JVL (2:55)

Often you do your war games before the war, not mid war. Then it's not really a war game, is it?

Catherine Rampell (3:01)

No, it's, it's a, it's a, it's a war war.

JVL (3:05)

So, I mean, I, Tim, our colleague Tim Miller has been running around like a crazy person saying, I feel like everybody is underestimating the economic impacts here. And on the one hand, I understand that because America is actually better positioned to weather these sorts of shocks than many other countries. On the other hand, I do get the sense that American markets in general are underestimating what's going on, and yet there's all sorts of, like, bad signals. It's not like everybody's thinking, hey, everything is great, but people are, are thinking that it's bad. We have some consumer confidence numbers we'll get into later. We have again, oil prices going way high.

Catherine Rampell (3:51)

Recession risk is rising.

JVL (3:53)

Recession risk is rising. Right. So I guess on the, Talk to me, Katherine, on the very big macro question of are are the markets and people properly sort of understanding the risk curves in front of them?

Catherine Rampell (4:11)

Look, I, I am not, you know, like a day trader. I am, I, I hold, you know, broad index funds like the S P. I don't. So I guess this is my way of saying, like, I'm not putting money on the line here.

JVL (4:23)

And ethically, it would be not investment advice.

Catherine Rampell (4:26)

Correct. It is not investment advice. And, you know, take with a grain of salt, besides, because let's, like, I don't have skin in the game in the way that people who are actually making trading decisions on this information, maybe they know something more than I do. But, yeah, it seems, it seems like there's a little bit too much of a sanguine response to what's going on in the world right now, particularly after Trump very obviously says things to, like, jawbone the market to try to get people to calm down. Right. It's like, why does anybody take him at his word when he, he'll like, periodically say, oh, don't worry, it's almost over, we're almost done. I want to get out of there soon. But there's, like, no actual evidence that he has presented that he has a plan for extricating the United States from this war, or for that matter, from extricating the globe from, from this huge quack, like economic Quagmire that he has created by disrupting not just oil markets, but like everything in the world at this point. And it's really again, like, I'm not a day trader, so maybe these people who have money on the line are smarter than I am and they see something that I don't. But I don't get what the off ramp is here. And I don't understand what market participants think the off ramp is here. Like to get to the point of that. BlackRock quote the BlackRock CEO, CEO, President, President, President. His quote. If the war ended today and the Strait of Hormuz were magically reopened today, which not likely, you still have a huge amount of damage that has been wrought already in the form of like a bunch of companies in the Gulf. Excuse me. Countries in the Gulf have either reduced how much oil they are producing or ended it entirely. You know, oil, gas, natural gas, other products.

JVL (6:29)

Turned off their aluminum smelters.

Catherine Rampell (6:31)

Right? Exactly. They ran out of storage for stuff because they couldn't get ships through the Strait and they, they could not. Like in the aluminum smelting example, natural gas was just getting too expensive, so they had to turn off the smelter. And that's going to take whatever it is months or a year to turn it back on. It's not just like flipping a switch. So there are a bunch of reasons why that disruption alone means that like there's like a hole in the supply that will take some take a while to refill. On top of that, you also have some damage to the infrastructure already. And that's not just about like how long it takes to turn back on the aluminum smelting plant. It's like you have an oil refinery that got taken out and once that is gone, it is gone. And so you have to, you know, the largest natural gas processing plant in the world, which is in Qatar, got bombed by the Iranians and they're lost

JVL (7:32)

20% of capacity, 70% capacity.

Catherine Rampell (7:35)

Yeah. So that's huge.

JVL (7:37)

4% global capacity, by the way. That's how big this place is. So a fifth of their, this one field's capacity is 4% of the entire world's capacity for producing natural gas.

Catherine Rampell (7:49)

So, you know, in the United States is somewhat insulated from that. Like we produce so much natural gas ourselves, we are a net exporter. But it's still a global market and there are going to be more commodity

JVL (8:01)

prices go up everywhere. They go up here too, Right, Right.

Catherine Rampell (8:05)

So. So it's really hard for me to understand why there. I don't want to say there's like this euphoria, but again there's just like almost this indifference, nonchalance about some of this long term damage that is happening. And I don't really understand why, or at least why it would be comforting to hear Donald Trump say, don't worry, it's going to be okay.

JVL (8:31)

Let me trot out a theory.

Catherine Rampell (8:33)

Yeah.

JVL (8:33)

My theory is that nobody believes Trump when he says these things.

Catherine Rampell (8:38)

Okay.

JVL (8:39)

Everybody believes it's market manipulation, but they believe the market manipulation will work. And so they pile in because there's like a little bit of money to be made short term.

Catherine Rampell (8:50)

Okay. Yeah.

JVL (8:51)

So when Trump, when Trump tweets something out, people don't think that he, he like actually pieces coming. Right. He says, oh, we're really close to a deal, but they think oh, the market will run with and it be. So it becomes like a self reinforcing thing. Right. If everybody in the market thinks that the market's going to react this way to this news, then it's going to. And so you wind up with. It gets very noisy. Right.

Catherine Rampell (9:17)

I mean, and that's a good theory. But at some point like somebody should be taking the other side of that trade though. And maybe they are in that they should be assuming, okay, well if it's all like puffery, you know, there's, there's no there there. That at some point the, the reality will catch up with, with the market and so they should be shorting everything. Right. I mean, I guess you can get the time frame wrong.

JVL (9:45)

Yeah.

Catherine Rampell (9:46)

Keynes famously predicted that markets were going to crash. But he, you, you can run out of liquidity before your bet is, you know, before you win the bet essentially and lost a lot of money. So maybe it's possible there are people who are realizing, you know, the greater fool theory that somebody else will be willing to take, you know, will, will believe the, essentially that eventually that's gonna stop holding. But I don't know, it's confusing to me.

