C (3:58)

Buckle up. I have learned things and I'm going to try to explain them to people who may be like me. And when they hear the carry trade, they're like, what? And then when they hear the carry trades unwinding and it's disturbing the whole global economy, they're like, what? What? I have been trying, picking away all week, trying to make sure I understood this. I even woke up in the middle of the night and I was like, I understand the carry trade. And then in the morning I was like, do I? So basically, Japan, for at least the last 15 years, its economy's been stagnating. It hasn't had any inflation, it's had deflation. And it's been able to borrow money or issue bonds at very low, low rates. And that has been good for the rest of the world and for investors because they go over to Japan, they borrow the yen because it's cheap, then they go take the yen and then they use it to buy debt with higher yield overseas and around the world. And that has enabled Japan to keep going economically.

A (5:05)

It hasn't really helped Japan that much, to be honest.

C (5:08)

Yeah, actually, its economy has been trash. And Japanese investors, because they don't get very good yield at home, they take their yen and they go and they invest it other Places and all their money, all the Japanese investment has been going overseas to the US but now something has changed in Japan.

A (5:29)

Okay, so let's just stop right there and see if we can recapitulate because this is the really big mega, mega force that has been driving capital markets around the world for decades. As you say, is this thing called the yen carry trade. There are lots of other carry trades, there are lots of other funding currencies. Anytime you borrow in one currency and invest in another currency, that's a carry trade. But the big one, the mother of all carry trades, has always been yen dollar. And the simplest form of the yen dollar carry trade, as you say, is just Japanese pension funds, insurers, housewives, anyone with yen takes one look at the bond market. And by the way, Japan is a little bit like Germany in that they don't really invest in stocks there. Like retail investors don't invest in the stock market. They just invest in bonds. And they look at the bond yields that are on offer and they're like 40 year bonds yielding 1% or something. And they're like, I'm not going to invest my money at 1% for 40 years. So they take their money, they convert it into dollars, they buy treasury bonds, and they buy not just treasury bonds, but corporate debt and all manner of other European debt. And all of that money coming in from Japan, from Japanese investors is great, like really cheap money that can fuel growth in the United States and Europe and around the world. And then that is multiplied by hedge funds basically, who go into Japan and they don't have any money, but they're hedge funds, so they can borrow money. So they go into Japan and they borrow a whole bunch of money in yen, pay 1% interest, then they have coffers full of money that they then turn around and invest in treasury bonds or corporate bonds or whatever. And so all of that money which is borrowed in Japan winds up getting invested in America. That helps US Growth, European growth, and all the rest of it. So that massive carry trade has been super important.

C (7:15)

Yeah. And I think Bloomberg said something like $5 trillion in Japanese capital is deployed, like around the world. So basically, like cheap Japanese money has fueled investment around the world.

A (7:27)

Yes.

B (7:28)

Okay.

A (7:29)

And this is all based on the stylized fact, which is a fact or has been a fact for as long as I've been a financial journalist, which is longer than I care to admit. The interest rates in Japan are very near zero. They're like somewhere between 0 and 1%. They always have been, they always will be. You can just kind of trust in that. And yet I wake up this morning, I get out of bed, I stretch, I stumble over to the coffee machine and what does it tell me? The coffee machine that says felix, long dated Japanese government bonds are yielding 4%. And I'm like, what? Have I had my coffee yet? And I drink my coffee and my coffee machine is, yes, I am not lying. JGBs are yielding 4%. It is absolutely wild. This is completely unprecedented. And what that means is that Mrs. Watanabe, the bond investor, she doesn't need to do all manner of demand around investing in foreign currencies and taking currency risk and all the rest of it because she can get 4% on her JGBs now. And this carry trade has just gone away.

B (8:28)

I have two questions. Yeah, number one, where do you get a talking coffee machine?

C (8:32)

Yeah, I was wondering about that too.

A (8:34)

Okay, maybe that was. Maybe that was like autistic license number.

B (8:38)

Two, because of this, are we secretly propping up the yen?

A (8:43)

Who's we?

B (8:44)

The US Government.

A (8:45)

The US government has nothing to do with this. The US government has really got nothing to do with this because this is just a function of low interest rates in Japan and higher interest rates in the US which has been the case for decades.

B (8:57)

Yes, but in the prep, we did read a piece speculating that the government was trying to prop up the yen because of what you're describing this morning is not great for the U.S. no, it is great.

