detected more missile launches.
Today's show features interviews from the Bloomberg Technology Summit in San Francisco:
- Bloomberg News National Security Team Leader Nick Wadhams on latest in Israel-Iran Conflict and Bloomberg News Correspondent David Gura on Israel/Iran Conflict and G7 Meeting
- Beth Fouhy, Partner at FGS Global, on latest ICE Deportations, US Domestic News
- Rob Thummel, Senior Portfolio Manager at Tortoise Capital on energy markets
- and we Drive to the Close with Chris Fasciano, Chief Market Strategist at Commonwealth
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. This is Bloomberg Business
Week Daily reporting from the magazine that helps global leaders
stay ahead with insight on the people, companies, and trends
shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business, finance and tech
(00:23):
news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast
with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebeck on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
All right, let's get to some of the latest headlines
we've been talking about at Israel and around exchanging fire
for the fourth consecutive day to day, stoking fears of
an all out war with the potential to drag in
others in the oil rich region. And Tim forced the
US into a more hands on stamp.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
So that's the backdrop, along with trade tensions and more.
For this year is a Group of a Seven summit.
It's the fiftieth annual gathering of world leaders. It's happening
right now in Canada. Speaking earlier from their President Donald
Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney Kanne though shot,
we should note it's former chair of the board of
directors at Bloomberg LPV, owner of Bloomberg TV and Radio.
President Trump addressing the hostilities earlier in the Middle East.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
I'd like to talk, but they should have done that before.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
I had sixty days and they had sixty days.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
And on the sixty first day, I said, we don't
have a deal. They have to make a deal, and
it's painful for both parties.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
But I'd say, iron is not winning this war, all right.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
That, of course is President Trump there with Canadian Prime
Minister Mark Harney from the G seven. Let's get more
from the meetings we had to Calgary, Alberta, Canada, our
Bloomberg News bureau there, and to Bloomberg News National Security
Team leader Nick Wadams. Hey, Nick, good to be checking
in with you. I know it's going to be a
busy couple of days, busy week. There's a certain pomp
and circumstance to all G seven meetings, a photo op,
(01:51):
the family photo, so on and so forth. Every meeting, too, though,
has specifics around it. And again the geopolitical and macro
backdrop set the scene for us this year around what's
top of mind, like what is going on in the
Middle East as we speak, and what else you are
hearing is really on the minds of leaders.
Speaker 5 (02:08):
Well, there's a lot on their minds. I mean, obviously
you see a lot of leaders coming here looking for
common ground to send a message of unity around issues
that really matter, on trade, on Israel Iran, on Ukraine,
things like that. The big issue, of course, is whether
President Donald Trump is going to be willing to go along.
So far, we know he's refusing to sign a joint
(02:28):
statement on the Israel Iran conflict that would have called
for de escalation. The host, Mark Carney is basically decided
to dispense with the traditional joint communica that comes out
of a meeting like this. So what you're seeing instead
is a lot of leaders coming here looking to do
bilateral deals with the US on trade. So the Japanese
(02:49):
Prime Minister will be here. You obviously have Canada, you
have the UK looking to do its own trade deal.
Claudia Sinbaum, President of Mexico, not a member of the
G seven, but coming up as well. So they're also
seeing this as a chance to sort of get Trump
on neutral turf, outside the spotlight of the Oval Office
and try to cut a deal with him. Given that
it looks like the traditional role of the G seven
(03:12):
as a place where Western leaders or democracies come together
and sort of say here's where we stand together and
set these statements of principle. You know, they're just not
going to be able to do that with Trump being
such an outlier.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
So does it seem like the takeaway from this or
the goal for at least for the United States and
for other countries would be to walk away from the
G seven with some trade deals.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
I think, so that's to make substantial progress. The President said,
you know, it was achievable that they could do a
deal with Canada here. I mean, there's not a ton
of time. President leaves tomorrow night, as do the other leaders,
so we're looking about at about a forty eight hour window.
But they are looking for an opportunity to get something done.
I mean, you know, more broadly, I think what Mark
(03:57):
Karney essentially would want is to get out of here
with out a major blow up. The last time there
was a G seven meeting in Canada when Trump in
his first term, it ended in disaster when the President
was flying out and he basically ripped up the Joint
Communicay and it was a bit of an imbroglio for
Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime minister at the time. So
(04:17):
they'd like to sort of use this as a chance
to mollify the president at least create some image of unity.
So far, though Trump not necessarily willing to play along.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
All right, and we're going to bring in David Gore
in just a moment, because I want to get both
of your thoughts on that, and I want to kind
of play off of that. Nick in that Bloomberg news
on reporting on the event too, specifically talked about how
all the global leaders are trying to avoid conflict with
President Trump. Is this President Trump at the center, He's
got the biggest dance card and everybody dancing around him.
Speaker 5 (04:47):
Yeah, that's certainly true, though there are obviously a lot
of other meetings and bilaterals. Every leader is coming here
looking to essentially meet with every other leader. You are
seeing a move to essentially establish a ceasefire for Gaza
that's being orchestrated by the Italian delegation. So there's other
stuff happening here. But you know, it's just such a
(05:10):
fascinating dynamic when you essentially have six United versus one,
and the US being the outlier, but also obviously having
the world's largest economy in the world's biggest military. I mean,
you can't really get this stuff done without participation from
the US, so it's creating some awkwardness up here.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
All right, I want to bring in David Gora into
our conversation. We're going to keep Nick one. I'm still
with us as well, but Bloomberg News correspondent, host of
The Big Take correspond podcast. Excuse me, David Gore, he's
there in bamp Canada. David, you two on the ground.
Like Nick, you guys pick up on kind of some
of the nuances, But I want to ask you the
same question about this idea of President Donald Trump kind
(05:48):
of at the center of it all.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (05:52):
I mean I go back to sort of what we
knew going into this, that we have a Prime minister
still fairly new to the job, and Mark Karney, who
really wanted to avoid what happened back in two thousand
and eighteen, wanted to kind of reform the agenda so
that there'd be fewer land mines that he or other
world leaders or Donald Trump could step into that could
scuttle this whole thing. And I think what we saw
this morning at that pool spray, when Mark Karney was
(06:12):
there with Donald Trump talking to reporters is despite the
Prime Minister's best late efforts, all of that can.
Speaker 4 (06:17):
Kind of blow up in his face.
Speaker 6 (06:19):
So it was from that that we got these remarks
about Russia's previous involvement, and then what was the G
eight Now the G seven had him kind of musing
about China playing a bigger role in this multilateral institution.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Suffice to say.
Speaker 6 (06:31):
That's not something I think a lot of these other
world leaders would be in favor of or even had
considered going into this. So to Nick's good point, it's
a very long and detailed agenda, with a lot of meetings,
both the visual and not. It's a long couple of days,
and there are a lot of possibilities through which things
can be changed radically by the comments of one world
leader and by President Trump in particular.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
What would a successful G seven David look like to
the United States and to President Trump as he leaves
after a day.
Speaker 6 (07:00):
I think before the crisis erupted in the Middle East,
there was a lot of hope from this administration that
some of these trade deals could be furthered.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I'm sure they would say codified.
Speaker 6 (07:08):
Or signed, even though they don't seem to be in
the position for that to happen, but I think they
thought that the focus would be on what would come
out of those bilateral meetings on the sidelines here vis
a vis trade, and of course what we've seen over
the last few days has really cast a shadow over
the proceedings in a way where that's unlikely to happen,
and we saw both the President and other world leaders
downplaying the likelihood of that.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
Happening over the course of this gathering.
Speaker 6 (07:31):
But I do look at President Trump in this forum
in contrast with other g sevens, including that one in
twenty eighteen, and it's a president much more aware of
the fact that he holds a lot of power. Here,
there are a lot of eyes on him, and this
notion of America First is now more firmly established. He
feels more confident in that and setting aside what's going
on in the Middle East, recognizes the fact that he
(07:55):
is the person with whom all these other world leaders
want to meet and tried to broker deals when it
comes to trade policy, and there's a kind of confidence
that comes from that that I think is kind of
eclipse and what we've seen in the past, which was
his just kind of total disaffectation with events like this one,
finding them boring or not interesting or ponderous or unlikely
to kind of yield the results that he would like
(08:16):
to see.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Yeah, but there is something significant right that he is there,
and you know a part of these meetings, Nick, come
on back and on this conversation. Is there any feeling
of global unity? And I say this with you know,
Israel aram that conflict, we still have Russia and Ukraine
at war. There's a lot of stuff going on where
not necessarily everybody agrees on how things should move forward
(08:38):
from here. But I'm just curious, is there any signs
of global unity? Again? And I do think it's significant that,
you know, President Trump ultimately is there.
Speaker 5 (08:48):
Right, he is here. You know, there was some speculation
in the months before whether he would even attend, So
his coming, I guess you could see that as a
relatively good sign. But you know, even Mark Harney acknowledged
in his opening remarks at this meeting, you know, nostalgia
is no longer going to suit us.
Speaker 7 (09:04):
We can't keep.
Speaker 5 (09:05):
Yearning for days gone by, which is essentially a recognition
just how much things have changed. I mean, as David mentioned,
you have this extraordinary moment. The first event of this
whole conference was Trump meeting with Mark Carney for a
bilateral and Trump's first comment in that was what a
huge mistake it had been to expel Russia from the
(09:27):
G eight in twenty fourteen, and saying essentially that if
they hadn't done that, the war in Ukraine never would
have started. Of course, he got the facts wrong, he
said Justin Trudeau had been the Canadian leader at the time.
He also said that Russia was expelled that was a mistake.