JVL (10:19)

It's also scary to get involved in trying to take the other side of things when it's clear that one side is consciously manipulating the markets. Yes, right. When there is obviously a lot of insider information going on. And this is, we've seen it from Kalshi to Polymarket to oil futures. Right. Did you $580 million in the oil futures that came out right before the tweet, like 16 minutes, 17 minutes before

Catherine Rampell (10:46)

the tweet again, stock futures and oil futures. Actually somebody, yeah, somebody or somebody's got very rich.

JVL (10:52)

Right. And so when you know that that is happening out in the world, I mean, it just seems like it's tremendously risky to say, oh, I'm smarter than everyone else. I'm going to take the other side of this because you could get burned real hard by people just manipulating the markets around you. I don't know. So we have, we have a couple, couple things to talk about, one of which is consumer sentiment. This is great expectations. Worse than what is the economic outflow. We now have people expecting business conditions to go down in both the short run and the long run. And inflation expectations are way up. Short run inflation. Now people are expecting four and a half percent. The. Who is OEC or somebody?

Catherine Rampell (11:46)

Oecd.

JVL (11:47)

Yeah, the OECD put out. What was their, their guess? Do you have that?

Catherine Rampell (11:53)

My recollection is that they said 4.2% inflation in the US over the, over 2026, so obviously well above in fact more than double the Fed's target of 2%. So, yes, that's headline inflation. So that includes energy prices, obviously. And the Fed normally strips out what's going on in energy prices and in food prices because they're so volatile. But it doesn't mean that consumers, A, don't feel it like consumers care about what happens to energy and food prices and B, energy prices also affect the price of everything else. Right. Any goods that need to be, to get shipped, any products that need to get manufactured that requires fuel of some kind.

JVL (12:37)

So anything that has plastic packaging, as you wrote.

Catherine Rampell (12:40)

Anything. Yes, anything that has plastic packaging. Fertilizer which is made, parts of it are made from petrochemicals. And so you have fertilizer prices going up, which again leads to higher food prices, among other things. So, yeah, so lots of signs that prices are going up. I think we also have a chart somewhere showing what the market.

JVL (13:02)

Yeah, the Bloomberg, that Bloomberg business terminal chart. Is that the one you're talking about?

Catherine Rampell (13:07)

Yeah, yeah. Do you have it?

JVL (13:08)

Can we throw that up, guys?

Catherine Rampell (13:09)

Oh, no, not that.

JVL (13:10)

No, that's a Brent crude. It's, it's the one at the very bottom of our document. Anyway, it's.

Catherine Rampell (13:16)

But, but basically, you know, you can kind of back out from how Treasuries are trading, what market participants think inflation is going to be. And it suggests that they think.

JVL (13:27)

Yeah, yeah, line go up. Line go up. Catherine.

Catherine Rampell (13:34)

Yeah, Investors are Now betting overall US inflation over the next 12 months will surge above 5%. So, yeah, so that's, you know, this is, this chart is from March 20 a week ago, but I looked up the data, I had a. I don't have a Bloomberg terminal anymore, alas, but I had a friend look it up for me yesterday, and it's still about 5%. So just to give you a sense of, like, what, Again, people who have skin in the game think that we are going to have pretty high inflation, mostly driven by energy, but not exclusively driven by energy, because as we've said, like so many other supply chains are conditional on this. So it's a weird set of facts to be forcing into reality leading into a midterm. I would say normally presidents would be doing everything that they can, turning over every rock, trying to find ways to reduce gasoline prices. And obviously that is not what this administration is doing.

JVL (14:36)

Can we throw the recession forecast up on there, guys? Because that's the other thing that's interesting, the sort of oil price shocks and their correlations to recessions.

Catherine Rampell (14:46)

Yeah. So it's not a prediction per se, but it's showing that, like, yeah, it's when energy prices get very high, more often than not, I would say you end up having a recession, but not always. Like, we had a huge, you can see on the chart, we had a huge price spike in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. That led to much higher oil prices and we didn't have a recession then.

JVL (15:12)

So it's Joe Biden at the helm, though.

Catherine Rampell (15:15)

So Joe Biden at the helm. And we released a lot of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which Don Trump, among others, were very critical of at the time. And now, of course, we have the administration today trying to do the same thing, but a little bit late. You know, I've asked different people who are energy experts, like, is there something that they could have done to keep gas prices from going up so high, aside from not starting a war in the Middle East? And one of the, the responses has been, well, they, they could have, like, started releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve a little earlier because it takes a while for it to flow literally through the market. So there are things that they could have done that they did not think to do for whatever reason. This administration is clearly not known for its planning capacity. So. Yeah, I mean, besides the fact that oil prices are going to lead to higher consumer prices down the supply chain, that also leads to a higher risk of recession. And that's because, well, for a number of reasons, but like when consumers are spending more on gasoline and today they're spending, I think, about $400 million more per day than they were.

JVL (16:39)

Not $400 million per day. $400 million more per day.

Catherine Rampell (16:45)

Correct. That's from.

JVL (16:46)

Just want to make sure people understand you.

Catherine Rampell (16:48)

Yes. Because gas has gone up by more than a dollar since the war started. So collectively, based on how much gasoline American consumers buy, they're spending collectively $400 million in additional spending per day. That's $400 million that they do not have available to spend on other goods and services. Right. Maybe they're no longer going out for dinner or they're no longer buying their kid the nicer birthday gift or whatever it is. That's consumer spending that gets diverted to energy. And so you have all of the companies that would have been patronized by consumers losing out.

JVL (17:30)

Right.

Catherine Rampell (17:31)

So then they have to pull back. Maybe they have to lay off workers, their workers ultimately and cut back their spending. And this is how you get the vicious cycle that is a recession. So that's why there's a big concern about a recession risk and why, in fact, in the past you have seen that pattern with energy shocks correlating at least with recessions.