A (9:08)

Okay, so the unwind of the carry trade is not great for the US but there is no evidence that the United States government is propping up the yen or interfering in the yen dollar anything. And if it did, it wouldn't work because these are huge seismic forces and treasury intervening. Like if it did, it could cause a little blip here or there, but it's not going to have any major effect. The thing that I started was like, these are like really massive enormous forces that govern the world. These forces are bigger than governments. Every so often governments try to intervene in currency markets. The one that everyone is worried about right now or looking at is the European Central bank because the European Central bank is worried about the euro dollar exchange rate and they're worried that the euro is too strong against the dollar. That's making European companies uncompetitive. And they want the euro to be a little bit weaker than it is. And when the euro reaches 120 to the dollar, that's when the ECB starts thinking about, well, maybe we should start intervening and try and keep the euro a Little bit weaker, prevent it from strengthening. So it's not like central banks never intervene, but where the markets want FX rates to be, that's where they end up. And in the grand scheme of things, the number one overarching thing that you always need to remember about exchange rates is they reflect interest rates. So the way to have a strong currency is to have a higher overnight interest rate. The way to have a weak currency is to have a lower overnight interest rate. Because investors, you know, your hedge funds and all of them, they would much rather earn 5% overnight on their money than earn 1% overnight on their money. So they keep their money in the currencies where they're earning 5%, and they sell the currencies where they would be earning 1%.

C (10:54)

But that's only true so far as the currency is considered stable. Like, you wouldn't invest in a currency with a high yield if it was put out by an unstable regime, right?

A (11:05)

So then you get into the Turkey situation, right? We can have like 100% interest rates. We still don't buy Turkish lira because you're convinced that the Turkish lira is just going to implode. So the problem with all of these trades, with every single carry trade, and every time you're investing in any foreign currency, is you worry about what is going to happen to the exchange rate. And you can make money till the cows come home on the carry, but then if the exchange rate moves against you, you can lose it all overnight. And that is what everyone is worried about right now is like massive unwinds of the Japanese carry trade are going to cause the yen to spike. And if that happens, then all of the extra interest that the Japanese investors are getting in dollars is not going to make up for the fact that the dollar has much against the yen, that then they're going to lose money. And we should just stick with Japan for, like, one more beat. Because there is, like, a reason why all of this is happening in Japan. And the Japanese government has been trying for decades to reignite inflation because inflation has been too low and to reignite economic growth. And they've kind of amazingly succeeded. And now what is happening is that after decades of artificially low interest rates, which they have been having in order to try and reignite economic growth, now inflation is a thing again in Japan. And so they're raising interest rates to help keep inflation in check. Also after decades and decades of really expansionary fiscal policy where they've been spending and spending at government level to try and boost the economy that finally seems to be maybe working. And so the economy is growing, the stock market is doing really well. So all of that brings interest rates back to what everyone else on the planet would consider normal. 4% on a 40 year bond is not high by any other standards other than Japanese standards. And so Japan is moving back to what looks like a normal healthy economy with normal interest rates and normal inflation. That's what it wanted. But the adjustment is seismic.

C (13:03)

So I guess then the question just is how seismic and what is the adjustment? Bully for Japan. But we're Americans. What does it mean for us?

A (13:12)

It's not. I mean, there are problems with Japan, right? Because in all of those decades of borrowing, Japan now has government debt which is over 200% of GDP. Right. It makes the US people bellyaching about the US debt look like nothing.

C (13:26)

And they have this new leader, the woman with the nice purse we talked about a few weeks ago, Sanai Takei. She is also talking about cutting taxes though. Even though their debt's so high.

A (13:37)

Yeah, yeah. She's talking about further expansionary fiscal policy. And her political opponents also want expansionary fiscal policy. We're seeing that in Europe, we're seeing that in Japan. In the United States, basically every single politician in the world right now is being expansionary in terms of fiscal policy, which means needing to borrow a lot of money. Especially in a country like Japan, which already has debt to GDP of 200%, that means a lot of demand from the government, from investors. So global investors are kind of happy right now because they have all of these different governments around the world saying like, I want to borrow money from you. And so they're all like competing with each other to see who can pay the highest interest rate, basically, because with a finite amount of money, the investors get to choose where they put their money. And so interest rates go up. That's good for investors over the long term, it's bad for bondholders because the bond, when interest rates go up, prices go down. So on a mark to market basis, it doesn't look great in the bond market. But broadly speaking, it's good for investors, it's bad for taxpayers who have to pay a lot of interest on all of that government debt that is being issued. And this is a global phenomenon.

B (14:41)

What are the downsides of the fact that it is a global phenomenon and that almost every single country is running huge deficits and using that to prop up growth? Or is there a downside on a macro level?

A (14:52)

That's a really good question. What happens when you have the entire world running massive deficits. I think what it really means is it's in over the. It becomes over the medium term, a massive transfer of wealth from taxpayers with income who pay income tax to rentier bondholders with wealth who sit there and clip coupons on their government bonds. It definitely kind of over the medium term would exacerbate global inequality from the, you know, the income to the wealth.

C (15:23)

So lawmakers in the US obviously, but also in Europe and Japan, they don't want to raise taxes and they're running up higher debts. And yes, taxpayers are on the hook to pay these higher interest rates, but they're also not being asked to pay higher taxes technically, which would lower the debt.

A (15:43)

Yeah, exactly. Because if you've got all of this government spending that people want to boost growth, you can fund it in one of two ways. You can fund it via taxes, or you can fund it by borrowing. Right now, I mean, obviously every government does both, but there is a lot of borrowing and they could raise taxes. But ultimately, as a taxpayer, you pay for it one way or another. Either way, you either pay directly in higher taxes or you pay indirectly. In terms of higher debt, interest payments down the road.

