Charles Payne Show May 9, 2024

Thank you so much Kelly. Alright, join me now. Monetarymacros.com, CIO Joseph Wong, Bianco Research President, and Jane Bianco. We got so much brainpower here, guys. We have to open the doors. Let's, you know, keep it down here. Alright, let me start with you, Joe. First time in studio. And I was reading your work. Let's go backwards. So this balancing act for Jane Powell, you think he'll say, okay, it's okay to cut rates based on some softness in jobs, even though it means longer-sticky inflation. Well, first of all, it's a pleasure to be here. This is a magnificent studio.

非常感谢你，Kelly。好的，现在加入我。Monetarymacros.com的首席投资官Joseph Wong，Bianco Research总裁Jane Bianco都在这里。我们有这么多的智慧在这里，大家都要敞开心扉。让我们保持冷静。好的，让我从你开始，Joe。第一次来到工作室。我读过你的工作。让我们倒退一步。所以，为了Jay Powell而平衡行动，你认为他会说，好吧，根据一些就业疲软情况，降低利率没有问题，即使这意味着更长时间的通胀紧缩。首先，很高兴能在这里。这是一个了不起的工作室。

And I do think that's how it works. So the Fed ultimately is political in the sense that the people who work there, they have certain values and beliefs, right? And when you look at it, when you look at what those values and beliefs are, they are heavily, heavily part of the Democratic Party, right? You can see that in public voting data as well. And one of the hallmarks of being of that view of the value is valuing employment more than inflation. So I think when push comes to shove, we have a little bit higher in unemployment. When we have, even if inflation is still a bit high, I think they're gonna cut. And I think that's going to keep us stuck with higher inflation simply because politically, that's their value system. They're just really, really afraid of unemployment.

我认为这就是它的运作方式。因此，联邦储备系统最终在政治上是有影响的，那里工作的人们都有一些特定的价值观和信仰，对吧？当你看看这些价值观和信仰都是什么的时候，你会发现它们与民主党非常紧密相关。你也可以在公共投票数据中看到这一点。其中一个价值观是更看重就业而不是通货膨胀。因此，我认为当形势严峻时，即使通货膨胀仍然相对较高，他们也会采取削减措施。我认为这将使我们陷入更高的通货膨胀中，仅仅因为在政治上，这是他们的价值观系统。他们真的非常害怕失业。

Jim? You know, I would agree with that, that the Fed value system does lean that way. I would put a nuance on it that the Fed is not necessarily partisan. And what I mean by partisan is they don't sit around the FOMC table and say, who do we wanna vote? Who do we want to win the November election? I don't think they do that at all. But I do think that their political values come in. Where I'll take a little bit of disagreement is, if the Fed wants to tolerate a little bit higher inflation, they're gonna risk a bad reaction on the bond market. Because I think the bond market is comforted when the Fed is on the case, when they're worried about inflation. If the Fed is gonna say, we'll tolerate a little bit inflation, then we'll tolerate owning a little bit less of your bonds and push the price down and push the yield higher.

吉姆？你知道，我同意这一点，联邦储备系统确实有这种倾向。我想要强调的是，联邦储备并不一定是党派的。我所说的党派是指他们不会坐在FOMC会议桌旁讨论，我们想投票支持谁？我们想让谁赢得十一月选举？我不认为他们会这样做。但我认为他们的政治价值观会发挥作用。我对此有点不同意的是，如果联邦储备希望容忍更高的通胀率，他们可能会引发债券市场的不良反应。因为我认为当联邦储备关注通胀时，债券市场会感到安心。如果联邦储备表示，我们愿意容忍一点通胀，那么我们也愿意持有更少的你们的债券，从而推动价格下跌、收益率上升。

So we talked about this a lot for a while. You were in no man's land with no landing, then the bandwagon started to fill up right now. You've kind of adjusted your stance here a little bit, right? Yeah, I was always looking for the idea that we would make a new high in yields at five to five and a half. We got the four and three quarters. So I kind of moved to neutral, only because it's 75% of the way done. What's the old line on Wall Street, pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered? And I'll take 75% and back off.

所以我们讨论了很久。你一直处于没有着陆的无人之地，然后现在开始跟风了。你在这里有点调整了立场，对吧？是的，我一直在寻找一个新的高利率的想法，大约是五至五点五。我们得到了四分之三。所以我有点中立了，只是因为已经完成了75%。在华尔街上有句老话，猪会肥大，贪婪的猪会被宰杀？我会接受75%并退了。

I still think we might give five, five and a half, but it's not that far away anymore. And if we get that without any kind of a major move in the market, I suspect they might start thinking about getting along this market, at least looking for a meaningful bond market rally. You know, Joe, one thing I've been worried about, and I've used it on a show a few times, you know, the Hemingway gradually then sudden. And I kind of thought about it a little bit with the initial job that's claimed support came in significantly higher than expected. Since then, they're saying maybe there's a quirk with the New York data, you know, Wall Street, those circle the wagons quickly when the narrative starts to change. But do you worry about sort of a shock? I'm not sure where it would come from, but it feels like there's a lot of, the economists are too saying one about this. Whether on either side, they believe it's gonna gradually keep going up or gradually go down. And none of them seem to expect any sort of shock to the system.