Howie Mandel (17:53)

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly the King and Wallow 267's million dollars gaming in an epic global gaming league video game showdown. Plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now@globalgamingleague.com that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.

Bleacher Report Announcer (18:24)

The Bleacher Report app is your destination for sports right now. The NBA is heating up, March Madness is here and MLB is almost back. Every day there's a new headline, a new highlight, a new moment you've got to see for yourself. That's why I stay locked in with the Bleacher Report app. For me, it's about staying connected to my sports. I can follow the teams I care about, get real time scores, breaking news and highlights all in one place. Download the Bleacher Report app today so you never miss a moment.

JVL (18:54)

And we were not on, we were on very shaky ground to begin with. This is why, I mean, we had the Fed report shortly before, I think it was before the war started. Although who can say, because I don't remember anything anymore, that we've had basically zero net job growth since office. Right? I mean, things were not, it isn't like, hey, everything was great, but now we have this oil shock.

Catherine Rampell (19:17)

Mm. Yeah. What, what happened was Jay Powell, who's the Fed chair, gave a press conference last week. So it was after the war started. Okay. Where he mentioned that the Fed thinks we've had zero job growth overall in the last six months.

JVL (19:36)

Six months, okay.

Catherine Rampell (19:37)

Yeah. When they account for, you know, what they think is like, what will be some likely revisions. So they think we've had zero job growth. And he was saying to be fair at the time, like, maybe that's okay because we have fewer workers since we're deporting.

JVL (19:52)

We've deported so many workers, guys, so don't worry.

Catherine Rampell (19:55)

Yeah. So he's like, maybe that's like. It's hard to say how much of this is supply, you know, supply of workers versus demand for workers, but it's still not a great thing. And it means that if you get hit by a big shock, then there is some significant downside risk is how I think he put it. And those numbers that, you know, last six months, no job, you know, expected, no job growth, that predates the war. So prior to this big shock, you had some fragility in the job market. And you can also see in some of the other numbers things like the. Of those who are unemployed right now, the share of them who are long term unemployed is unusually high. Meaning that if you are one of the unlucky people who has lost your job, it's really, they're just not that many openings. So it's. There's not a lot of firing. There's also not a lot of hiring. So with, without that churn, you can just get stuck. So you may have like this, this large contingent of the workforce that's already getting kind of screwed. And then what happens if you do tip into, from zero job growth to negative job growth, I. E. Job losses, then things are going to get worse. And, and I, I feel like I'm, I'm getting sucked into the, the, the doomerism that is.

JVL (21:12)

Oh, I would never do that to you.

Catherine Rampell (21:14)

No, never. Never with jbl. So, you know, I don't want to say like a recession is inevitable. It's definitely not. But the risks of recession have certainly risen. We started out, as you point out, with some fragility in the job market and elsewhere, tariffs creating more uncertainty, etc. Then you layer on this massive energy shock, slash everything shock that just makes it much harder for companies to plan and hire, and that can lead to that, that vicious cycle I was talking about earlier.

JVL (21:49)

So two, two other data points here that I think really buttress what you're saying. The first is, gosh, I wish I had thought to bring this chart with me. But workers very reluctant to leave jobs right now.

Catherine Rampell (22:04)

Yeah.

JVL (22:04)

So workers, you know, people, your quits rate is way, way down because people feel like they are not going to be able to find another job if they, if they quit the job they have. The other thing, which it's different, but I think is speaking to the same psychology, is housing. And so the housing market right now is suddenly frozen in amber and nobody's buying, nobody's selling. And this is, I think, the type of behavior you see when consumers are just spooked, Right. It isn't even panicked. It's they're spooked and nobody quite knows what's going on.

Catherine Rampell (22:40)

Well, it's not only that, it's that interest rates are really high and interest rates have been rising as a result of this war as well. And to walk people through how that happens, when you have higher inflation, among other things. So you have higher inflation, that means that it's more likely that the Fed is going to have to have higher interest rates to counteract that inflation. Maybe not today, but the Fed, you know, Jay Powell, among others, has even said, like, our next move very well could be a rate hike rather than a rate cut. It's not the baseline scenario, but it's possible. So if markets think that they're going to be potentially higher interest rates, then mortgage rates are benchmarked off of the Fed's interest rates. So that leads to higher mortgage rates. And then that means that the delta between what a seller is willing to sell for and what a buyer is willing to buy can get larger. Right. Because it's, the buyer is not just having to think about the sales price, you know, the list price. They're also having to think about, like, what is their monthly mortgage payment going to be.

JVL (23:50)

Right.

Catherine Rampell (23:50)

And so I think that's part of what's going on here. We have a housing crisis which has led to higher prices in general and people not being able to afford them, and then layer on top of that, mortgage rates. And Donald Trump is aware of this, right? He is. He just like, he's been trying to jawbone markets into, like, cutting oil prices or whatever. He has also been trying to jawbone the Fed. Well, jawbone and like, extort threaten to prosecute friend prosecute the Fed into cutting interest rates. But like I said, there are a whole bunch of reasons why that's not the obvious thing that they should, like, you could argue about maybe they should be doing it regardless of Trump's political pressure. Like, maybe that's the right move. I don't. It's, it's actually a really hard question to answer, but it may not be because we've just shown all of these data saying that, like, inflation is going to go up.

JVL (24:43)

So, so let's, let's talk about Fed and interest rates now. I was going to say this a little bit, but we're here, so we might as well. Prior to the war, the assumptions were that we had rate cuts coming and markets had largely priced that in. Markets had decided, yeah, don't worry, good times are coming, money's going to get cheaper, suddenly we're in the war, and you wind up now getting a whole bunch of all these contrary indicators, which we're talking about rising energy costs, rising inflation, et cetera, et cetera. And so if you're at the Fed now, you're being pulled in two directions at the very least. I think it's probably safe to say they will not be willing to cut rates as aggressively as they would have on February 26th. So if their meeting had been on two days before the war, on February 26th, that rate cut is not the cut that they would do now, today. I don't think that doesn't mean that they'll raise rates, but it means the entire window of how they're looking at this has shifted.