Of course, Russia was expelled because it had invaded Crimea
at the time, and when you invade a sovereign state
(09:50):
like that, that's kind of incompatible with the principles of
the G seven. So it was a real signal at
the time that Russia just could not be in this organization.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
So you see him immediately sort.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Of coming in and almost asserting his dominance and separating
himself from the other members. It's very hard to see
how they can find corommon ground when the US president
is basically coming in essentially spoiling for a fight.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
You know, it's interesting. I look at the global markets,
and you know, we've got to rally underway here in
the US. We said, global markets, you know, bounce back
on expectations or some reporting by other new news organizations
about maybe the tensions between Iran and Iraq excuse me,
Israel and Iran easing. You know, you could kind of
you know, whiteboard, you can kind of go a lot
of different ways here. But David come back in because
(10:35):
I think it's just a reminder that even on a
market rally, there's just so much going on around the
world at this moment. I think about the protests in
the United States around the weekend. I'm looking at your backdrop.
It looks awfully peaceful, peaceful. You're in a pretty remote place,
and my understanding some of that was to minimize minimize,
excuse me, protests at the G seven meetings.
Speaker 6 (10:59):
Yeah, that geography is really important here, and so the
meetings themselves are taking place in Kanaanascas, which is a
provincial park about an hour from where I am in
bamfrom the media centers here. Some meetings are taking place here,
some press conferences, and then there's also goings on in
Calgary as well.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
But it's a.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
Triangle where each line of the triangle is about an
hour from the other. So it was sort of deliberate
from Mark Karney, the organizer, that you would get these
leaders together in a very remote, isolated place and maybe
born out of that would be more opportunity for informal talks,
a chance to kind of further those relationships. Again, drawing
this contrast as I have to twenty eighteen, most of
(11:34):
those principles from twenty eighteen are gone, so it's a
chance to start fresh. Obviously, the organizer, Mark Arney, hasn't
been on the job for very long either, so it's
kind of.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
Delivered the way that all of this is set up.
Speaker 6 (11:46):
But you're wise to bring up all that's happening here
and you turn on the news, you listen to Bloomberg,
Grady or Television or any network, and just see all
that's happening.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
It is overwhelming.
Speaker 6 (11:56):
And again there's the official agenda at this summit, and
there's the unofficial one as well, and just kind of
focusing on the Middle East in particular. I think that
there was some hope from many of the leaders gathered
here that you know, as we heard on the as
we heard from them as they came here. There were
statements about that crisis in the Middle East, this call
for that to be de escalated. I think there was
(12:16):
hope that there could be kind of a unified statement
of the G seven leaders on that issue.
Speaker 4 (12:21):
That's not going to be the case.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
It sounds like coming out of this that that's not
what Donald Trump, the President of the United States wants
at this point in time. He continues to call for
diplomacy and for Ron not to have nuclear weapons.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
But you see just.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Kind of the strain, even with something that is galvanizing
so much attention, not just from world leaders but from everyone,
the US kind of reluctant or unwilling to enter into
that kind of statement, that group statement.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
David, you mentioned the US reluctance there, and it raises
a bigger question, and we're going to ask Nick the
same question too, which is why in twenty twenty five
does the G seven matter? What is the significance in
today's day and age.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
You're asking me first or Nick?
Speaker 3 (12:57):
You first, David, then Nick, it gets some time to prepare.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
Nick can clean it up after Look.
Speaker 6 (13:06):
I respect what the Prime Minister said about not being
able to rest on nostalogia, but this has been a
forum for fifty years as the Prime Minister pointed out,
nodding to the history of this multilateral institution when these
countries who started out his friends, got together to work
through and talk about a variety of issues of importance
to all of them and to kind of flex their
might as democracies and leading economies. And I think fundamentally
(13:27):
that continues to be the case here. They wield a
lot of power and I think, as all would say,
if they can work together and find points of agreement,
it makes them present a more powerful front two to
the world as a whole. I think that that's why
the G seven still matters. It is an occasion when
these world leaders can get together, whereas it is to
have tough conversations and to think about the path forward.
(13:48):
Obviously we've seen the strains and the fissures here, not
just at this summit, but it one's previous to it.
But I think fundamentally just having that forum remains crucial
for those who believe that multilateralism is something better than
the country's going get alone.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
All right over to you, Nick, your thoughts and why
G seven really still matters?
Speaker 5 (14:05):
Well, I mean, you know, I don't know if it's
for me to say that it matters or not, though,
but it is really interesting. I mean, when you look
at you know this this situation, leaders come and go.
I mean when when President Trump was last year, I
think the only leader who was around the table who's
here this time is Emmanuel Macron. So there's a lot
of turnover. Who knows what happens from one year to
(14:25):
the next. It is also for us a very interesting
place in the sense that you can really pick on
some pick up on some bigger global shifts. So last night,
the European Union's Ursula vonder Lyon was here. She gave
a press conference and talked about pulling Canada more closely
into the European defense, infrastructure and architecture, and that was
just sort of a fascinating moment for me. That's something
they've talked about repeatedly over the last many months. But
(14:48):
it shows these shifts that Europe wants to embrace Canada
more and sort of implicitly pull it a little bit
away from the United States. And that reflects this much
broader unease about how things are shifting, the power dynamics
are shifting geopolitically and globally. Where Europe wants to find
common cause with Canada and a little bit separated or
(15:08):
pull it away from the United States. And so you
come to these events looking for clues where you're looking
for those sort of broader, slower tectonic shifts and in geopolitics.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
So important certainly at this moment in history. Gentlemen, thank
you so much, really really appreciate it. Of course, we've
been talking with Bloomberg News National Security Team leader Nick
Wadhams there in Canada, our news bureau there in Calgary, Alberta,
and of course Bloomberg News correspondent host of the Big
Take podcast, David Gore. He too on the ground there
and Bump.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five East during
this listen on Apple Karplay and Android Auto with the
Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
A couple of things. I'm sure you've heard about it,
but we just want to remind everybody the difficult weekend
it was on the domestic front. US prosecutors charged alleged
shooter Van Spolter with two counts of murder in the
deaths of Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband
and what officials referred to as a murderous rampage. That
was early Saturday morning. Also over the weekend, protesters rallying
(16:17):
in hundreds of US cities to announce what they said
were President Trump's authoritarian tendencies, including the increased deportations and
tactics used to carry them back. You know, Tim, we
kicked off talking about kind of global geopolitical tensions, but
there is a lot going on on the US domestic
home front.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
So let's talk about that domestic tensions that are simmering
back with US is FGS Global partner Beth Bowie. FGS
Global is a public affairs consulting firm. Beth a former
senior politics editor at NBC News and MSNBC. She joins
us here in the Bloomberg BusinessWeek Studio. I want to
start with the Minnesota shootings and look at them through
the lens of the other political violence that we've seen
(16:53):
over the last year too, assassination attempts on the president
before he took office. We saw the murder outside of
the consulate earlier this year in Washington, d C. Of
two americ of people in the US. There in what
was you know, I think fair to say is perceived
as political violence. There was a really depressing story, I
(17:15):
believe it was yesterday in the New York Times about how
political violence in the US is now becoming as routine
as school shootings. Like that's such a grim thing to
even think about. What's going on here?
Speaker 8 (17:28):
Well, I think you're seeing the conflagration of a couple
of things. One is the very high pitch tensions that
everybody's feeling about politics. We know our country is extremely polarized,
extremely divided people on social media, their tempers getting riled up.
And then you add to it the element of guns,
which we have in this country at a much higher
level than any other comparably civilized countries. So the combination
(17:49):
of the violent tendencies and the ability to execute literally
and figuratively with a deadly weapon makes us unique. It's
a very scary time, for sure, particularly for those public
officials who are finding themselves really under under scrutiny, under attack.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
We could have.
Speaker 8 (18:06):
Mentioned Nancy Pelosi's husband being you know that wasn't involved,
didn't involve a gun, but you know, clubbed right in
his home. The j six folks who attacked the capital
with weapons, clubbing, herting, killing in some cases police officers.
We're in a very fraught moment right now, and there's
doesn't seem to be much sign of cooling. And I
(18:26):
would say the other problem we're facing is is as
soon as one of these things happens, everybody jumps to
conclusions about why. You know, what was the shooter's motive,
what was the attacker's motive? You know which political side
are they on? I mean, you know, granted, right now
we're seeing more violence happening on the right, but it
would be who everyone if they didn't jump onto Twitter
or jump onto x or what have you, and and
(18:47):
make assumptions about what's going on here. A lot of
times people have very complicated histories. They may suffer from
mental illness. We need to learn more before we sort
of draw all sorts of conclusions about why people are
doing what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Completely right, there's you've got to know all of the information. Something.
Having said that, there is something about freedom of speech,
peaceful protesting. I feel like, you know, look at on
college campuses where we used to embrace different thoughts, right
and different political views, where all of a sudden. That's
almost like it doesn't happen anymore, so like there is
(19:20):
something else going on. And I'm just curious, you know,
your thoughts on that, because that certainly plays into the
political tensions that we're seeing here. Yeah, the inability to
have we do it here all the time, have conversations
in the newsroom where we all don't necessarily agree, but
we learn from each other. But something has gone away
on a national level.
Speaker 8 (19:39):
Yeah, it doesn't feel that way, doesn't it. I mean,
it does feel like there was a period of time,
maybe not that long ago, where one could have sort
of a civil conversation with people that you may or
may not agree with. College campuses. I mean, what we've seen,
you know, most recently is the activity around Israel Palestime,
Israel Gaza that has motivated a lot of college students
(19:59):
and is you know, brought lots of accusations of you know,
Jewish students being mistreated on campus, or the free speech
of folks who want to demonstrate on the behalf of
the Gosins not being allowed to or being you know,
in the case of Columbia, you know, police being brought
into the campus to to break down those those camps
last year. I mean, we saw a lot of rage,
(20:20):
a lot of anger. Unfortunately, Yes, because we're dealing with
a very fraught political environment and tensions are running high.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
And yet we have social platforms where we have a
president of the United States, it certainly feels free to
post at will. I would say business leaders like an
Elon Musk who feel very comfortable to post at will.
So it's it's just like.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
My own zones, his own platform, and that's.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Become the new media, right that very wealthy people seem
to bind to kind of be able to do that.
But it's just this unevenness of certain folks being very
comfortable saying whatever they want and then a lot of
Americans feeling nervous or business leaders. How many business leaders
do we have come into our room who will talk
off air saying there's fear about really saying what they
(21:06):
feel about various policies.