我仍然认为我们可能会达到五分之五、五分之六，但现在已经不那么遥远了。如果我们在市场没有任何重大变化的情况下达到这一点，我怀疑他们可能会开始考虑在这个市场上进展，至少寻找一个有意义的债券市场反弹。你知道，乔，有一件事情让我有点担心，我在节目中用过几次，你知道，海明威逐渐然后突然。我有点考虑初始的声称支持工作数量显著高于预期。从那时起，他们说也许是纽约数据出了点问题，你知道，当叙述开始改变时，华尔街很快就会收起兵车。但你是否担心会发生某种冲击？我不确定会从哪里来，但感觉像是有很多，经济学家们也在谈论这件事。无论在哪一方面，他们都相信市场会逐渐上升或者逐渐下降。他们似乎没有人预料到任何种类的冲击会影响系统。

So I think you're right to note that the labor market has been deteriorating. We saw that this morning in the jobless claims, we saw that in our info payrolls. I think what the economists don't see, and what they can't see, is that this time around, we have a significant increase in the supply of labor. We have millions of people coming into this country, and a lot of them are illegal, so we just don't know how many. Now, I think what could happen is as we have weakened and demand, and we have this ongoing supply that people just don't know, can't see, but it's there in the millions, we could have a rise in unemployment, a weakening in the job market that is faster than expected. But certain industries, that wouldn't help though. I mean, like these industries that are saying, these aren't necessarily all skilled laborers.

所以我认为你指出劳动力市场正在恶化是正确的。我们今早在失业救济申请中看到了这一点，我们在工资单据中也看到了。我认为经济学家们没有看到，也无法看到的是，这一次，我们的劳动力供应大幅增加。我们有数百万人涌入这个国家，而其中许多人是非法的，所以我们根本不知道有多少。现在，我认为可能会发生的是，由于需求疲弱，以及我们持续增长的一部分供应，人们根本不知道、看不到但是确实存在着数百万人，我们可能会看到失业率上升，工作市场疲弱的速度比预期的更快。但是，对某些行业来说，这并不会有所帮助。我的意思是，像那些行业所说的，这些并不一定都是熟练劳动者。

Exactly. People can't go straight to Silicon Valley and get a job. Right, right, a lot of the people coming, they're not sending their best. So I think in certain sectors, we can have unemployment rates shoot up a lot faster than expected. So rather than a sudden shortfall in demand, I think weakening demand and sudden surges apply. So, Jim, what are you saying now that's most prevalent on your radar? Probably the economy and inflation. The inflation rate has really stalled at around, let me use CPI, above 3%, it's gonna probably be about 3.4, if the estimates are correct for the April CPI report. And this whole narrative that Wall Street has had that we were in this last mile to going to 2%, and Fed officials saying that the inflation rate will fall later this year, there's a phrase that he used called the base effect. Look at the numbers from a year ago, they're very, very low, the inflation numbers. If we get modest or normal inflation numbers now, the year of your number might start trending higher, and that's gonna be difficult for the Fed to be making the case that they're still on the path towards 2% because the numbers won't be headed that way until at the earliest, the fall, only if you get the data to kind of cooperate.

没错。人们不能直接去硅谷找工作。是的，很多来这里的人，他们并不是派遣他们最好的人才。所以我认为在某些领域，失业率可能会比预期上升得更快。所以，我认为不是突然需求短缺，我认为是需求减弱和突然激增。那么，吉姆，你现在认为最值得关注的是什么？可能是经济和通胀。通胀率确实已经停滞在接近3%的水平，让我用CPI，可能会达到3.4%，如果四月的CPI报告预估准确的话。而华尔街一直在谈论的最后一程到达2%目标的说法和美联储官员表示通货膨胀率会在今年晚些时候下降的说法，他用了一个短语叫基准效应。看看一年前的数据，通货膨胀数值非常低。如果我们现在得到适度或正常的通货膨胀数值，那么今年的数值可能会开始上升，这将使美联储很难证明他们依然在通向2%的道路上，因为数字直到最早的可能是秋季才会朝着那个方向发展，只有在获取合作的数据时。

So what do you make, then, Jim, of the, the sort of, I feel like it's become a wild card, housing or shelter? Because when Powell initially began with this rate hiking cycle, it wasn't long after the data was coming in, and it was sort of surprising, it was still a little bit too hot, but the part that was hot was for the most part, things like insurance but housing and shelter. And all the economists have said, well, the way they factor in, the way they figured out, there's always gonna be a three or four month lag, spend like a year lag, and maybe housing is going in the other direction. If that doesn't fix itself, then what does a Fed do?