Catherine Rampell (25:49)

Yeah.

JVL (25:50)

The next meet. When's the meeting? June.

Catherine Rampell (25:54)

I think the next.

JVL (25:55)

I'm gonna have to look that up for us.

Catherine Rampell (25:58)

I can look it up, but I think there's one in April.

JVL (26:01)

Is there an April meeting?

Catherine Rampell (26:03)

I think there is, but I don't know. I may be wrong.

JVL (26:06)

You know what? I'll effort that while you talk. So my question is then, so you've just written about Kevin Morrish, who's coming in to have a job in which I think no matter what the Fed does, Trump will be angry because I'm sure he wants like, 900 basis points cut or something like that. Yeah, so what. I mean, what. I'm not going to ask what is the Fed going to do? Because nobody knows. But, like, what should we be looking for? Like, as we're trying to understand what's happening and what, what various moves from Fed, the Fed on the chess board would mean. Just make me smart about this. Like, as we're getting ready for the next.

Catherine Rampell (26:47)

Kevin Wash is kind of screwed. I mean, it's, it's like his own fault or something. Like he knew what he was signing up for. I Guess I should put it this way. So Kevin Wash is kind of screwed because he has been a lifelong inflation hawk. Inflation hawk means that you're usually someone who's like, errs on the side of being more worried about inflation and therefore you err on the side also of tighter monetary policy, which would mean things like higher interest, higher short term interest rates, a smaller Fed balance sheet, et cetera. That is what his disposition has been throughout his career, with a couple of exceptions. Both times, just as Donald Trump either won reelection or took office, he suddenly became much less worried about inflation. This happened in 2020 leading into 2021, excuse me, 2015 leading into 2015, 2016 and then again end of 2024 leading into 2025. So both times when Donald Trump was about to take office. So he has instead more recently positioned himself as someone who is not as worried about inflation. He is willing and, and had like basically promised to cut short term interest rates. He would do some other things to shrink the balance sheet. And he said that like they'll offset each other, whatever. The only thing Donald Trump cared about was cutting interest rates. Right. Trump said quite explicitly on social media and in many interviews that this was a prerequisite for anyone who wanted a Fed job. They had to be willing to cut interest rates. And I think he specifically said something like they should be cutting rates when the economy is doing well. Why are they cutting rates when the economy is doing well? They're trying, you know, they, or Jay Powell, they were trying to hurt him. So Warsh got the job or has been nominated for the job. He hasn't been confirmed yet because he promised lower interest rates. All of the things that Donald Trump has done since he has taken office have made that promise harder to keep. By first, lots of tariffs which have not had, you know, they've not had an enormous effect on, on inflation, but they have had some effect on inflation.

JVL (29:02)

You can see he's only put like 20% of them into, into effect.

Catherine Rampell (29:06)

Yeah, yeah. And also, and companies have kind of like tried to hold off on raising prices because they were expecting the Fed to strike the tariffs down, things like that. So. But it has had an effect. You can see it in certain categories like appliances, for example. So there's that. Then of course there's this war which has raised inflation expectations. In the consumer data that you talk, you know, the consumer survey data that you talked about in that market data that we talked about, the OECD forecast across the board, people think that inflation is going to go up and there's a question of like how does the Fed deal with that? Historically they've said that they tried to look through, through price shocks, meaning that if it's a one time price shock, particularly in something like energy which is super volatile, they don't assume that it's going to like feed into ongoing inflation. It's a one time price increase and maybe it'll fade away when the shock is over. And it's not like we're worried about ongoing, you know, people expecting prices to keep going higher and higher and higher. It happens once and then it's done. And normally that's sort of how you would expect the Fed to react to things. But it's different now because we've had historically high inflation quite in, in very recent memory. We've had inflation above the Fed's target for five years now. So you know, there's a different psychology I guess is how I would put it. Like there is a real fear that even though maybe intellectually people realize yeah, this is a one time shock, it's not about the prices of everything going up. They still might, you know, like how you were saying before, people are, are changing their behavior based on what they think everybody else is going to do, even if they think everybody else is also wrong. It's kind of like that with inflation psychology. If everybody assumes that their suppliers are going to raise prices because maybe they'll be confused about what's going on, it's a one time supply shock or not. If they think that their supplier is going to raise prices, if they think that all of their services are going to get more expensive, their shipping is going to get more expensive, expensive, you know, all the logistics, whatever, they may preemptively raise prices. So it's like if you worry about high prices it can become a self fulfilling prophecy. Everybody assumes that prices are going to go up and then it, it happens. So that's the thing that the Fed is worried about. It's this idea that inflation expectations become unanchored is the term of art. And so should they be looking through this oil shock or is it like the oil shock and the tariff increases, you know, the tariff related price increases and this history of the past five years, are all of those things going to compound so that like people start willing inflation into more inflation into existence, in which case the Fed needs to crack down and be like nope, we're going to be the bad guys, we're going to raise interest rates and like nobody has to worry about everybody else raising prices because everybody else is going to Be like, have the same medicine, you know, be administered the same medicine. So the, you know, that's, that's something the Fed could do. On the other hand, they're, you know, they're like, you know, what's the, what's the line about? Who was it? Eisenhower? Somebody said like, just bring me a one handed economist. Like there are too many. On the other hands, it's probably not Eisenhower. I mean, it's Coolidge or somebody. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Um, you know, if you're worried about a recession, if you're worried about job losses, then the Fed should be cutting rates. On top of all of this, let's say the members of the Fed who are setting rates do think that the right approach is to stimulate the economy to cut interest rates. Now they have to worry about like, are people going to view this decision through the lens of, oh, we're just doing it because Trump wants us to. And then they have to like, I don't know, it just makes, it makes everything so much more difficult. Donald Trump should have just let the Fed be, put smart people on and let them.