Speaker 8 (21:08):
Yeah, and at our firm we deal with those kind
of like what do.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
You hears all the time?
Speaker 8 (21:13):
I mean, you know, they they want to they want
to stand by their values, but they're also very worried about,
you know, drawing scrutiny perhaps from the administration, drawing backlash
from their consumers about the practices that they've decided to
engage in. So they're very nervous about expressing themselves in
any way at all. And that's an uncomfortable feeling to
have as a as a leader, to not be able
(21:34):
to sort of say where you stand, where you believe
your company stands, where you want to represent UH as
a leader going forward, and feeling like you can't do that.
Speaker 3 (21:43):
You know, one thing that we're talking a lot about
here is the not just the protests against ice in
Los Angeles and the riots and you know what happened
there over the last week or so, but also the
way that the president and his administration are thinking about immigration,
because it seems like there has been so change there,
specifically with regard to farm workers, workers within the hospitality industry.
(22:07):
It seems like leaders are talking to him and saying,
wait a second, we're actually having trouble finding workers. There
have been a lot of different presidents that have tried
to solve this. Will this administration, in your view, does
it have the tools to actually make change here?
Speaker 7 (22:22):
Well?
Speaker 8 (22:23):
I mean the fact that the president has had to
acknowledge that certain industries will not function without this labor
force is really quite surprising, given that he did campaign
he was very obvious about what he intended to do.
He said he was going to deploy federal forces to
get rid of people living here illegally. He didn't differentiate
one or the other. He said, we're going to go
(22:43):
for the criminals, and then we're going to go for
everyone else. He is now recognizing the fact that much
of our economy runs on this labor. There's no obvious
replacement for these folks, so he's going to have to
make it make some changes. That said, he also just
came out last night and again this morning announcing that
he was going to deploy ICE into Democrat run cities
(23:04):
in order to purge folks out of those places. Specifically,
and he named what he said was illegal voting by
an undocumented people, which that basically does not happen at all.
There's tons and tons of research on this, but it
was basically him announcing that he's going to use ICE
as a political tool, not just a tool to remove
people who are here illegally, but rather to target places
(23:26):
that are so he opposes politically, so they impose him.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Is it more about culture war optics? Versus immigration policy
that we're seeing with President truv and just got about
thirty sevens.
Speaker 4 (23:34):
Yeah.
Speaker 8 (23:35):
Look, I mean that was something that he ran on,
was immigration, and he was very much had the sympathy
of many Americans who felt like our immigration policy gone
out of control. But what they are doing now, the
sort of ramping this up, just taking people wholesale out
of the country without really looking at their at their situation,
not putting them through due process. There's a big backlash.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Against that now, all right, going to leave with there
covered a lot of ground. Thank you so much, really
apprec hit it, Bethoo. We've FGS Global Partner joining us
right here in studio.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Listen live
each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Applecarplay 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 play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
Okay, let's talk energy. It's the second worst performing sector
in the S and P five hundred right now. It
was the worst performing utilities taken out leg lower. There's
some bouncing around.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
Wt I crude was up six percent at one point
and down five percent at one point. So that's the
kind of day we.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Hed go figure, go figure. That's why we got Rob
Thummel here, senior portfolio manager at Tortoise Capitol. They've got
around nine point six billion dollars in assets under management.
Rob manages several of the funds, including the Tortoise Energy
Infrastructure Total Return Fund, up this year more than four percent. Rob,
good to have you. With US oil up twenty six
percent since May fifth, I couldn't believe this. I was
(25:00):
doing this shocked. When we were preparing for this, I
yelled across the desks to kill us. What is going on?
We know what happened in the last week and and
why the tensions in the Middle least oil has moved
up since then, but why is steady push higher since
the end of last month.
Speaker 7 (25:16):
Yeah, you know, Doug, I think or sorry.
Speaker 3 (25:18):
Tim, we're talking about it.
Speaker 7 (25:20):
We're talking about that.
Speaker 2 (25:21):
I'm be' tug Tim, Tim, So I want to think
of you can say thank you, Tim.
Speaker 7 (25:28):
What I think is happening is I think there's there's
more certainty about the demand for oil right, so, so
the global economy continues to prosper. Uh, the oil inventories
are really very low. So so any disruption or any
potential disruption is really going to cause a spike in
oil prices. So obviously we had a big disruption or
concern about a disruption. Actually we never had have never
had any physical volume.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
What exactly is the concern, like with with a skirmish
between Israel and Iran, is the concern about the straight
up horror moves?
Speaker 7 (25:56):
Is that with the concern, that's exactly a tim that's
that's explaining. So the straight of horn news is really important. So,
the US is the largest producer of oil in the
world thirteen point three million barrels. For context, we produce
about one hundred or consumed about one hundred million barrels
a day.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
But we can still okay, so that we consume about.
Speaker 7 (26:13):
Globally one hundred million barrels. Of one hundred million barrels
a day are consumed globally, Okay, twenty twenty million barrels
a day roughly go through that straight of horn horror moves.
So if that supply is cut off for some for
some reason, and remember Iran is very close to that
straight it's at the base of the straits. So if
that's cut off for any reason for any point in time,
the world just doesn't have enough inventory to to deal
(26:35):
with that for a long period of time. So that's
anytime there's escalating conflicts near the Straight of Horn moves,
oil prices are going to go up higher.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Do we see that reflected in the delta between Brent
crude VERSUS West Texas intermedia.
Speaker 7 (26:48):
A little bit? Yeah, I mean sometimes, but they tend
to move together because the US can export oil, right,
so if the if oil prices move higher globally BNT,
then typically then you'll see I WTI move up accordingly
as well.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
Okay, one more on the numbers, just to set the
stage for US hundred million barrels a day is what
we use as a globe. You said the US exports
how much the.
Speaker 7 (27:14):
US exports five or six million barrels a day?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
We produce the thirteen thirteen and how much do we use.
Speaker 7 (27:20):
Well, we use a little bit around a round fifteen
to twenty roughly, and.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
We always have to import something because of what we
produce here isn't necessarily the right type of oil for
US to use, that's right.
Speaker 7 (27:31):
So we import them from Canada and from other areas
of the world as well because of the quality of
the oil.
Speaker 4 (27:35):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (27:36):
So we're not a wash in oil.
Speaker 7 (27:38):
Well, in some ways we are, do you think. I mean,
if you think about the conflicts we've had carrolled, I mean,
these are massive. This is a massive conflict affecting geopolitical risk.
But yet oil prices are actually down, as you mentioned,
and are really not that high relative to the conflict
that the world is experiencing.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
So my understanding is too that usage has been declining
as well.
Speaker 7 (27:59):
Right, Well, global olth demand it's slowing. It's slowing, right,
Global oil demand is still growing. We set a record
last year for global oil demand, the highest it's ever been.
It'll be higher this year than it was last year.
But you're right, global oil demand is slowing.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
So what do you make of We talked about global growth,
and I just want to make sure I heard correctly,
because the OECD one forecast has lowered global GDP growth
forecast for this year to two point nine percent, down
from three point one percent in its previous projection. I
think initially when we started, you talked about that the
global economy is kind of firing on all cylinders. Is
that really the case.
Speaker 7 (28:31):
Well, I think it's improving this certainty related to the
global economy. I think, with less concern about the tariffs, right,
and so I think that's oil prices really sold off
earlier this year because of two things. Concern uncertainty related
to tariffs and the impact of the economy, and then
the adding to the supply that OPEC plus was adding.
They were adding volumes of additional volumes when maybe the
(28:51):
demand wasn't there. That's one of the reasons why. Then
the more certainty has really created the opportunity for higher
growth in oil prices from.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
You your perspective, and you've got to make investments based
on what's going on in the global energy markets. I mean,
what do you think as a realistic longer term trend
for WTI crewed Right now, we're right now just above
seventy one dollars a barrel.
Speaker 7 (29:13):
Yeah, So I think WTI right where we are about
seventy dollars in the seventies is a long term trend.
I think we're going to be lower in the near term,
but I think longer term you'll see some adjustments made
at the US. The US might be flat and even
maybe decline in production next year, and so as a
result of that, then you'll probably see demand go up
for oil globally and domestically, and then you know, the
(29:35):
US will have to then return to producing more.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
I got a lot of messages coming at me from
interested viewers and listeners who are curious about the international
relations side of this, specifically Iran. They're not so concerned
about the straight of Horn Moves closing because he argues
that the strait of hor Moves closing would hurt Ran
more than it hurts the rest of the world. Is
the incentive not necessarily align the well, I think.
Speaker 7 (30:01):
That's it's a very stupid point. And the other point
to be made related to that is the two largest
consumers of oil, the US and China, basically are really
interested in China particular buys a lot of Irani and
crude oil. So I think it would be very difficult
for the straight of Horror moves to to to really
to close. And so as a result that I'm not
too concerned either.
Speaker 3 (30:18):
And then a question two about the escalation of tensions
between these two countries. Does it move beyond is real
any ron? And what are the implications if that does happen?
Speaker 7 (30:26):
Well, I sure hope not. I mean just for the world, right,
for all of us as human beings. But you know,
from a district it's really going to be difficult to
disrupt the crude oil supply basically, and so I just
I just don't see the crude oil supply because of
its its significance in growing the global economy, I just
don't see it being disrupted. And so as a result
of that, I just think oil can trade at a
(30:47):
at probably lower from here, which is a good thing
for all of us as consumers, especially as we started
the summer driving season.
Speaker 2 (30:54):
So what's the smart investment play? I'm looking at the
Tortoise energy infrastructure and I'm looking I think you're number
one holding, but correct me. I think this was as
of the end of April. Was NPLX limited.
Speaker 7 (31:07):
Well that's one of what we like MPLX. Well, really, yeah,
go ahead. That's an infrastructure names Carol, so that it's
a high dividend yield. It's probably seven and a half
eight percent dividend yield. It grows itself about three or
four percent a year, So.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
We like, was it the infrastructure that you like, because
it doesn't kind of matter. It's just you got to
be moving stuff around, like.