C (16:09)

I don't understand how that's me paying indirectly, actually. Is it because inflation is higher?

A (16:14)

It's because you, as a sort of citizen slash shareholder of USA, are racking up this government debt. Like you have. 1300 millionth of the national debt can be thought of as being like your little share of national debt. And so you have, whatever it is, $150,000 of debt that you're paying ever higher amounts of interest on. And your taxes, when they do go to spending money, an ever higher proportion of that tax revenue goes on interest payments on the debt rather than going on spending money for services by the government.

C (16:51)

So we will see some kind of fiscal cutbacks if interest rates stay high and our servicing costs go up.

A (16:59)

Well, so far we haven't. And if you look at the experience of Japan, that hasn't happened in Japan. So the fiscal constraint, the bond market, fiscal constraint on governments has always existed in emerging markets. We saw it very briefly under Liz Truss in the UK when she tried to do some crazy fiscal thing and the bond market revolted and she wound up getting ejected after a month or however long she was in power for. So it does happen in rich Western countries like. Or it did happen once in relatively recent memory, but broadly speaking, we haven't reached the sort of bond vigilante part of the story yet. People worry that we will, but we are not there yet. But we should talk a little bit about what happened on Friday, which is that Donald Trump came out and said, Kevin Walsh is going to be the new Fed chair. Obviously the Fed nomination process is going to be quite fraught so long as Jeanine Pirro is suing Jay Powell. But assuming this does end up happening, and I don't think that there are any really significant objections to him from Congress. The markets loved it. Basically they were like, you are not a MAGA crazy person. You are not like Stephen Myron who joined the Fed board a few months ago. And it's just like, you know, we should cut rates to zero. He's been on the Fed board before. He seems relatively normal. Yeah, he's making requisite sort of grumpy noises to the degree that he needed to get nominated, but he seems vaguely sane. And the markets were like, oh good, he's like broadly hawkish, which means he's going to keep interest rates higher than they would be if you had a MAGA crazy coming in. That means that if interest rates are higher, people are going to want dollars more because they get higher interest rates on their dollars. So that caused the dollar to strengthen against all of the currencies in the world and against, quite spectacularly against silver, which plunged in price by 10% in a matter of minutes, which is not something that normally happens to silver. So what we are seeing here is a really good example of how, just like people kind of expected it was going to be Kevin Walsh, right? Most of Kevin Walsh was priced in. And even though most of Kevin Walsh was priced in, when it finally became official, there were these huge moves because these tiny little differences in like, we are 80% sure that it's going to be Kevin Walsh. To like, we are 100% sure that it's going to be Kevin Walsh. That little change in probabilities could cause significant movements in the FX market, because that's how much the global economy really cares about small differentials in overnight interest rates. Slate MONEY is sponsored this week by Monarch. This is a year. Well, most years are like this, but this year in particular, I've decided that I really need to be a little bit more mindful and intentional about my spending. Sometimes I just find myself tapping my card willy nilly without any real idea of how much I'm spending overall. And this is a story, as you can probably imagine, that often doesn't end well. Managing your money doesn't have to be a struggle this year because Monarch is the all in one personal finance tool that's designed to make your life easier. It brings your entire financial life, budgeting, accounts, investments, net worth, future planning, all of it together in one dashboard, on your laptop, on your phone. You can start your new year on the right foot financially and get 50% off your monarch subscription with Code Slate. Monarch is the go to for a New Year's financial reset. It will help you refuse spending over the holidays, it will help you set a fresh budget, it will give you automated weekly money recaps, and it will help you track your progress towards future financial goals goals so this new year achieve your financial goals for good. Monarch is the all in one tool that makes proactive money management simple all year long. Use code slateonark.com for half off your first year. That's 50% off your first year@monarch.com with code slate.

D (21:28)

Think Verizon is expensive? Think again. Anyone can bring their AT and T or T mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal. So bring us your bill. Walk in, run in, pogo sticking, teleport, if you can ride on the back of a rollerblading yak or fly in on the wings of a majestic falcon. Any way you can bring your AT and T or T mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal on the best Network based on RouteMetric's best overall mobile network performance US 2nd/2025 all rights reserved. Must provide very recent postpaid consumer mobile bill in the name of the person redeeming the deal. Additional terms, conditions and restrictions apply.

E (21:58)

Hi, this is Jonathan Fields from Good Life Project. If you're not using Ironclad for contracts, you could be leaving millions on the table without knowing it. Every contract holds renewal dates, pricing terms and obligations you can't afford to miss. But good luck finding them when it matters. Ironclad's AI instantly surfaces. What matters so you can act before opportunities slip away. That's why they're trusted by OpenAI, L' Oreal and Salesforce. Find the savings hiding in your contracts@ironcladapp.com podcast that's ironcladapp.com podcast.

A (22:37)

What do you think about Kevin Warsh?