JVL (33:12)

What in our history with that man leads you to believe that he could have done that?

Catherine Rampell (33:16)

Hey, he, he elevated, he elevated Jay Powell to his current job. People forget that Jay Powell nominated for Ray.

JVL (33:24)

He made a lot of mistakes with personnel, you know.

Catherine Rampell (33:27)

Yeah, yeah. So anyway, so, so Warsh is in a difficult spot, I guess is how I would put it.

JVL (33:32)

I mean the, the funniest outcome. So the Fed does meet late April, 4-28-29. The funniest outcome would be rates remain unchanged, which would then leave everybody setting their hair on fire with why didn't they raise rates, why didn't they cut rates?

Catherine Rampell (33:51)

That's the most likely outcome actually. So you were talking before about like, what would have happened if we didn't have a war? What would the Fed have done? My vague memory is because the Fed puts out these, they call them sep, the Survey of Economic Projections. I always forget what it stands for. It's like each of the members on the committee that sets interest rates, they put out anonymous forecasts for what's going to happen to inflation, unemployment, GDP growth and interest rates. And so you, this is the dot plot. If people have heard of the infamous dot plot, it's like you can see where their dots fall on the chart, but you don't know whose dot is whose. It's very sneaky. So you could see that like last year, the, from the dot plot, I think towards the end of last year, the members of the Fed like the, the general, the median dot or whatever suggested that they were going to have at least one interest rate cut this year and it would probably be earlier in the year. And now with all of the recent developments with the war and other things from the dot plot you can see like when that rate they still think there's going to be a rate cut but it's coming later and you can look at markets and they also think it's going to come later. So you know I think the baseline forecast is still that there will be some interest rate cut but it's not going to be in April, it's not going to be in June and may not even be in July. I don't remember what the what the forecast show now I can look it up but it keeps on getting kicked down the road because it's like it's never going to be the right time. It's if inflation is Summary of economic projections summary. Thank you Summer.

JVL (35:38)

Thank you Jasmine.

Catherine Rampell (35:39)

Never remember what the S stands for.

JVL (35:40)

Jasmine on the spot for us. Okay.

Howie Mandel (35:45)

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly The King Wallow 267's million dollars gaming in an epic Global Gaming League video game showdown. Plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now at global gaming league.com that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.

JVL (36:15)

Tyler Redick here from 2311 Racing.

Howie Mandel (36:17)

Another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chumba. Jump in@chumbacasino.com let's shamba. No purchase necessary. BTW Group Void we're prohibited by law. CTNC21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino.

JVL (36:30)

So I we had a couple questions asking for darker people saying you know what, what do you worry about?

Catherine Rampell (36:38)

You want it darker?

JVL (36:39)

Guys, I have a big thing that I worry about a lot that nobody else seems to care about. Except that last week an analyst at Deutsche wrote a and so but it is this is an interest killing the minute I say the word petrodollar 80% of the people watching this stream are going to log off. So I'm going to hold that in reserve so that you and I can nerd out about the petrodollar system.

Catherine Rampell (37:05)

Okay?

JVL (37:06)

And I would say as you are looking at the very near term future. So you're looking at the next week, four weeks. What are the things that would worry you the most that you. They like. This development could wind up to bad outcomes economically.

Catherine Rampell (37:27)

Yeah. So I mentioned damage to infrastructure earlier when Donald Trump was threatening to bomb power plants. Besides the extraordinary humanitarian cost that that would entail and you know, as I understand it from talking with our colleague Mark Hertling, would be war crimes, etc, that would also be pretty catastrophic or lead to pretty catastrophic economic outcomes because you would imagine that Iran would retaliate and would go after other kinds. I mean they already have gone after other kinds of infrastructure. They're trying to do tit for tat, eye for an eye. When we bombed their natural gas field in South Pars, then they started bombing or with. With mixed success, I think an oil refinery in Israel and various other refineries and processing facilities, etc. If you have more infrastructure that gets destroyed, very, very bad economically because again, that stuff cannot be easily rebuilt. And you could imagine that feeding into a global recession slash depression. Beyond that, I know you want to talk about the petrodollar. I can get to that. I'll let you rant about that. I would say that the other thing that I would be very concerned about is that you have the potential for sort of a multi crisis in the sense that there are other ticking time bombs in the US economy. US and global economies, frankly. And they're mostly unrelated, but they can definitely feed onto each other. So the examples that I would give are the AI bubble right now in the United States. AI related. AI related investment is propping up talk

JVL (39:28)

about Taiwan and liquid natural gas, if you will. Can I poke you to do that? Oh well, no, you.

Catherine Rampell (39:35)

Well, I was going to say. I mean, I'm guessing you're referring to the fact that Taiwan is the major producer of semiconductors around the world and

JVL (39:47)

so acquired for data center construction.

Catherine Rampell (39:49)

Right. Data. I mean not just data center construction, but like all electronic cars. Right. Pretty much. Refrigerator.

JVL (39:57)

Everything has a chip in it.

Catherine Rampell (39:58)

Yeah, correct. So you could imagine a universe in which, well there's. It depends how dark you want to go. Like how World War 3 is.

JVL (40:09)

You want to go none the more dark.

Catherine Rampell (40:14)

So it's, you know, there is the question of like Taiwan is very dependent on liquefied natural gas from the Middle East. What happens if their costs get so expensive that they can't continue producing? What happens? This is the really dark outcome that again, it is not a prediction, but it is a risk. China gets emboldened by what we've done in Iran decides to. This is an opportune time to go after Taiwan and solve the so called Taiwan problem. And that has a huge disruption in global.

JVL (40:47)

I'm actually sunny on this one. I think, I think the worse things get for America, the less China needs to go after Taiwan because they're about to inherit the entire global order.

Catherine Rampell (41:00)

Yeah, but they, so why, you know, why?