Speaker 7 (31:24):
The infrastructure and like natural gas. So, you know, we
really think the energy sector is being redefined and going
forward that natural gas will actually take the leading role
as one of the larger supply growth commodities, really not
only domestically but also around the world as well.
Speaker 3 (31:38):
So I'm thinking about this in the context of sort
of what Carol was asking about when it comes to
quote unquote energy independence or the way that American firms
are being encouraged by the administration to drill and to
explore for oil in the United States and extract oil
in the United States. Do you see that happening during
this administration or will it not happen because the price
(32:01):
won't get high enough, sustainably high enough.
Speaker 7 (32:04):
Yeah, you know, and it's a good observation. What I
say is the US is still the largest energy producer
in the world. That's not going to change in this administration.
Is probably not going to change in any administration. The
US is really has a lot of energy, a lot
of cheap energy that it can not only use domestically
but export as well. Now, what we are going to
see is as you highlight, lower oil prices is resulting
(32:26):
in now a lower rig count in the US, which
will ultimately result in lower production in the US. And
it's because of the price. So we just the oil
producers need a little higher price basically need to oily
be in the seventies or eighties to really increase production.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
Well, let's remind everybody, right, this is cyclical. And I
think about you know, being up in Williston, North Dakota
in the back in twenty eleven and it was just
off the chart and everybody's drilling. And again I've said
this a million times. The locals there are like, we've
seen this before. So I mean, this is just like
semi conductors. Right, there's you know, a demand and not
enough supply and people, and the price goes to where
(32:58):
it needs to be and people start to infrastructure, spend,
build out, and then supply goes up in the price
goes down.
Speaker 3 (33:04):
Gere for high prices is high prices, right, The cure
for high prices is high prices.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Yeah, exactly, So exactly, so is that kind of where
we are now?
Speaker 7 (33:11):
Yeah, And the cure for low prices is low prices.
So you're right, So we're going to see less drilling.
But here's the difference this time, I think, and I
think this is really important for people to understand, is
the companies themselves are in much better financial condition. There
the balance sheets are much improved, and so you don't
have to worry about these companies these days as much
from a credit perspective. They're much more improved from a
balance sheet perspective.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
All right, but infrastructures your play love infrastructure, Love love
infrastructure and natural gas to Tortoise, all right, can I
leave it? Hey, good to see you. Thank you, rub
them well, Senior portfolio manager at Tortoise Capook.
Speaker 1 (33:40):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five eas during
Listen on Applecarplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,
or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 7 (33:56):
No, I'll beout you let me drive.
Speaker 3 (33:57):
Oh no, no, no, no, this is not a toy.
Speaker 5 (34:00):
Who's going up?
Speaker 4 (34:02):
All right?
Speaker 5 (34:02):
Please, I'll do the gravel wat I want to try?
Speaker 3 (34:06):
It's a good question.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
This is the drive to the clothes Punk's a musing
well run on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
All right, TikTok everybody, just about seventeen and a half
minutes to go until we rub up the trade on
this Monday, June sixteenth. I just heard from Charlie and
Bill Maloney wrapping up the trade for you as we
get ready for the clothes and yeah, we're off our
best levels of the session, but we have seen some optimism,
some risk on trade. If you will tim come back
into the market.
Speaker 3 (34:39):
Let's get into with Chris Fasciano, chief market strategist that
Commonwealth Financial Network. He's here in the Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio.
One thing that I think was surprising to a lot
of people. We're gonna zoom out and talk about the
big picture trade, but as far as today goes, I
think people have been really surprised at the market reaction
during an ongoing skirmish in the Middle East, one that
(35:01):
hasn't shown more trepidation when it comes to risk on assets.
Speaker 9 (35:04):
What gives This has been a headlined driven market this
entire year, right out of the gate, whether it's terroriffs,
trade policy, the deficit, or geopolitical conflict. And I think
what we're seeing today is there have been the stories
out there that Iran has reached out to the US
and Israel to try to negotiate some kind of deal.
(35:24):
So the market's view is that this conflict, which they
were very worried about on Friday, looks like it's going
to be contained. And as long as it's contained and
doesn't impact the US economy, which means higher oil prices,
potential for higher inflation, and a concern for the Fed,
they're willing to look through it and go back to
what they believe the fundamentals are currently.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
Chris, the velocity and volume of the news flow, be
it from the White House or just around the globe,
does it create opportunities or does it kind of make
investors in your world say I'm out.
Speaker 9 (35:57):
I think it creates opportunities. My view is volatility always
creates opportunities. But it's really hard when talking to our
advisors and they're hearing from clients to get them to
see that at a time like April, right. So, I've
lived through a lot of these market selloffs, and what
I always say is the catalyst is different, and that's
(36:19):
what our advisors we're hearing from clients in March and April.
This is different this time. Catalysts are different, but the
market action always tends to be the same. Which I
mean by that is that it's driven by the future
outlook for the economy and corporate earnings. So when you
get a big sell off, you can start to look
at things like valuations and you can start to make decisions.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
But having said that, you know if it is different
this time around and the catalyst, which is often from
the White House, and to be fair, I think we
can all say safely that the back and forth on
some of the policies from President Trump and his team,
but largely from the President, make it difficult to figure
out what impact will there be longer term on corporate
earnings and all that good stuff. And so that to
(37:03):
some extent is well, wait, how do I make a
decision when the variables are still up in the air?
Speaker 9 (37:08):
Right? I think that's absolutely true. But one of the
interesting or unique things about policy compared to like the
financial crisis is that policy can change. And that's what
we've seen right terrris are announced at very high levels.
It appears as though the President is using terris as
a negotiating tool. Market reacts negatively and the policy gets
(37:31):
changed and we have a pause and effect.
Speaker 3 (37:33):
Are you are you concerned about the lack of actual
concrete trade deals that have been announced, and but I
mean lack, I mean like none out of ninety ninety
ninety deals in ninety days is what we're supposed to see, right,
the ninety days is just yeah, that's like less than
a month away.
Speaker 9 (37:52):
July ninth is coming, and I think we all know
that the way deals work is they get negotiated at
the last minute, right, And I think that's what you're seeing.
But G seven's going on, right, and I've seen stories
that the President is meeting with his counterparts from the
EU in Canada and Mexico. So I still believe we're
going to get some kind of headlines, but I don't
(38:13):
believe we're going to get fully negotiated deals by July ninth.
What the market wants to see something similar to what
they saw with the UK, which is a template that says,
here's what we agree.
Speaker 3 (38:23):
What would you tell them? Would you call that a template?
A framework? What would you call it?
Speaker 9 (38:27):
I'd call it a framework, not an actual trade deal. No,
you can't negotiate trade deals that quickly. I mean we
look back at like twenty eighteen, it took almost eighteen
months to negotiate Phase one with China back.
Speaker 2 (38:38):
So look at MoU right, yeah, yes, and then team
go figure it out exactly.
Speaker 9 (38:43):
I think we're going to see those as we approach
July ninth.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
So glass half full, glass half empty.
Speaker 4 (38:50):
Glass half full.
Speaker 10 (38:51):
I think this is a fascinating market, right, Because I say,
if if you're a type of person that doesn't look
at your statement every month, and you looked at it
in January and you looked at it last week, say
nothing happened, you'd be wrong, but you might be better off.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Where do I find that latitude to just like not
even the problem is I'm in the right markets every
day in terms of news.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
Yes, absolutely, but I would argue that sometimes it's hard
to erase. Right the whip saw that we got, yes,
and it's a reminder that we do have an administration,
a president in particular. Again, I'm not talking out of
line that can say one thing and then do a
one eighty right, and so we're not done. This administration
(39:33):
goes on for another three so many you know, three
years and so many months, and so things can change again.
Speaker 4 (39:41):
Right.
Speaker 9 (39:41):
So the way you frame the question, I said half full,
because I look at it. We're basically back to where
we were in January in terms of market levels and valuations.
Speaker 4 (39:51):
Right so right, it's.
Speaker 9 (39:53):
Been a wild rollercoaster, but that makes me cautiously optimistic
that going forward the economy, which had there's so much
momentum coming into the year that it was able to
persevere through the headwinds, will continue to grow in the
back year. Corporate earnings will continue to grow. That will
be supportive for equity investors. But to your point, I
don't think volatility is going away, and I think there
(40:15):
are risks out there that investors need to be cognizant of.
Speaker 3 (40:19):
How would you characterize the economy right now? The consumer
powers this economy. There are concerns that cracks are starting
to form. Do you agree with that?
Speaker 9 (40:26):
There are concerns cracks are starting to form. There's no
doubt we've saw that with consumer competence that basically cratered
in the first half of the year, although on Friday
we saw a tick up after the pause with China.
But the way I look at it is the driver
of the consumer is employment and jobs. You are seeing
that slow, but you're still seeing it at levels that
(40:47):
should be supportive for the consumer, which means that they
will continue to spend money, which means the economy should
continue to grow as long as we continue to get
progress on tariffs and we got a budget bill paid
asked that could begin to add stimulus into the economy
late in the year as we enter next year.
Speaker 2 (41:05):
Just real quickly, are you worried?
Speaker 10 (41:07):
Though?
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Again, this is a question Tim and I ask about
the US being uninvestable and that investors moving away from
dollar based assets. US importers are increasingly being asked by
their foreign counterparties to settle transactions and currencies other than
the US dollar, such as euros, Chinese and mimb Mexican paceols,
and Canadian dollars. I mean that's happening.
Speaker 9 (41:27):
Yes, As I said, there are a lot of things
to worry about, and I think investors need to be
cognizant of them. To your point, is the US uninvestable?
I don't believe that. But throughout this year I have
been talking to our advisors about increasing their international exposure
because not only is it cheap, but we're starting to
see improvements and fundamentals, and I think that will continue
(41:49):
to drive that trade.
Speaker 5 (41:50):
All right.