C (22:39)

Emily well, I'm still learning about Kevin Warsh. He's one of several Kevins that were under consideration for the job. More Kevins than women. He is a George W. Bush guy. He was, I think, initially appointed to the Fed Board of Governors by George W. Bush, who is now considered like very normal and I guess moderate. It's crazy.

A (22:58)

Come back W. Always forgiven. All is forgiven.

C (23:01)

It's all good. You were great. We loved when you hit the golf ball that time or duck the shoe. Just charming stuff. I know that he works with or is a protege of Stanley Druckenmiller, who's like a big money guy. After he left the Fed.

A (23:17)

After he left the Fed, he went to work for Stan Druckenmiller, who is a famous sort of contrarian. Well, not contrarian, but like, slightly what you might say, structurally bearish. Hedge fund manager, but very successful.

C (23:28)

And I know that Bessant also is like a Druckenmiller man. I saw it on Twitter. Don't ask me more questions about that. And I know that Kevin Warsh is married to a Lauder heiress, and that made him more attractive to the president, possibly because it's like they run the same circles kind of a thing.

A (23:47)

He's a rich person.

C (23:48)

Rich guy. I don't know.

A (23:49)

Rich guy. Trump likes billionaires.

C (23:51)

It's good to have a rich guy.

B (23:52)

Is he tall, though? That's a big Trump criteria.

C (23:54)

Well, Trump said he was central casting, which I don't know if we know what central casting means. Right. It's like the person fulfills the stereotype of law.

A (24:04)

It means you have good hair.

C (24:05)

But, like, yeah, for Trump, it means good hair and looks good on tv, I think.

A (24:10)

But he does. He look. He looks like a central bank governor.

C (24:13)

So did Powell, which is probably why he got the nomination in the first place from Trump.

B (24:17)

So, yeah, the expectations are so low, and this isn't a knock on Warsh, but I think everybody's just so relieved that there wasn't a total maniac that he nominated, because that has happened in so many Trump appointments.

A (24:30)

I think Trump does seem to have been. What's the word?

B (24:35)

Moderated, maybe?

A (24:36)

Yeah, moderated a little bit. We've seen it a little bit in his kind of retreat in Minnesota. We're seeing it like he's not out there railing against the Fed right now. When they announced this lawsuit against Powell, the reaction from the White House was, wait, hang on a sec. No one told us this was going to happen. You know, you don't see Trump, like, vocally backing that lawsuit, which is sort of interesting. It doesn't seem like the White House and the Fed are particularly like, obviously they are at war because there's this lawsuit. But it's more of a Jeanine Pirro rogue faction of the DOJ against the Fed than it is the White House against the Fed. The Lisa Cook lawsuit seems to be sort of petering out a little bit. They had oral arguments in the Supreme Court where the Supreme Court Court basically was highly skeptical that Trump can fire Lisa Cook from the Fed. And again, the markets breathed a big sigh of relief because if Trump can do that, then he could just start firing everyone and replacing them with lackeys. And Kevin Wash has come out and said Fed independence is important. Scott Bessant, the Treasury Secretary, has come out and said that the US Has a strong dollar policy. What this means, no one knows. But there are all of these sort of. In the past week or so, we have seen a bunch of sort of tacking towards normality in a way, from the kind of just blow everything up.

B (26:00)

Trump's biggest sensitivity is just the stock market and how it's performing. And I think the people around him have convinced him that chaos at the Fed is not good for markets.

A (26:09)

Well, I don't know how they could have convinced him of that, given that the stock market is at record highs. I mean, we should also, since this, since we are talking about big important rates and currencies and stuff, we should mention that this is a large part of why the US Stock market is at record highs, is because it's at record highs in dollar terms and the dollar has weakened substantially. Right? So if you are an investor from anywhere in the planet other than the United States, your US Stock holdings are not looking nearly as good as if you're an American. The Americans are all super happy. They're like, oh, my God, s and P7000. But everyone else in the world is like, wait, hang on a sec. What does it benefit me for the S and p to hit 7000 if the dollar has just plunged by 15%?

C (26:53)

I agree with you guys that when it comes to the Federal Reserve, that's been a bit of a quasi red line for the President. I mean, he still tried to fire Lisa Cook, and he still has sued Jerome Powell. But like, the Supreme Court has actually like, woken up around that and I think send fairly clear messages that they're not gonna tolerate that. And Republican congressmen also have sort of like, pushed back. This was like, the Federal Reserve is the one area where he gets some pushback, I think, from Republicans and the Supreme Court. And even on Friday, before we talk, like Senator Thom Tillis, who is retiring, but he's a Republican senator in North Carolina, was saying, I'm not gonna vote for Warsh because this Powell thing is happening. So I would suspect it's possible. You see that Case get dropped to get warsh over the line. That's, that's a theory I just came up with.

B (27:40)

Republicans do view the Fed as a load bearing piece of economic stability, even when they complain about it.