JVL (41:03)

Why? I know it's very important to them but like, you know, you do that, it then queers things with the Europeans. It makes things harder to, to really make the case that, well, you know, we may be autocrats but we're rules based and we're predictable. I feel like they, they now believe they can play for more.

Catherine Rampell (41:21)

But that's, I hope that is my own pet theory. You know, I'm, I'm far from an expert on this, but you asked me the darkest case scenario, so I love that. So let's say China gets emboldened. So there's that. What I was saying about the AI bubble is that AI will have major transformative effects on the economy, some of which will be good, you know, maybe boosting productivity and in making things much better. Torture Nexus.

JVL (41:56)

This is a joke about AI that, you know, the people who built AI, it's like they read a book called Don't Build the Torture Nexus and their takeaway from that was hey guys, we can build the Torture Nexus.

Catherine Rampell (42:10)

Okay? I think I've heard you say a version of this before. In any event, AI itself may wipe out a lot of jobs. I don't know on what time frame. And there's lots of smart people who disagree with each other on that who know more about it than I do. But let's say that's a longer time frame. In the meantime, there's a lot of bad money chasing after good in terms of companies trying to win the AI race that will not win. And they're going to pull all of that investment money that they've put into data centers and software and various other things. And if that's propping up the economy, which to a large extent it is, if that collapses at the same time that you have these huge energy shocks that are hurting other parts of the economy. And then on top of that you have what's going on with the private credit markets, which is like its whole own can of worms. This is a corner of the financial market where basically you have private equity funds loaning money to companies. And it's not completely unregulated, but almost completely Unregulated and kind of like nobody is paying that much, Nobody's paying that much attention to it. And there have been a couple of companies that went belly up recently and it's like all of a sudden we're learning. Oh shit. Like there are these loan, these huge loans that went bad and nobody's paying attention to like the, the interconnectedness of them. In the same way that leading up to the financial crisis, subframe stuff. Yeah, it's, it's kind of similar.

JVL (43:39)

It's phantom debt that nobody can see. And when you don't know the debt is out there, if it goes bad, it spooks everybody because then, well, how much else of it is out there? Right. We don't know what the liabilities are.

Catherine Rampell (43:51)

Right. And so, and who was it? Jamie Dimon made some comment recently, like if there's one cockroach, there are usually more. And what he was referring to is like nobody's paying attention to this. You know, companies that are getting loans that shouldn't be getting loans that they, they go bad and then what are the knock on effects? And they're like probably a lot of other borrowers out there that are like this and we just don't know what their connectedness is. And, and so all of these things, the war, the AI bubble and credit markets, they're all kind of distinct, but they can feed on each other. Right? Like let's say you have one big highly leveraged company go bust and it spooks lots of other investors. And suddenly that's a time when people say, hey, like I'm going to reevaluate what's in my portfolio. Why is 50% of my portfolio in AI, which is pretty close to what the s and P500 looks like right now. It's like 40% of the S&P500 is in these AI connected stocks. So you could have like this sort of massive reshuffling that then makes everything else worse, if that makes sense. And so that's the scenario that I would be most concerned about. Again, not saying it's going to happen, not even saying it's more likely than not, but you have a bunch of bad things. You could get very unlucky. And we have this very careless administration that is not even thinking about any of these risks, you know, again, let alone the humanitarian side of what they're doing, like the, the, the economic risks here. They're not thinking about it, they're not paying attention. If anything, they're trying to deregulate financial markets. Even more. That's also what's been happening at the Fed, which we can get into at some point. But you know, they're not paying attention to any of these problems that may ultimately compound one another. And you could end up in a very dark place economically, not just in the U.S. but like you could end up in a global depression. I hope we don't. But like, I do not trust our leadership to be thinking about any of this and let alone like knowing how to manage a crisis that may be partly of their own making.

JVL (46:04)

I mean, these are the same people who, as we said at the beginning, are Now War Gaming $200 oil in the middle of the war they started. They didn't war game it beforehand. They waited till they were four weeks into the war to start the war games.

Howie Mandel (46:20)

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly the King and Wallow267's million dollars gaming in an epic Global Gaming League video game showdown. Plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artists Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now@globalgamingleague.com that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.

JVL (46:50)

Tyler Redick here from 2311 Racing.

Howie Mandel (46:52)

Another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chumba. Jump in@chumbacasino.com let's Chumba. No purchase necessary BTW group void where prohibited by law CTNC21 sponsored by Chumba Casino.

JVL (47:06)

Yeah, I. I do feel a little bit like Harris in Apollo 13. Well, what do we got on the spaceship that's good? Well, where's the strength? And I'm not quite sure what our underlying strengths are, but.

Catherine Rampell (47:22)

Well, okay, so you, you wanted to talk petrodollar. So which is another piece of all this that we, I mean, which drive

JVL (47:29)

the five people who are watching this off the stream, but. Well, look, we'll do it, but we're going to do it with a hard limit of like two minutes.

Catherine Rampell (47:36)

Okay.

JVL (47:37)