Speaker 2 (41:51):
Chris Faciano, Chief Market strategies at Commonwealth Financial Network. Thank
you so much.
Speaker 4 (41:54):
Good to be.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday
afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,
the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube
(42:17):
and always on the Bloomberg terminal
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is Bloomberg Business
Week Daily reporting from the magazine that helps global leaders
stay ahead with insight on the people, companies, and trends
shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business, finance and tech
(00:23):
news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast
with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebeck on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
All right, let's get to some of the latest headlines
we've been talking about at Israel and around exchanging fire
for the fourth consecutive day to day, stoking fears of
an all out war with the potential to drag in
others in the oil rich region. And Tim forced the
US into a more hands on stamp.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
So that's the backdrop, along with trade tensions and more.
For this year is a Group of a Seven summit.
It's the fiftieth annual gathering of world leaders. It's happening
right now in Canada. Speaking earlier from their President Donald
Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney Kanne though shot,
we should note it's former chair of the board of
directors at Bloomberg LPV, owner of Bloomberg TV and Radio.
President Trump addressing the hostilities earlier in the Middle East.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
I'd like to talk, but they should have done that before.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
I had sixty days and they had sixty days.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
And on the sixty first day, I said, we don't
have a deal. They have to make a deal, and
it's painful for both parties.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
But I'd say, iron is not winning this war, all right.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
That, of course is President Trump there with Canadian Prime
Minister Mark Harney from the G seven. Let's get more
from the meetings we had to Calgary, Alberta, Canada, our
Bloomberg News bureau there, and to Bloomberg News National Security
Team leader Nick Wadams. Hey, Nick, good to be checking
in with you. I know it's going to be a
busy couple of days, busy week. There's a certain pomp
and circumstance to all G seven meetings, a photo op,
(01:51):
the family photo, so on and so forth. Every meeting, too, though,
has specifics around it. And again the geopolitical and macro
backdrop set the scene for us this year around what's
top of mind, like what is going on in the
Middle East as we speak, and what else you are
hearing is really on the minds of leaders.
Speaker 5 (02:08):
Well, there's a lot on their minds. I mean, obviously
you see a lot of leaders coming here looking for
common ground to send a message of unity around issues
that really matter, on trade, on Israel Iran, on Ukraine,
things like that. The big issue, of course, is whether
President Donald Trump is going to be willing to go along.
So far, we know he's refusing to sign a joint
(02:28):
statement on the Israel Iran conflict that would have called
for de escalation. The host, Mark Carney is basically decided
to dispense with the traditional joint communica that comes out
of a meeting like this. So what you're seeing instead
is a lot of leaders coming here looking to do
bilateral deals with the US on trade. So the Japanese
(02:49):
Prime Minister will be here. You obviously have Canada, you
have the UK looking to do its own trade deal.
Claudia Sinbaum, President of Mexico, not a member of the
G seven, but coming up as well. So they're also
seeing this as a chance to sort of get Trump
on neutral turf, outside the spotlight of the Oval Office
and try to cut a deal with him. Given that
it looks like the traditional role of the G seven
(03:12):
as a place where Western leaders or democracies come together
and sort of say here's where we stand together and
set these statements of principle. You know, they're just not
going to be able to do that with Trump being
such an outlier.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
So does it seem like the takeaway from this or
the goal for at least for the United States and
for other countries would be to walk away from the
G seven with some trade deals.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
I think, so that's to make substantial progress. The President said,
you know, it was achievable that they could do a
deal with Canada here. I mean, there's not a ton
of time. President leaves tomorrow night, as do the other leaders,
so we're looking about at about a forty eight hour window.
But they are looking for an opportunity to get something done.
I mean, you know, more broadly, I think what Mark
(03:57):
Karney essentially would want is to get out of here
with out a major blow up. The last time there
was a G seven meeting in Canada when Trump in
his first term, it ended in disaster when the President
was flying out and he basically ripped up the Joint
Communicay and it was a bit of an imbroglio for
Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime minister at the time. So
(04:17):
they'd like to sort of use this as a chance
to mollify the president at least create some image of unity.
So far, though Trump not necessarily willing to play along.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
All right, and we're going to bring in David Gore
in just a moment, because I want to get both
of your thoughts on that, and I want to kind
of play off of that. Nick in that Bloomberg news
on reporting on the event too, specifically talked about how
all the global leaders are trying to avoid conflict with
President Trump. Is this President Trump at the center, He's
got the biggest dance card and everybody dancing around him.
Speaker 5 (04:47):
Yeah, that's certainly true, though there are obviously a lot
of other meetings and bilaterals. Every leader is coming here
looking to essentially meet with every other leader. You are
seeing a move to essentially establish a ceasefire for Gaza
that's being orchestrated by the Italian delegation. So there's other
stuff happening here. But you know, it's just such a
(05:10):
fascinating dynamic when you essentially have six United versus one,
and the US being the outlier, but also obviously having
the world's largest economy in the world's biggest military. I mean,
you can't really get this stuff done without participation from
the US, so it's creating some awkwardness up here.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
All right, I want to bring in David Gora into
our conversation. We're going to keep Nick one. I'm still
with us as well, but Bloomberg News correspondent, host of
The Big Take correspond podcast. Excuse me, David Gore, he's
there in bamp Canada. David, you two on the ground.
Like Nick, you guys pick up on kind of some
of the nuances, But I want to ask you the
same question about this idea of President Donald Trump kind
(05:48):
of at the center of it all.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (05:52):
I mean I go back to sort of what we
knew going into this, that we have a Prime minister
still fairly new to the job, and Mark Karney, who
really wanted to avoid what happened back in two thousand
and eighteen, wanted to kind of reform the agenda so
that there'd be fewer land mines that he or other
world leaders or Donald Trump could step into that could
scuttle this whole thing. And I think what we saw
this morning at that pool spray, when Mark Karney was
(06:12):
there with Donald Trump talking to reporters is despite the
Prime Minister's best late efforts, all of that can.
Speaker 4 (06:17):
Kind of blow up in his face.
Speaker 6 (06:19):
So it was from that that we got these remarks
about Russia's previous involvement, and then what was the G
eight Now the G seven had him kind of musing
about China playing a bigger role in this multilateral institution.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Suffice to say.
Speaker 6 (06:31):
That's not something I think a lot of these other
world leaders would be in favor of or even had
considered going into this. So to Nick's good point, it's
a very long and detailed agenda, with a lot of meetings,
both the visual and not. It's a long couple of days,
and there are a lot of possibilities through which things
can be changed radically by the comments of one world
leader and by President Trump in particular.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
What would a successful G seven David look like to
the United States and to President Trump as he leaves
after a day.
Speaker 6 (07:00):
I think before the crisis erupted in the Middle East,
there was a lot of hope from this administration that
some of these trade deals could be furthered.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I'm sure they would say codified.
Speaker 6 (07:08):
Or signed, even though they don't seem to be in
the position for that to happen, but I think they
thought that the focus would be on what would come
out of those bilateral meetings on the sidelines here vis
a vis trade, and of course what we've seen over
the last few days has really cast a shadow over
the proceedings in a way where that's unlikely to happen,
and we saw both the President and other world leaders
downplaying the likelihood of that.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
Happening over the course of this gathering.
Speaker 6 (07:31):
But I do look at President Trump in this forum
in contrast with other g sevens, including that one in
twenty eighteen, and it's a president much more aware of
the fact that he holds a lot of power. Here,
there are a lot of eyes on him, and this
notion of America First is now more firmly established. He
feels more confident in that and setting aside what's going
on in the Middle East, recognizes the fact that he
(07:55):
is the person with whom all these other world leaders
want to meet and tried to broker deals when it
comes to trade policy, and there's a kind of confidence
that comes from that that I think is kind of
eclipse and what we've seen in the past, which was
his just kind of total disaffectation with events like this one,
finding them boring or not interesting or ponderous or unlikely
to kind of yield the results that he would like
(08:16):
to see.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Yeah, but there is something significant right that he is there,
and you know a part of these meetings, Nick, come
on back and on this conversation. Is there any feeling
of global unity? And I say this with you know,
Israel aram that conflict, we still have Russia and Ukraine
at war. There's a lot of stuff going on where
not necessarily everybody agrees on how things should move forward
(08:38):
from here. But I'm just curious, is there any signs
of global unity? Again? And I do think it's significant that,
you know, President Trump ultimately is there.
Speaker 5 (08:48):
Right, he is here. You know, there was some speculation
in the months before whether he would even attend, So
his coming, I guess you could see that as a
relatively good sign. But you know, even Mark Harney acknowledged
in his opening remarks at this meeting, you know, nostalgia
is no longer going to suit us.
Speaker 7 (09:04):
We can't keep.
Speaker 5 (09:05):
Yearning for days gone by, which is essentially a recognition
just how much things have changed. I mean, as David mentioned,
you have this extraordinary moment. The first event of this
whole conference was Trump meeting with Mark Carney for a
bilateral and Trump's first comment in that was what a
huge mistake it had been to expel Russia from the
(09:27):
G eight in twenty fourteen, and saying essentially that if
they hadn't done that, the war in Ukraine never would
have started. Of course, he got the facts wrong, he
said Justin Trudeau had been the Canadian leader at the time.
He also said that Russia was expelled that was a mistake.
Of course, Russia was expelled because it had invaded Crimea
at the time, and when you invade a sovereign state
(09:50):
like that, that's kind of incompatible with the principles of
the G seven. So it was a real signal at
the time that Russia just could not be in this organization.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
So you see him immediately sort.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Of coming in and almost asserting his dominance and separating
himself from the other members. It's very hard to see
how they can find corommon ground when the US president
is basically coming in essentially spoiling for a fight.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
You know, it's interesting. I look at the global markets,
and you know, we've got to rally underway here in
the US. We said, global markets, you know, bounce back
on expectations or some reporting by other new news organizations
about maybe the tensions between Iran and Iraq excuse me,
Israel and Iran easing. You know, you could kind of
you know, whiteboard, you can kind of go a lot
of different ways here. But David come back in because
(10:35):
I think it's just a reminder that even on a
market rally, there's just so much going on around the
world at this moment. I think about the protests in
the United States around the weekend. I'm looking at your backdrop.