C (27:47)

So everyone cares about the money. The money don't touch the money, touch the poor people. That's fine. But I will say for all that and all the rationality that seems to prevail in that arena Thursday night, the President did sue the Treasury Department and the irs. Like, things are still not even in the money arena. Things are like a bit weird.

A (28:06)

Okay, but that was in his personal capacity, right?

C (28:09)

Okay, yeah, no, sure, it's, it's different. But like in any other moment, any other era, if the President in his personal capacity, through the IRS and the Treasury Department, like, we would be doing our whole podcast about it for $10 billion.

A (28:24)

It is a classic piece of Trump crazy. And like, what is the, Is treasury going to just settle with him? Like, you know, Scott Bessing is like, oh yeah, hi boss. Who am I to say that you're wrong? I'm a big Trump supporter. I think we should just settle for $5 billion.

B (28:39)

You know, there's nobody in Congress or founding fathers like any piece of government that would have anticipated that we'd have a highly litig in office. He would just constantly be suing people.

A (28:50)

But suing his own executive power.

C (28:53)

He runs the government and he's suing it. It's crazy pants.

A (28:57)

To Emily's point, we are living in a world of crazy.

C (29:01)

I didn't say that. I didn't say crazy. I just said that's very abnormal.

A (29:05)

I'm gonna come out and say it's crazy. Do you not think it's crazy?

C (29:08)

I am a journalist. I don't wanna say I feel like.

A (29:12)

Emily is an objective Axios journalist, but Elizabeth will say that it's crazy.

C (29:16)

I'm an objective, clinical Axios, not going to use the word crazy to describe anything. Also, I feel like mental health people, they don't like that word either. So I'm just going to say it's like real unusual, it's not conventional. And any suggestion that like Trump is.

B (29:31)

Being moderated is unhinged a mental health word.

C (29:35)

I don't think it is. I think it's a word about doors.

A (29:38)

The doors. The doors have come off their hinges.

D (29:54)

If you're not using ironclad for contracts, you could be leaving millions on the table without knowing it. Every contract holds renewal dates, pricing terms and obligations you can't afford to miss. But good luck Finding them when it matters. Ironclad's AI instantly surfaces what matters so you can act before opportunities slip away. That's why they're trusted by OpenAI, L' Oreal and Salesforce.

C (30:17)

Find the savings hiding in your contracts@ironcladapp.com podcast that's ironcladapp.com podcast. Try angel stuff for your tushy.

A (30:34)

It's made by Angels soft and strong, but budget friendly.

C (30:39)

The choice is simple. A roll that feels like paradise and.

A (30:44)

Always at a heavenly prize. Angel soft. Angel soft.

C (30:49)

Something strong.

A (30:50)

So it's simple.

C (30:52)

Pick up a pack today. Angel soft, Soft and strong.

A (30:55)

So cool. But actually, I think we should stay on this. There was part of me we've been going back and forth about like, where should we talk about the sort of corporate communications around this? And I think we should actually do this here because it is all part of the same conversation. The consensus around Fed independence and normality that we're seeing with Kevin Walsh being sort of reassuringly nominated to be Fed chair, with the Supreme Court showing a little bit of backbone, with Thom Tillis being like the voice of reason and all of this kind of stuff is being mirrored by corporate America. When Trump was inaugurated, what you saw was all these billionaires sitting behind him in Washington. They're all donating millions of dollars to his inauguration committees. They're all sucking up to him in public. You have Mark Zuckerberg talking about masculine energy and all of this kind of stuff. And you have Tim Cook presenting him with a gold plated or solid gold something. And everyone is doing the sucking up to Trump thing, which seems to have broadly worked for them on a corporate level. And you can see why they do it. It's because it works. And now this week we are beginning to see that broad corporate consensus with Trump almost leading the way, with Trump like firing Bavino and sending in Tom Homan to calm things down and stuff. That broad corporate consensus is like has now moved to say, yeah guys, we should not like quasi civil war in Minnesota with the state and the feds facing off against each other and US Government thugs murdering people in the street. Like that's bad, let's not do that people. And that to me is interesting because it does kind of indicate that there is some kind of self correcting mechanism somewhere in this society still.

B (32:52)

Well, I think it's not that their moral compasses have become sharpened overnight. I think it's that it is bad for business to have the entire state of Minnesota in this kind of state of chaos and a lot of these CEOs who are doing business there.

A (33:05)

I don't think the state of Minnesota is that important economically.

B (33:09)

No, I think it's not just what's happening in Minnesota. It's the idea that ICE can come into. If you have a company like your Home Depot, if they can just walk into your stores and raid people, that's a problem. But also it reminds me of a conversation I had in 2017 with a tech CEO where he said immigration is sort of part of the discourse now. He said, but none of the CEOs give a fuck about it. But we sort of have to talk about it and develop a stance because our employees are affected by it and they care about it.

A (33:39)

Well, they suddenly care about the H1BS and they started this big pressure group called Forward Us and they really tried to push for more immigration and more high skilled immigration and that all fell apart. Now they just shut up about it. Or up until a week ago they broadly shut up about it because they lost that war. But they care. They really do want more immigration quite badly and they are hiring aggressively overseas and not in America because that's where the talent is now.