那么，吉姆，你对住房或庇护这种我觉得已成为一个变数的事情有什么看法呢？因为当鲍威尔最初开始加息周期时，数据出来并不久，令人惊讶的是，一些部分仍然炙热，但炙热的部分在很大程度上是保险等，而非房屋和庇护。所有经济学家都说，他们如何考虑，他们如何想出一个办法，总会有一个三到四个月或者一年的延迟，可能房地产会走向另一个方向。如果这个问题得不到解决，那么联邦储备系统会怎么做呢？

Well, that'll be a big problem because no matter what you think about housing, it is everybody's biggest cost. Whether it's rental or the owner from home. I think what we're missing with the housing numbers is what we talk about with general inflation. The cumulative impact of housing inflation since 2020 has been much greater than people think. So while they talk about housing rolling over the OER, the owner's equivalent rent part of CPI, rolling over and bringing down CPI, it still hasn't caught up to things like Zillow or apartment.com showing 30 or 40% increases in rent. It's only up about 25%. That's why I think it's been difficult for it to come down. It's still trying to correct that divergence. I saw a report yesterday said that 2023, New York rents went up seven times at New York salaries. And somewhere like one out of four people in Manhattan is a millionaire, you have to be. And that's just to get a shoebox apartment.

这将是一个大问题，因为无论你如何看待住房问题，它都是每个人最大的开支。无论是租房还是拥有自己的住房。我认为在住房数据中我们忽略了与一般通货膨胀相关的事情。自2020年以来，住房通货膨胀的累积影响远远大于人们所想象的。因此，尽管他们谈论住房是否超过了CPI中的OER（业主当地等效租金）部分，导致CPI下降，但它仍未追赶到像Zillow或apartment.com显示出租金上涨30％或40％的情况。它仅上涨了约25％。这就是为什么我认为它很难下降。它仍在努力纠正这种分歧。我昨天看到一份报告说，2023年，纽约的房租在纽约工资上涨了七倍。在曼哈顿这样的地方，四分之一的人口是百万富翁，你也必须要是。这只是为了租一个鸽子笼式公寓。

Joe, what's most prevalent for you, Mike? What are you most concerned about right now? So what I'm most concerned about really is the fiscal situation. I think what's really changing going forward is that if you continue to have a 6% fiscal deficit, what you're really doing is you're printing dollars, you're debasing the currency. And that I think throws everyone off course. Are you surprised these bond yields like this, the bond auction rather? I mean, it was a little sloppy, but it's still concerning how much money they're raising. I mean, at some point, do you think that could be a place where we, you know, because you talked about the bond, the philanthropies, I guess, these bond auctions seem to be going off okay so far. Yeah, yeah, I'm really surprised about the bond market. You know, if I were a bond investor and I saw 6% fiscal deficits forever, that so much even merited a special mention in the IAFs reports that then I wouldn't really be buying bonds in these years. So I'm with Jim. I think bond yields should go higher. And I think this is something that perhaps the market, because we've been in a multi-decade bull market for such a long time, you have a lot of complacency here. You have a lot of people who are basically grown up in the world where you just buy bonds and you make money. For 40 years. I think that's changing and that takes time to do filter into markets. Ironically, it's changing right before our eyes, but it feels like a slow motion train wreck. And by the time we all catch on, maybe people wish they saw this segment. And Jim, thank you both very much. Really appreciate it. Thank you. All right, folks, we're going to stick with housing. We've got.

乔，迈克，在你看来，最普遍的是什么？你现在最担心的是什么？我最担心的是财政状况。我认为未来真正改变的是，如果你继续保持6%的财政赤字，你实际上是在印刷美元，贬值货币。我认为这会使每个人都偏离轨道。你对这些债券收益率有没有感到惊讶，债券拍卖呢？我是说，这有点笨拙，但筹集了多少资金还是令人担忧。我是说，是否有可能会成为我们关注的一个领域，因为你谈到了债券，慈善机构，我想，这些债券拍卖看起来目前还挺顺利的。是的，我对债券市场感到很惊讶。你知道，如果我是债券投资者，看到永久的6%财政赤字，甚至在国际货币基金组织报告中都有特别提到，那我可能不会在这些年份买债券。所以我同意吉姆的观点。我认为债券收益率应该上升。我认为这可能导致市场转变，因为我们已经经历了几十年的牛市，市场中有很多自满情绪。有很多人在一个你只需买债券就能赚钱的世界长大。40年了。我认为这种情况正在改变，这需要时间渗透到市场中。讽刺的是，这种情况正在我们眼前发生，但感觉像是一场慢动作的火车撞击。当我们都意识到之时，也许人们会希望他们早点看到这一段。吉姆，谢谢你们两位。非常感谢。谢谢。好吧，我们继续关注房屋问题。接下来我们有……。