It looks awfully peaceful, peaceful. You're in a pretty remote place,
and my understanding some of that was to minimize minimize,
excuse me, protests at the G seven meetings.
Speaker 6 (10:59):
Yeah, that geography is really important here, and so the
meetings themselves are taking place in Kanaanascas, which is a
provincial park about an hour from where I am in
bamfrom the media centers here. Some meetings are taking place here,
some press conferences, and then there's also goings on in
Calgary as well.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
But it's a.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
Triangle where each line of the triangle is about an
hour from the other. So it was sort of deliberate
from Mark Karney, the organizer, that you would get these
leaders together in a very remote, isolated place and maybe
born out of that would be more opportunity for informal talks,
a chance to kind of further those relationships. Again, drawing
this contrast as I have to twenty eighteen, most of
(11:34):
those principles from twenty eighteen are gone, so it's a
chance to start fresh. Obviously, the organizer, Mark Arney, hasn't
been on the job for very long either, so it's
kind of.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
Delivered the way that all of this is set up.
Speaker 6 (11:46):
But you're wise to bring up all that's happening here
and you turn on the news, you listen to Bloomberg,
Grady or Television or any network, and just see all
that's happening.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
It is overwhelming.
Speaker 6 (11:56):
And again there's the official agenda at this summit, and
there's the unofficial one as well, and just kind of
focusing on the Middle East in particular. I think that
there was some hope from many of the leaders gathered
here that you know, as we heard on the as
we heard from them as they came here. There were
statements about that crisis in the Middle East, this call
for that to be de escalated. I think there was
(12:16):
hope that there could be kind of a unified statement
of the G seven leaders on that issue.
Speaker 4 (12:21):
That's not going to be the case.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
It sounds like coming out of this that that's not
what Donald Trump, the President of the United States wants
at this point in time. He continues to call for
diplomacy and for Ron not to have nuclear weapons.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
But you see just.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Kind of the strain, even with something that is galvanizing
so much attention, not just from world leaders but from everyone,
the US kind of reluctant or unwilling to enter into
that kind of statement, that group statement.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
David, you mentioned the US reluctance there, and it raises
a bigger question, and we're going to ask Nick the
same question too, which is why in twenty twenty five
does the G seven matter? What is the significance in
today's day and age.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
You're asking me first or Nick?
Speaker 3 (12:57):
You first, David, then Nick, it gets some time to prepare.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
Nick can clean it up after Look.
Speaker 6 (13:06):
I respect what the Prime Minister said about not being
able to rest on nostalogia, but this has been a
forum for fifty years as the Prime Minister pointed out,
nodding to the history of this multilateral institution when these
countries who started out his friends, got together to work
through and talk about a variety of issues of importance
to all of them and to kind of flex their
might as democracies and leading economies. And I think fundamentally
(13:27):
that continues to be the case here. They wield a
lot of power and I think, as all would say,
if they can work together and find points of agreement,
it makes them present a more powerful front two to
the world as a whole. I think that that's why
the G seven still matters. It is an occasion when
these world leaders can get together, whereas it is to
have tough conversations and to think about the path forward.
(13:48):
Obviously we've seen the strains and the fissures here, not
just at this summit, but it one's previous to it.
But I think fundamentally just having that forum remains crucial
for those who believe that multilateralism is something better than
the country's going get alone.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
All right over to you, Nick, your thoughts and why
G seven really still matters?
Speaker 5 (14:05):
Well, I mean, you know, I don't know if it's
for me to say that it matters or not, though,
but it is really interesting. I mean, when you look
at you know this this situation, leaders come and go.
I mean when when President Trump was last year, I
think the only leader who was around the table who's
here this time is Emmanuel Macron. So there's a lot
of turnover. Who knows what happens from one year to
(14:25):
the next. It is also for us a very interesting
place in the sense that you can really pick on
some pick up on some bigger global shifts. So last night,
the European Union's Ursula vonder Lyon was here. She gave
a press conference and talked about pulling Canada more closely
into the European defense, infrastructure and architecture, and that was
just sort of a fascinating moment for me. That's something
they've talked about repeatedly over the last many months. But
(14:48):
it shows these shifts that Europe wants to embrace Canada
more and sort of implicitly pull it a little bit
away from the United States. And that reflects this much
broader unease about how things are shifting, the power dynamics
are shifting geopolitically and globally. Where Europe wants to find
common cause with Canada and a little bit separated or
(15:08):
pull it away from the United States. And so you
come to these events looking for clues where you're looking
for those sort of broader, slower tectonic shifts and in geopolitics.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
So important certainly at this moment in history. Gentlemen, thank
you so much, really really appreciate it. Of course, we've
been talking with Bloomberg News National Security Team leader Nick
Wadhams there in Canada, our news bureau there in Calgary, Alberta,
and of course Bloomberg News correspondent host of the Big
Take podcast, David Gore. He too on the ground there
and Bump.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five East during
this listen on Apple Karplay and Android Auto with the
Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
A couple of things. I'm sure you've heard about it,
but we just want to remind everybody the difficult weekend
it was on the domestic front. US prosecutors charged alleged
shooter Van Spolter with two counts of murder in the
deaths of Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband
and what officials referred to as a murderous rampage. That
was early Saturday morning. Also over the weekend, protesters rallying
(16:17):
in hundreds of US cities to announce what they said
were President Trump's authoritarian tendencies, including the increased deportations and
tactics used to carry them back. You know, Tim, we
kicked off talking about kind of global geopolitical tensions, but
there is a lot going on on the US domestic
home front.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
So let's talk about that domestic tensions that are simmering
back with US is FGS Global partner Beth Bowie. FGS
Global is a public affairs consulting firm. Beth a former
senior politics editor at NBC News and MSNBC. She joins
us here in the Bloomberg BusinessWeek Studio. I want to
start with the Minnesota shootings and look at them through
the lens of the other political violence that we've seen
(16:53):
over the last year too, assassination attempts on the president
before he took office. We saw the murder outside of
the consulate earlier this year in Washington, d C. Of
two americ of people in the US. There in what
was you know, I think fair to say is perceived
as political violence. There was a really depressing story, I
(17:15):
believe it was yesterday in the New York Times about how
political violence in the US is now becoming as routine
as school shootings. Like that's such a grim thing to
even think about. What's going on here?
Speaker 8 (17:28):
Well, I think you're seeing the conflagration of a couple
of things. One is the very high pitch tensions that
everybody's feeling about politics. We know our country is extremely polarized,
extremely divided people on social media, their tempers getting riled up.
And then you add to it the element of guns,
which we have in this country at a much higher
level than any other comparably civilized countries. So the combination
(17:49):
of the violent tendencies and the ability to execute literally
and figuratively with a deadly weapon makes us unique. It's
a very scary time, for sure, particularly for those public
officials who are finding themselves really under under scrutiny, under attack.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
We could have.
Speaker 8 (18:06):
Mentioned Nancy Pelosi's husband being you know that wasn't involved,
didn't involve a gun, but you know, clubbed right in
his home. The j six folks who attacked the capital
with weapons, clubbing, herting, killing in some cases police officers.
We're in a very fraught moment right now, and there's
doesn't seem to be much sign of cooling. And I
(18:26):
would say the other problem we're facing is is as
soon as one of these things happens, everybody jumps to
conclusions about why. You know, what was the shooter's motive,
what was the attacker's motive? You know which political side
are they on? I mean, you know, granted, right now
we're seeing more violence happening on the right, but it
would be who everyone if they didn't jump onto Twitter
or jump onto x or what have you, and and
(18:47):
make assumptions about what's going on here. A lot of
times people have very complicated histories. They may suffer from
mental illness. We need to learn more before we sort
of draw all sorts of conclusions about why people are
doing what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Completely right, there's you've got to know all of the information. Something.
Having said that, there is something about freedom of speech,
peaceful protesting. I feel like, you know, look at on
college campuses where we used to embrace different thoughts, right
and different political views, where all of a sudden. That's
almost like it doesn't happen anymore, so like there is
(19:20):
something else going on. And I'm just curious, you know,
your thoughts on that, because that certainly plays into the
political tensions that we're seeing here. Yeah, the inability to
have we do it here all the time, have conversations
in the newsroom where we all don't necessarily agree, but
we learn from each other. But something has gone away
on a national level.
Speaker 8 (19:39):
Yeah, it doesn't feel that way, doesn't it. I mean,
it does feel like there was a period of time,
maybe not that long ago, where one could have sort
of a civil conversation with people that you may or
may not agree with. College campuses. I mean, what we've seen,
you know, most recently is the activity around Israel Palestime,
Israel Gaza that has motivated a lot of college students
(19:59):
and is you know, brought lots of accusations of you know,
Jewish students being mistreated on campus, or the free speech
of folks who want to demonstrate on the behalf of
the Gosins not being allowed to or being you know,
in the case of Columbia, you know, police being brought
into the campus to to break down those those camps
last year. I mean, we saw a lot of rage,
(20:20):
a lot of anger. Unfortunately, Yes, because we're dealing with
a very fraught political environment and tensions are running high.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
And yet we have social platforms where we have a
president of the United States, it certainly feels free to
post at will. I would say business leaders like an
Elon Musk who feel very comfortable to post at will.
So it's it's just like.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
My own zones, his own platform, and that's.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Become the new media, right that very wealthy people seem
to bind to kind of be able to do that.
But it's just this unevenness of certain folks being very
comfortable saying whatever they want and then a lot of
Americans feeling nervous or business leaders. How many business leaders
do we have come into our room who will talk
off air saying there's fear about really saying what they
(21:06):
feel about various policies.
Speaker 8 (21:08):
Yeah, and at our firm we deal with those kind
of like what do.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
You hears all the time?