B (34:09)

Yeah, but this was when they didn't think that the H1B program was going to be threatened beginning of the first term. So I agree with you. Now they do give a fuck about it. But, but a lot of the reaction you're seeing is coming from the workers. First, there's a backlash against Tim Cook right now because the few hours after Alex Preddy was shot, he was at the White House for a screening of Melania and Apple employees were very angry about that. So he had to sort of post an internal message saying that, you know, I don't approve of what's happening, even though I've been hobnobbing with the President. And so I think that's the sort of pressure is coming from labor in a big way, in a way that I don't think it was earlier in the administration. And I think the companies feel like they have to respond.

A (34:50)

This is Emily's beat, right? Because you tell me, Emily, have you seen workers be relatively quiet over the past year and then suddenly noisier? And that that has caused the CEOs to be like, oh, now my workers care. I need to say something or have. The work has always been relatively noisy. And now there's some other reason why the CEO said speaking out.

C (35:13)

I mean, earlier this week there was this open letter from 450 tech workers, some of whom were retired from some of the Big tech companies signing a letter demanding that their CEOs, tech CEOs, like, go to the White House, demand ICE, leave cities, cancel their contracts with ICE. And that seemed to get some traction that I haven't seen. I haven't seen a letter like that in the second Trump administration. Letters like that were like a dime a dozen in the first Trump administration. And even before that, like, the tech labor was so much more vocal active back when interest rates were low and they were high demand workforce. But now they're not. And I think this week that dam broke with this letter and there was just a lot more talk. And I do think Elizabeth is right. The labor pressure was like one vector pushing on the CEOs to say something. And not that they said anything particularly, like strong.

A (36:04)

The term of art seems to be de escalation. Everyone is calling for de escalation.

C (36:09)

Yeah, milk toast kind of a response. But for this era, very notable and very different from anything else. And I think, I mean, partly it's like it's labor pressure and then it's just something happens that's. And it's very clear what it is, and you can't deny it. And I think that's what happened with George Floyd in 2020, and that's what happened with Alex Preddy a little over a week ago. You watch the video and you're like, holy shit, like, how is this happening in my country? And I think that also a little bit really did play a role here, like, as cynical as we always are. I think it has to have played a role.

A (36:43)

My point of view here is that the thing that changed was seeing, like Minnesotans coming out in like minus 20 degree weather in their thousands to demonstrate and be very vocal in support of their immigrant friends and neighbors. And what this showed very visibly and very vocally and at very high volume was that truly Middle America is horrified by what ICE is doing in these towns. And that public opinion is not ambiguous on this. And that gave CEOs the ability to say, well, yeah, if I say that we need to de escalate. If I say that what is going on in these towns is terrible, there is almost no one on either side of the political spectrum going to disagree with me. When you see Sam Altman and Tim Cook and the Home Depot guy and all the rest of it coming out and saying, like, let's this word de escalate. One of the reasons I think they can do that is because that is not going to get Ben Shapiro upset. That is not going to get the right like, they're not going to face backlash from the right on that, partly because it's kind of what Trump is saying, too. Even Trump is signaling that things have gone too far. So, like, you can speak out insofar as you're still more or less aligned with Trump and he's not going to disagree with you.

B (38:10)

Yeah. I think for the tech CEOs, too, part of it is their workers are aware, and this came up in one of the open letters, that when the tech CEOs want to march to the White House and demand something, they can do it. They convinced Trump to call off an ICE surge in San Francisco.

C (38:24)

Right.

B (38:25)

And all the workers remember that. And so they're sort of like, well, when you guys want to stop this, you can. And I think it's easier for these CEOs to put out a public statement that makes it sound like they're out on the same side as the workers. But how many of them are actually marching to the White House and demanding anything? None of them, as far as I can tell.

A (38:42)

I think, though, Cook did talk to Trump about it. I don't think he's lying when he said he talked to Trump about it.

B (38:47)

What does that mean?

C (38:48)

It's really democracy in action, what Felix just described. That's it. That's why we have the First Amendment to protest, so you can make a big stink, so that lawmakers have to pay attention to you.

A (38:58)

And also, I'm just going to come out and say the blindingly obvious here, which is that Trump is not an ideologist. You know, Stephen Miller is an ideologue, but Trump is not an ideologue. Trump has this preternatural ability to sort of understand the temperature of his base. And I think he knows that his base has reacted really badly to this, partly because of just like, the killing people thing, and partly because also they've totally fucked up on the Second Amendment thing. So he lost, like, the nra. And when you lose the nra, that's not good if you're a Republican.

B (39:29)

Yeah. There was Greg Abbott, the governor of Texas pushed back. And you can just almost see the scene playing out in their minds, which is that Vice sort of goes into a big Texas city where almost everybody does concealed carry and they shoot a bunch of white guys. Some of them are going to be Republicans. They want ICE generally to least recognize that having a gun does not make someone inherently a criminal. Which Trump said something to that effect early in this news cycle, and then he sort of walked it back because that backlash was so swift.