For people who don't know what the petrodollar is, this is an agreement the United States came to with OPEC in the 1970s that said all oil transactions, they are made and settled in US dollars. This was meant to simplify the system and help ease the flow of oil as a commodity in the wake of all the price shocks of the 1970s, this had the effect of making the dollar the reserve currency for the world. Because what it meant is that every country needed to have US dollars on hand in order to purchase oil, which meant that every country had to purchase dollars, which meant that dollars are very safe, which meant that US debt was very cheap to finance. The reason we can run a country where we run massive deficits is because we can sell our treasury bills very, very cheaply and we can get borrow money now to pay for entitlements and Social Security and Medicare at very, very low interest rates. If the petrodollar system were to go away, then that would speed up what the pointy headed econ nerds call de dollarization, which is the world moving away from the US Greenback as the backstop currency for everybody. And so when I look at this crisis, I mean, I just sort of put myself in Iran's position and I think if I wanted to hurt America, what's the biggest thing I could do? And the biggest thing I could do is I could try to help China do something that would be in China's interest. Right? If you're Iran, you can't really hurt America. I mean, you can hurt the global economy, you can hurt the American economy, but you can't hurt America in strategic ways, but you could help China and China can hurt America. And so one way to do this, the way our sanctions work against Iran, when Iran sells oil, it sells it because it is sanctioned not in US dollars but in Chinese 1. If part of Iran's price for a ceasefire was that all oil coming through the Strait of Hormuz, in order to keep the strait open, has to be sold in yuan, that would fork the global oil market. And creating the petro yuan as a competitor to the petrodollar would have enormous consequences in the long term for America. Nobody would notice it in the first week or the first month or the first year, but like over the long haul in how we handle debt financing and Social Security and Medicare and the entire network of how the American economy works, that would be like a dagger aimed at the heart of the American way of life. And so I look at this and I think, well, if I was Iran, what would I, Well, China would love that China would, would be very, very interested in something like that because that would really cement their status as a rising power and America's status as a declining power. And so you could say, hey, our price is that we do this thing that helps the Chinese. And I look at that, I'm just like that freaks me the fuck out, and nobody else cares about it. Do you care about it at all, or are you just like, no, I mean, this is 50. You're at like, item 55 on a list of 5,000 things that could go wrong.

Catherine Rampell (51:02)

And I mean, the threats to the dollar extend beyond this, right? Like, there are a whole bunch of reasons why dollars look, in theory, less safe than they used to, including that we have a president who does not adhere to rule of law. And so beyond the fact that oil transactions transacted in dollars, there were a lot of other reasons why U.S. debt looked safe and U.S. dollars looked safe. And it was because the U.S. as a Democratic institution, was considered reliable, as a borrower, and stable. Right. And so there are a lot of other risks to our reserve currency besides that. However, the problem is it's not obvious that, like, it's not obvious what would replace the dollar. And that's been the problem from the get go. The yuan does not seem like a particularly attractive replacement as a.

JVL (52:10)

Not as currency. So it require the Chinese to make a bunch of significant structural changes in their central banking system.

Catherine Rampell (52:19)

Yeah, I mean that.

JVL (52:20)

Right, so.

Catherine Rampell (52:21)

Yes, yeah, so, but, you know, it can still.

JVL (52:23)

The euro is pretty attractive as an old euro.

Catherine Rampell (52:26)

Yeah, but it's. The people have been saying that for a while. There was also a Euro crisis, you know, within very recent memory. So it's really hard to know my friend Martha Gimbel, I don't know if you know her. She's at the Yale Budget Lab. She testified before some congressional committee recently, and she was asked something about the dollar as a global reserve currency. And she had this great metaphor about how it's like at the beginning of a Hallmark movie where the heroine is dating the shitty guy, the shitty boyfriend in New York City, and she knows she can do better, but she hasn't found anything better, so she just sticks with him. And we haven't gotten to the plot point in the movie where she goes home to her small town and meets the guy who runs the Christmas tree farm or whatever.

JVL (53:18)

What she was looking for was right in front of her the whole time.

Catherine Rampell (53:22)

So in this analogy, we realize we're stuck with the bad bow, but we don't have a more attractive alternative yet. That, I think, is how a lot of the world thinks about this. So if a more attractive alternative were to materialize, I think that that could give us a run for our money. No pun intended. Or maybe pun intended. But it's not. We're not there yet. And actually, one ironic thing about what's happening.

JVL (53:51)

I'm not predicting this. I mean this was a. What keeps JVL up at night? Like, when I look at what is the worst possible outcome here, that's the one I say we don't want. That would be bad.

Catherine Rampell (54:01)

That would definitely be bad. That would be bad for a ton of reasons. And it would force us to make fiscal decisions that we are not prepared to make. And no, in neither party. What was I going to say? Yeah. Oh. What I was going to say was that one irony of all of this is that like, even as the dollar seems like it's become less attractive, maybe because of the petrodollar stuff, maybe because of the rule of law stuff, actually the dollar has appreciated against a basket of currencies in the last month. I want to say, and it looks like that for now is just a flight to quality, that people are freaked out about the state of the global economy. And for now, again, the US Dollar still looks like the, the best of a bad batch of options. So you, you do see people buying dollars even as they're dumping, they seem to be dumping Treasuries. You know, bond rates are going up.

JVL (54:57)

They seem to be bitcoin way down too. I thought you said there was a flight to corporations quality, Catherine. Bitcoin. Bitcoin is down from 8237 to currently 73 6. Holy moly. I hadn't checked in on the bitcoin in a while.

Catherine Rampell (55:12)

Yeah.

JVL (55:12)

Wow.

Catherine Rampell (55:12)

Gold. People have been dumping gold. That's probably like, I mean, I'm not really sure what's going on there, but I would guess it's, you know, maybe there are a bunch of margin calls and people are saying like it's not so much about. They don't, they don't think gold, gold is a useful hedge against inflation anymore as like they just need to raise cash.

JVL (55:29)

If we start talking about gold here, the gold bugs to come after us and be like, no, you don't understand. So I want to take us home with something great that we got news that Donald Trump is going to put his signature on US currency, also putting his face on the gold commemorative coin and the normal dollar coin that he's going to mint for himself. I mean when you put that next to, hey, he started a war which could cause a global depression. It's very small potatoes and who cares?

Catherine Rampell (56:06)

Yeah.

JVL (56:06)

On the other hand, I care a little bit. Do you care at all about this? Because I look at this and I'm like, this is Banana Republic shit.

Catherine Rampell (56:14)

Yeah. But like, we're so far down the path of Banana Republic shit already that it's a little hard to get too animated about it. It's terrible. And in any other administration.

JVL (56:24)

Three minutes.

Catherine Rampell (56:25)

Yes.