Speaker 8 (21:13):
I mean, you know, they they want to they want
to stand by their values, but they're also very worried about,
you know, drawing scrutiny perhaps from the administration, drawing backlash
from their consumers about the practices that they've decided to
engage in. So they're very nervous about expressing themselves in
any way at all. And that's an uncomfortable feeling to
have as a as a leader, to not be able
(21:34):
to sort of say where you stand, where you believe
your company stands, where you want to represent UH as
a leader going forward, and feeling like you can't do that.
Speaker 3 (21:43):
You know, one thing that we're talking a lot about
here is the not just the protests against ice in
Los Angeles and the riots and you know what happened
there over the last week or so, but also the
way that the president and his administration are thinking about immigration,
because it seems like there has been so change there,
specifically with regard to farm workers, workers within the hospitality industry.
(22:07):
It seems like leaders are talking to him and saying,
wait a second, we're actually having trouble finding workers. There
have been a lot of different presidents that have tried
to solve this. Will this administration, in your view, does
it have the tools to actually make change here?
Speaker 7 (22:22):
Well?
Speaker 8 (22:23):
I mean the fact that the president has had to
acknowledge that certain industries will not function without this labor
force is really quite surprising, given that he did campaign
he was very obvious about what he intended to do.
He said he was going to deploy federal forces to
get rid of people living here illegally. He didn't differentiate
one or the other. He said, we're going to go
(22:43):
for the criminals, and then we're going to go for
everyone else. He is now recognizing the fact that much
of our economy runs on this labor. There's no obvious
replacement for these folks, so he's going to have to
make it make some changes. That said, he also just
came out last night and again this morning announcing that
he was going to deploy ICE into Democrat run cities
(23:04):
in order to purge folks out of those places. Specifically,
and he named what he said was illegal voting by
an undocumented people, which that basically does not happen at all.
There's tons and tons of research on this, but it
was basically him announcing that he's going to use ICE
as a political tool, not just a tool to remove
people who are here illegally, but rather to target places
(23:26):
that are so he opposes politically, so they impose him.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Is it more about culture war optics? Versus immigration policy
that we're seeing with President truv and just got about
thirty sevens.
Speaker 4 (23:34):
Yeah.
Speaker 8 (23:35):
Look, I mean that was something that he ran on,
was immigration, and he was very much had the sympathy
of many Americans who felt like our immigration policy gone
out of control. But what they are doing now, the
sort of ramping this up, just taking people wholesale out
of the country without really looking at their at their situation,
not putting them through due process. There's a big backlash.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Against that now, all right, going to leave with there
covered a lot of ground. Thank you so much, really
apprec hit it, Bethoo. We've FGS Global Partner joining us
right here in studio.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Listen live
each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Applecarplay 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 play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
Okay, let's talk energy. It's the second worst performing sector
in the S and P five hundred right now. It
was the worst performing utilities taken out leg lower. There's
some bouncing around.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
Wt I crude was up six percent at one point
and down five percent at one point. So that's the
kind of day we.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Hed go figure, go figure. That's why we got Rob
Thummel here, senior portfolio manager at Tortoise Capitol. They've got
around nine point six billion dollars in assets under management.
Rob manages several of the funds, including the Tortoise Energy
Infrastructure Total Return Fund, up this year more than four percent. Rob,
good to have you. With US oil up twenty six
percent since May fifth, I couldn't believe this. I was
(25:00):
doing this shocked. When we were preparing for this, I
yelled across the desks to kill us. What is going on?
We know what happened in the last week and and
why the tensions in the Middle least oil has moved
up since then, but why is steady push higher since
the end of last month.
Speaker 7 (25:16):
Yeah, you know, Doug, I think or sorry.
Speaker 3 (25:18):
Tim, we're talking about it.
Speaker 7 (25:20):
We're talking about that.
Speaker 2 (25:21):
I'm be' tug Tim, Tim, So I want to think
of you can say thank you, Tim.
Speaker 7 (25:28):
What I think is happening is I think there's there's
more certainty about the demand for oil right, so, so
the global economy continues to prosper. Uh, the oil inventories
are really very low. So so any disruption or any
potential disruption is really going to cause a spike in
oil prices. So obviously we had a big disruption or
concern about a disruption. Actually we never had have never
had any physical volume.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
What exactly is the concern, like with with a skirmish
between Israel and Iran, is the concern about the straight
up horror moves?
Speaker 7 (25:56):
Is that with the concern, that's exactly a tim that's
that's explaining. So the straight of horn news is really important. So,
the US is the largest producer of oil in the
world thirteen point three million barrels. For context, we produce
about one hundred or consumed about one hundred million barrels
a day.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
But we can still okay, so that we consume about.
Speaker 7 (26:13):
Globally one hundred million barrels. Of one hundred million barrels
a day are consumed globally, Okay, twenty twenty million barrels
a day roughly go through that straight of horn horror moves.
So if that supply is cut off for some for
some reason, and remember Iran is very close to that
straight it's at the base of the straits. So if
that's cut off for any reason for any point in time,
the world just doesn't have enough inventory to to deal
(26:35):
with that for a long period of time. So that's
anytime there's escalating conflicts near the Straight of Horn moves,
oil prices are going to go up higher.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Do we see that reflected in the delta between Brent
crude VERSUS West Texas intermedia.
Speaker 7 (26:48):
A little bit? Yeah, I mean sometimes, but they tend
to move together because the US can export oil, right,
so if the if oil prices move higher globally BNT,
then typically then you'll see I WTI move up accordingly
as well.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
Okay, one more on the numbers, just to set the
stage for US hundred million barrels a day is what
we use as a globe. You said the US exports
how much the.
Speaker 7 (27:14):
US exports five or six million barrels a day?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
We produce the thirteen thirteen and how much do we use.
Speaker 7 (27:20):
Well, we use a little bit around a round fifteen
to twenty roughly, and.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
We always have to import something because of what we
produce here isn't necessarily the right type of oil for
US to use, that's right.
Speaker 7 (27:31):
So we import them from Canada and from other areas
of the world as well because of the quality of
the oil.
Speaker 4 (27:35):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (27:36):
So we're not a wash in oil.
Speaker 7 (27:38):
Well, in some ways we are, do you think. I mean,
if you think about the conflicts we've had carrolled, I mean,
these are massive. This is a massive conflict affecting geopolitical risk.
But yet oil prices are actually down, as you mentioned,
and are really not that high relative to the conflict
that the world is experiencing.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
So my understanding is too that usage has been declining
as well.
Speaker 7 (27:59):
Right, Well, global olth demand it's slowing. It's slowing, right,
Global oil demand is still growing. We set a record
last year for global oil demand, the highest it's ever been.
It'll be higher this year than it was last year.
But you're right, global oil demand is slowing.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
So what do you make of We talked about global growth,
and I just want to make sure I heard correctly,
because the OECD one forecast has lowered global GDP growth
forecast for this year to two point nine percent, down
from three point one percent in its previous projection. I
think initially when we started, you talked about that the
global economy is kind of firing on all cylinders. Is
that really the case.
Speaker 7 (28:31):
Well, I think it's improving this certainty related to the
global economy. I think, with less concern about the tariffs, right,
and so I think that's oil prices really sold off
earlier this year because of two things. Concern uncertainty related
to tariffs and the impact of the economy, and then
the adding to the supply that OPEC plus was adding.
They were adding volumes of additional volumes when maybe the
(28:51):
demand wasn't there. That's one of the reasons why. Then
the more certainty has really created the opportunity for higher
growth in oil prices from.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
You your perspective, and you've got to make investments based
on what's going on in the global energy markets. I mean,
what do you think as a realistic longer term trend
for WTI crewed Right now, we're right now just above
seventy one dollars a barrel.
Speaker 7 (29:13):
Yeah, So I think WTI right where we are about
seventy dollars in the seventies is a long term trend.
I think we're going to be lower in the near term,
but I think longer term you'll see some adjustments made
at the US. The US might be flat and even
maybe decline in production next year, and so as a
result of that, then you'll probably see demand go up
for oil globally and domestically, and then you know, the
(29:35):
US will have to then return to producing more.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
I got a lot of messages coming at me from
interested viewers and listeners who are curious about the international
relations side of this, specifically Iran. They're not so concerned
about the straight of Horn Moves closing because he argues
that the strait of hor Moves closing would hurt Ran
more than it hurts the rest of the world. Is
the incentive not necessarily align the well, I think.
Speaker 7 (30:01):
That's it's a very stupid point. And the other point
to be made related to that is the two largest
consumers of oil, the US and China, basically are really
interested in China particular buys a lot of Irani and
crude oil. So I think it would be very difficult
for the straight of Horror moves to to to really
to close. And so as a result that I'm not
too concerned either.
Speaker 3 (30:18):
And then a question two about the escalation of tensions
between these two countries. Does it move beyond is real
any ron? And what are the implications if that does happen?
Speaker 7 (30:26):
Well, I sure hope not. I mean just for the world, right,
for all of us as human beings. But you know,
from a district it's really going to be difficult to
disrupt the crude oil supply basically, and so I just
I just don't see the crude oil supply because of
its its significance in growing the global economy, I just
don't see it being disrupted. And so as a result
of that, I just think oil can trade at a
(30:47):
at probably lower from here, which is a good thing
for all of us as consumers, especially as we started
the summer driving season.
Speaker 2 (30:54):
So what's the smart investment play? I'm looking at the
Tortoise energy infrastructure and I'm looking I think you're number
one holding, but correct me. I think this was as
of the end of April. Was NPLX limited.
Speaker 7 (31:07):
Well that's one of what we like MPLX. Well, really, yeah,
go ahead. That's an infrastructure names Carol, so that it's
a high dividend yield. It's probably seven and a half
eight percent dividend yield. It grows itself about three or
four percent a year, So.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
We like, was it the infrastructure that you like, because
it doesn't kind of matter. It's just you got to
be moving stuff around, like.
Speaker 7 (31:24):
The infrastructure and like natural gas. So, you know, we
really think the energy sector is being redefined and going
forward that natural gas will actually take the leading role
as one of the larger supply growth commodities, really not
only domestically but also around the world as well.