C (40:00)

This is all not to say, to be clear, like, Trump is talking de escalation and this Bavino fellow was demoted, but doesn't mean that the White House has stopped its crackdown on immigration.

A (40:11)

But I do think that the temperature's changed. I do think that the Stephen Miller targets for the number of deportations have always been massively unrealistic. He was pushing very hard on Kristi Noem and ICE to just deport more and more people and be more and more aggressive because he is the ideologue. And now he's run up, I think what Emily is saying, like, he's run up against democracy in various different ways and forms. And does the official administration deportation agenda remain in place? Yes. But have we now realized, like, where the line is? Like, you cannot cross this line because then the entire country will go against you. Yeah, I think maybe we have.

C (40:58)

But the line, I mean, it's so. The line is just like, don't shoot a white guy in the street. You know what I mean?

A (41:06)

Yeah.

B (41:07)

There has been some internal backlash against Miller in the last week, and I haven't seen that so far. I mean, he's been sort of, surprisingly not is visible to people. Like, whenever I talk to MAGA people, they sort of dimly know who he is.

A (41:21)

There was this very interesting Axios story where quote, unquote, friends of Kristi Noem basically said, don't blame me. I just did what Steve told me to do. And basically just trying to blame her boss, Stephen Miller, who's not her boss, to be clear. He's just like some shadowy Rasputin type figure floating in the shadows of the White House. But everyone kind of understands that he has more power than she does.

B (41:46)

Is there a polymarket bill and who gets thrown under the bus next or first?

A (41:52)

I mean, this is the other thing we should say. We're a year into the Trump administration, this one, this time, eight years ago, in the first Trump administration, it was just pure fucking chaos in the White House. And I can't count how many Cabinet secretaries had been fired and turnover and Scaramucci's and all the rest of it. And we have not seen that this time around. Like, we haven't seen a single cabinet change. Right. As far as I can remember.

C (42:16)

Yeah, we had a story, one of my colleagues wrote it just about Trump not really firing anyone in this second administration. He picked people that were really loyal to him. And in the worst case scenario, when he needs to push them out, he just puts them in different jobs.

A (42:32)

The only person who really Got pushed out was Elon, and he was not.

C (42:34)

Really, but he's, like, back in the.

A (42:36)

Fold now, and no one was pretending that he was there permanently anyway, even to the point at which, like, to get back to the Fed, Trump said, like, yeah, I really thought that Kevin Hassett would be great as a Fed chair, but I didn't want to move him to the Fed because I really like him here in the White House talking to me, doing his economic counseling. So, like, Trump is, for the first time that I can ever remember showing loyalty to his own cabinet and his own appointees, which he never showed that in the first term.

B (43:06)

I don't think that's loyalty, though. I think the point is, this time around, they've kind of people, he's not firing them.

A (43:11)

Him, which is what he normally does.

B (43:12)

That's true, yes. But I think the people who decided that they were going to work with Trump this time around, that sort of cleared out all of the moderates who were like, well, maybe I can go work at the White House and temper what he wants to do now. Everybody who went in for the second term knew what they were getting into, and they were just completely on board with it.

C (43:31)

I think this makes Trump more like a corporate executive because there is this tendency once you get, like, higher, high enough on the corporate ladder, you don't, like, straight up get. Get fired. A lot of times, you know, you get, like, kicked into, like, a side role until you, like, gracefully bow out kind of a thing.

A (43:47)

Chairman. It's always a good one.

C (43:48)

Chairman. Yeah.

A (43:49)

Or like chairman emeritus.

C (43:51)

Yeah. And you see it all the time. It happens all the time. It's like this, like, gentle push. It's.

B (43:56)

Maybe we could all convince Trump he can be the Chairman emeritus of the US and then he doesn't have to do any work, but he'll still get paid. I feel like this would be an attractive offer for him.

A (44:07)

Yeah. But he would want, like, a billion dollar salary.

B (44:10)

Can we pay him in crypto?

A (44:25)

We should have a numbers round. Emily, do you have a number?

C (44:29)

Yes. You know, I was going to do the Melania movie for my number, but I'm not doing it.

A (44:33)

Don't do it. Don't be obvious, Emily.

B (44:35)

Also, that was my number, too.

A (44:37)

All right, well, let's start with Elizabeth, since you've given it away. Elizabeth, what's your number?

B (44:42)

My number is 3 million, and that is the expected box office revenue for the Melania documentary between today and Sunday. I have to go see this documentary later today because I'm writing about it. For the nation. And this is out of the $40 million that Amazon invested, plus $35 million in marketing, which is the highest marketing budget, as far as anyone can tell, of any documentary ever. Although I loosely call it a documentary because I don't think it really fits.

A (45:12)

Is it not a documentary?

C (45:13)

She said it wasn't a documentary. So Sean McCreesh went to the premiere at the Kennedy center, which is currently suing to keep its name, the Kennedy Center. And apparently the first lady walked on stage and said, some have called this a documentary. It is not. And she said, it is a creative experience that offers perspectives, insights, and moments.