JVL (56:25)

All I'm asking for is three minutes. We don't have to, we don't have to write a dissertation on it. We do not have to say that his signature on the dollar bill is issue number one for the next Democratic president like that.

Catherine Rampell (56:38)

Yes. But can we not look past it?

JVL (56:41)

That's what. I just don't want to look past it. I feel like we look past so much stuff now because, like, well, at least he didn't shoot somebody in the streets of Minnesota, you know? And like, well, if that's the bar, if mass agents of the state executing people on the street is the bar of what we can care about, that seems bad to me.

Catherine Rampell (56:58)

Yeah. Oh, I totally agree with that. It's. It's hard to find the bandwidth. Yeah.

JVL (57:02)

Cook for me on the signature.

Catherine Rampell (57:05)

Yeah. It's. It's so narcissistic. And it's so Trump, though. Like, he's all about putting his name on things. Right. He's all about. His whole career has been about slapping his name on buildings and sneakers and Bibles and everything else, and now he's putting it on the money. I will say it will be increasingly difficult for him to call this Joe Biden's economy when his, his signature is literally on the money. The money as it maybe gets debased. There's like some, some poetic justice to that, I guess, that he's going to put his, his face and his signature on, on currency as they become less valuable because of things he is doing. That is because of inflation. I don't know. Do we have the statement from Bessant? This stuff is just like, so unctuous. Yeah. Under President Trump's leadership, we are on a path toward unprecedented economic growth, lasting dollar dominance and fiscal strength and stability. All the things we just said may be at risk. There is no more powerful way to recognize the historic achievements of our great country and President Donald J. Trump than US Dollar bills bearing his name. And it is only appropriate that his historic. That this historic currency be issued at the semi quincentennial. And then you have the treasurer whose name is getting, I believe, knocked off of the dollar bill, also falling all over himself to talk about America's golden age economic revival. It's gross.

JVL (58:38)

It's undeniable. I don't think the word undeniable means what he thinks it means.

Catherine Rampell (58:43)

Well, so you tell me your thoughts. I'm sure you have much more eloquent views on. On what this means for our republic.

JVL (58:51)

I mean, it just, it underscores for me the absolute centrality of any reform movement to tear down all of this. And I mean, this is. This was like a long running debate with me, Sarah and Tim where I was like, hey, if we get a Democratic president. And by Democratic, I don't mean like member of the Democratic Party. I mean it could be a Republican who's not an authoritarian.

Catherine Rampell (59:22)

Small D Democratic, Small d Democrat.

JVL (59:24)

Right. It is imperative that they tear down the ballroom and simply rebuild the east wing exactly as it was. It doesn't matter what it costs because. Because the message to aspiring authoritarians has to be, you can do what you want, but there is no throne. Whatever you do, we will tear down and put it back the way it was. You don't get to leave your mark. This is part of that. You know, like I, I think that all of those dollars with his signature on them should get pulled out of circulation. We're going to replace them one for one. And it sounds stupid and sounds silly because it is just symbolic. And does it really matter?

Howie Mandel (59:59)

No.

JVL (60:00)

Does it matter as much as a war or ice? And you know, should, should you prioritize tearing down DHS and reassigning the various agency functions within DHS to other places that you can rebuild from the studs up? Yes, that's more important. But the symbolic stuff is important too. There's a reason Trump does it, right? It's, it's. This is all part and parcel of conveying to the, the populace, to the demos that you have to submit because everybody's behind it. And you know that they're all behind it because look at this. We just built this big thing right here. You know, look at my names on this. You want to go to Yellowstone national park, we got to get your card. And my name is on that card. And if you put a sticker on your card to cover up my face on the card, the I'm going to tell the park service that they can't let you in. Did you have you followed that this is a thing. So, yeah, like that is an ins. That is something that would happen in like Nikolai Chashaskus, you know, regime where, oh, you are disrespecting the great leader. No, if you put a sticker over his face that we've put it on your card, then we shall not admit you to the grocery store. I just know these things aren't important. But yes, they're very important. And they're so low stakes that they should all be torn out root and branch as a. As a means to send a signal both to the populace and to society about what we will and will not tolerate. But even more than that, to send a signal to the next aspiring authoritarian. There. That's my rant. Boom.

Catherine Rampell (61:30)

I support that mic drop. Yep. That's great.

JVL (61:33)

All right, Catherine, this was a lot of fun. I can't believe we did this for a full hour. I promise I'll do it shorter next time. Everybody else, more petrodollars with more petrodollar talk. Yeah, we're gonna get real deep into basis points next time. Everybody else, thank you for being with us. We'll be back next week. Do me a solid hit like hit subscribe on the channel. It actually helps us more than you could possibly know with the algorithm. And we will be back on Saturday live with reports from various no Kings rallies all across the country. I will be hosting. I'll be sitting in the big chair trying to direct traffic and it should be a good time. Catherine. Thank you, my friend.

Catherine Rampell (62:11)

Thank you, everybody else. This is fun.

JVL (62:13)

Good luck, America.

Howie Mandel (62:16)

The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history. History as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly the king and wallow. $267 million gaming in an epic global gaming league video game showdown. Plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now@globalgamingleague.com that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level up exp Tyler reddick here from

JVL (62:47)

2311 Racing Victory Lane.

Howie Mandel (62:50)

Yeah, it's even better with Chumba by my side. Race to Chumbacasino.com, let's Chumba. No purchase necessary. VTW Group void where prohibited by law. CTNC21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino. The Global Gaming League is presented by Atlas Earth, the fun cashback app. Hey, it's Howie Mandel and I am inviting you to witness history as me and my How We do it gaming team take on Gilly the King and Wallow. Two six seven's million dollars gaming in an epic global gaming league video game showdown. Plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist Travy McCoy. Watch all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now@globalgamingleague.com that's globalgamingleague.com in partnership with Level Up Expo.