Speaker 3 (31:38):
So I'm thinking about this in the context of sort
of what Carol was asking about when it comes to
quote unquote energy independence or the way that American firms
are being encouraged by the administration to drill and to
explore for oil in the United States and extract oil
in the United States. Do you see that happening during
this administration or will it not happen because the price
(32:01):
won't get high enough, sustainably high enough.
Speaker 7 (32:04):
Yeah, you know, and it's a good observation. What I
say is the US is still the largest energy producer
in the world. That's not going to change in this administration.
Is probably not going to change in any administration. The
US is really has a lot of energy, a lot
of cheap energy that it can not only use domestically
but export as well. Now, what we are going to
see is as you highlight, lower oil prices is resulting
(32:26):
in now a lower rig count in the US, which
will ultimately result in lower production in the US. And
it's because of the price. So we just the oil
producers need a little higher price basically need to oily
be in the seventies or eighties to really increase production.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
Well, let's remind everybody, right, this is cyclical. And I
think about you know, being up in Williston, North Dakota
in the back in twenty eleven and it was just
off the chart and everybody's drilling. And again I've said
this a million times. The locals there are like, we've
seen this before. So I mean, this is just like
semi conductors. Right, there's you know, a demand and not
enough supply and people, and the price goes to where
(32:58):
it needs to be and people start to infrastructure, spend,
build out, and then supply goes up in the price
goes down.
Speaker 3 (33:04):
Gere for high prices is high prices, right, The cure
for high prices is high prices.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Yeah, exactly, So exactly, so is that kind of where
we are now?
Speaker 7 (33:11):
Yeah, And the cure for low prices is low prices.
So you're right, So we're going to see less drilling.
But here's the difference this time, I think, and I
think this is really important for people to understand, is
the companies themselves are in much better financial condition. There
the balance sheets are much improved, and so you don't
have to worry about these companies these days as much
from a credit perspective. They're much more improved from a
balance sheet perspective.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
All right, but infrastructures your play love infrastructure, Love love
infrastructure and natural gas to Tortoise, all right, can I
leave it? Hey, good to see you. Thank you, rub
them well, Senior portfolio manager at Tortoise Capook.
Speaker 1 (33:40):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five eas during
Listen on Applecarplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,
or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 7 (33:56):
No, I'll beout you let me drive.
Speaker 3 (33:57):
Oh no, no, no, no, this is not a toy.
Speaker 5 (34:00):
Who's going up?
Speaker 4 (34:02):
All right?
Speaker 5 (34:02):
Please, I'll do the gravel wat I want to try?
Speaker 3 (34:06):
It's a good question.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
This is the drive to the clothes Punk's a musing
well run on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
All right, TikTok everybody, just about seventeen and a half
minutes to go until we rub up the trade on
this Monday, June sixteenth. I just heard from Charlie and
Bill Maloney wrapping up the trade for you as we
get ready for the clothes and yeah, we're off our
best levels of the session, but we have seen some optimism,
some risk on trade. If you will tim come back
into the market.
Speaker 3 (34:39):
Let's get into with Chris Fasciano, chief market strategist that
Commonwealth Financial Network. He's here in the Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio.
One thing that I think was surprising to a lot
of people. We're gonna zoom out and talk about the
big picture trade, but as far as today goes, I
think people have been really surprised at the market reaction
during an ongoing skirmish in the Middle East, one that
(35:01):
hasn't shown more trepidation when it comes to risk on assets.
Speaker 9 (35:04):
What gives This has been a headlined driven market this
entire year, right out of the gate, whether it's terroriffs,
trade policy, the deficit, or geopolitical conflict. And I think
what we're seeing today is there have been the stories
out there that Iran has reached out to the US
and Israel to try to negotiate some kind of deal.
(35:24):
So the market's view is that this conflict, which they
were very worried about on Friday, looks like it's going
to be contained. And as long as it's contained and
doesn't impact the US economy, which means higher oil prices,
potential for higher inflation, and a concern for the Fed,
they're willing to look through it and go back to
what they believe the fundamentals are currently.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
Chris, the velocity and volume of the news flow, be
it from the White House or just around the globe,
does it create opportunities or does it kind of make
investors in your world say I'm out.
Speaker 9 (35:57):
I think it creates opportunities. My view is volatility always
creates opportunities. But it's really hard when talking to our
advisors and they're hearing from clients to get them to
see that at a time like April, right. So, I've
lived through a lot of these market selloffs, and what
I always say is the catalyst is different, and that's
(36:19):
what our advisors we're hearing from clients in March and April.
This is different this time. Catalysts are different, but the
market action always tends to be the same. Which I
mean by that is that it's driven by the future
outlook for the economy and corporate earnings. So when you
get a big sell off, you can start to look
at things like valuations and you can start to make decisions.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
But having said that, you know if it is different
this time around and the catalyst, which is often from
the White House, and to be fair, I think we
can all say safely that the back and forth on
some of the policies from President Trump and his team,
but largely from the President, make it difficult to figure
out what impact will there be longer term on corporate
earnings and all that good stuff. And so that to
(37:03):
some extent is well, wait, how do I make a
decision when the variables are still up in the air?
Speaker 9 (37:08):
Right? I think that's absolutely true. But one of the
interesting or unique things about policy compared to like the
financial crisis is that policy can change. And that's what
we've seen right terrris are announced at very high levels.
It appears as though the President is using terris as
a negotiating tool. Market reacts negatively and the policy gets
(37:31):
changed and we have a pause and effect.
Speaker 3 (37:33):
Are you are you concerned about the lack of actual
concrete trade deals that have been announced, and but I
mean lack, I mean like none out of ninety ninety
ninety deals in ninety days is what we're supposed to see, right,
the ninety days is just yeah, that's like less than
a month away.
Speaker 9 (37:52):
July ninth is coming, and I think we all know
that the way deals work is they get negotiated at
the last minute, right, And I think that's what you're seeing.
But G seven's going on, right, and I've seen stories
that the President is meeting with his counterparts from the
EU in Canada and Mexico. So I still believe we're
going to get some kind of headlines, but I don't
(38:13):
believe we're going to get fully negotiated deals by July ninth.
What the market wants to see something similar to what
they saw with the UK, which is a template that says,
here's what we agree.
Speaker 3 (38:23):
What would you tell them? Would you call that a template?
A framework? What would you call it?
Speaker 9 (38:27):
I'd call it a framework, not an actual trade deal. No,
you can't negotiate trade deals that quickly. I mean we
look back at like twenty eighteen, it took almost eighteen
months to negotiate Phase one with China back.
Speaker 2 (38:38):
So look at MoU right, yeah, yes, and then team
go figure it out exactly.
Speaker 9 (38:43):
I think we're going to see those as we approach
July ninth.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
So glass half full, glass half empty.
Speaker 4 (38:50):
Glass half full.
Speaker 10 (38:51):
I think this is a fascinating market, right, Because I say,
if if you're a type of person that doesn't look
at your statement every month, and you looked at it
in January and you looked at it last week, say
nothing happened, you'd be wrong, but you might be better off.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Where do I find that latitude to just like not
even the problem is I'm in the right markets every
day in terms of news.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
Yes, absolutely, but I would argue that sometimes it's hard
to erase. Right the whip saw that we got, yes,
and it's a reminder that we do have an administration,
a president in particular. Again, I'm not talking out of
line that can say one thing and then do a
one eighty right, and so we're not done. This administration
(39:33):
goes on for another three so many you know, three
years and so many months, and so things can change again.
Speaker 4 (39:41):
Right.
Speaker 9 (39:41):
So the way you frame the question, I said half full,
because I look at it. We're basically back to where
we were in January in terms of market levels and valuations.
Speaker 4 (39:51):
Right so right, it's.
Speaker 9 (39:53):
Been a wild rollercoaster, but that makes me cautiously optimistic
that going forward the economy, which had there's so much
momentum coming into the year that it was able to
persevere through the headwinds, will continue to grow in the
back year. Corporate earnings will continue to grow. That will
be supportive for equity investors. But to your point, I
don't think volatility is going away, and I think there
(40:15):
are risks out there that investors need to be cognizant of.
Speaker 3 (40:19):
How would you characterize the economy right now? The consumer
powers this economy. There are concerns that cracks are starting
to form. Do you agree with that?
Speaker 9 (40:26):
There are concerns cracks are starting to form. There's no
doubt we've saw that with consumer competence that basically cratered
in the first half of the year, although on Friday
we saw a tick up after the pause with China.
But the way I look at it is the driver
of the consumer is employment and jobs. You are seeing
that slow, but you're still seeing it at levels that
(40:47):
should be supportive for the consumer, which means that they
will continue to spend money, which means the economy should
continue to grow as long as we continue to get
progress on tariffs and we got a budget bill paid
asked that could begin to add stimulus into the economy
late in the year as we enter next year.
Speaker 2 (41:05):
Just real quickly, are you worried?
Speaker 10 (41:07):
Though?
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Again, this is a question Tim and I ask about
the US being uninvestable and that investors moving away from
dollar based assets. US importers are increasingly being asked by
their foreign counterparties to settle transactions and currencies other than
the US dollar, such as euros, Chinese and mimb Mexican paceols,
and Canadian dollars. I mean that's happening.
Speaker 9 (41:27):
Yes, As I said, there are a lot of things
to worry about, and I think investors need to be
cognizant of them. To your point, is the US uninvestable?
I don't believe that. But throughout this year I have
been talking to our advisors about increasing their international exposure
because not only is it cheap, but we're starting to
see improvements and fundamentals, and I think that will continue
(41:49):
to drive that trade.
Speaker 5 (41:50):
All right.
Speaker 2 (41:51):
Chris Faciano, Chief Market strategies at Commonwealth Financial Network. Thank
you so much.
Speaker 4 (41:54):
Good to be.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday
afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,
the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube
(42:17):
and always on the Bloomberg terminal
Hosts And Creators
Tim Stenovec
Carol Massar
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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!