A (45:35)

Moments.

B (45:36)

He's also an executive producer of it. And so I called a friend of mine who is a documentary filmmaker and has won a bunch of big awards, and he was like, every time I hear somebody call it a documentary, I just want to die.

C (45:48)

But why there are all these documentaries now? Not just Melania, but, like, the Beckhams produce their own documentary. It's not uncommon anymore, and people take it seriously.

A (45:58)

I have no problem with this being called a documentary at all.

B (46:02)

Documentary implies a kind of remove where the subject is not dictating what is happening.

C (46:08)

Yeah.

B (46:08)

And if the subjects are executive producers, that's highly unusual. It's basically like just a big commercial for Melania, which I think serious documentary filmmakers are like. That's not really what we do.

A (46:19)

Emily, what's your number?

C (46:21)

26 as in iOS 26, as in Apple's new operating system.

A (46:25)

Oh, the liquid Glass.

C (46:27)

Liquid glass, yes. So one of the updates of the system is your phone will screen your calls for you. So if someone calls from an unknown number, the phone will say, like, who is this? And they have to say. And then you decide, oh, my God, that's so cool. So you guys think it's cool?

A (46:42)

Is this the one good thing about Liquid Glass? That people are actually like, this is good, actually.

C (46:47)

Well, the Journal had a story that said some famous people don't like it because they want their calls to go through. And now they're getting, like, Apple blocked or whatever by this new iOS. So some of them don't like it, but I think most people like it.

B (47:01)

Yeah, I think they'll live. They'll be fine.

C (47:02)

Yeah, they're gonna be okay.

A (47:03)

Have you encountered this in the wild?

C (47:05)

Yeah. First my phone does it, which I don't like, because I want people to be able to call me, even though it means I get 40 spam calls a day. And so I don't like that. And going the other way, I Don't. I don't like getting my calls screened either. So for me, I don't love it.

A (47:18)

So how does it work? Because I haven't encountered this, like every. If someone calls you or you call someone, what happens?

C (47:24)

You get like a robot telling you. What did they say? They say something like, emily can't take your call, or who is this? You have to say who you are, basically. And then you get a text of the person's name, and I think you can hear it too, is how it works.

B (47:39)

I've had a call screener for like two years now because I've had the same phone number for a million years. So every PR person in existence has it. And also every time I write a column that right wingers don't like, somebody finds my phone number and then I just get bombarded. But I was using this app and I think it's called Roboblock, where you can choose the message that people get whenever they call in. And some of them are like the voicemail pretends to be like a fictional company or whatever. Depending on how obnoxious you want to be to the incoming callers, you can change the message.

C (48:11)

Oh, that's fun.

A (48:12)

Oh, yeah. And I should have my number too, which is 70, which is the amount of tons of gold that Tether has purchased over the past year, which is $24 billion of gold. And the CEO tells Bloomberg that they are continuing to buy gold at a rate of 1 to 2 tons per week.

C (48:35)

Is that why gold keeps going up and up and up?

A (48:37)

One of the reasons I think only Poland is buying more gold than Tether right now.

C (48:43)

Crypto is keeping gold. Gold's price is high. Yeah, that's funny.

A (48:46)

Yeah.

C (48:47)

It's not what you think.

A (48:47)

It's a strange world that we're in because the whole point about Tether is it's a stable coin, right? Which means that it's all backed one to one with dollars. And gold is not dollars to be blindingly obvious about it, but I guess they just have so much extra wealth now over and above the number of dollars that they need to back their tethers, that they can go ahead and buy gold at $5200 else. On which note, I think that is it for us this week if you are a Slate plus member. Number one, thank you. We love you. You're great. Number two, we do have a whole other Slate plus segment on Elon Shenanigans, but otherwise, thanks for listening. Thanks for emailing us on slatemoney sleep.com thanks to Micah Phillips and Shayna Roth. And many thanks also to not only Jasmine Molly, but also also Justin D. Wright of Seaplane Armada for producing this here show. And we will be back next week with more Slate Money.

B (50:03)

Foreign.

E (50:11)

Hi, this is Jonathan Fields from Good Life Project. If you are not using Ironclad for contracts, you could be leaving millions on the table without knowing it. Every contract holds renewal dates, pricing terms and obligations you can't afford to miss. But good luck finding them when it matters. Ironclad's AI instantly services what matters so you can act before opportunities slip away. That's why they're trusted by OpenAI, L' Oreal and Salesforce. Find the savings hiding in your contracts@ironcladapp.com podcast that's ironcladapp.com podcast the New Year.

A (50:45)

Brings new health goals and wealth goals. Protecting your identity is an important step. Your info is in endless places that could expose you to identity theft leading to lost funds. LifeLock monitors millions of data points per second. If your identity is stolen, our restoration specialists will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Resolve to make identity, health and wealth part of your New year's goals with LifeLock, save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com SpecialOffer terms apply.