tv Bloomberg Surveillance Bloomberg November 2, 2021 8:00am-9:00am EDT
>> the market is certainly testing the limit of the central banks. >> i think central banks are always behind markets. >> chair powell has slowly morphed from being ultra dovish to a serious tengion of hawkish nest -- a serious tinge of hawkish nest. >> we know the destination is not far away. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz. tom: good morning, everyone. on radio, on television, from our head colder's on lexington avenue in new york city, we are
back in the office, seeing many other people get back to the office, and they are greeted by these turmoils of 2021 and this november. jonathan: the bottom line is demand is still good. you saw that in the inventory commentary yesterday. business remains strong. demand continues to be strong. you can focus on prices paid. underpinning that is really solid demanded to 2022. tom: we are going to do the interdependencies in a moment with jeff you of bny mellon -- with geoff yu of bny mellon. jonathan: the rba has validated the move overnight in australia. in the united states, remains to be seen what happens tomorrow. then it is onto to the bank of england on thursday. they have encouraged repricing at the front end of the curve. that is where it is globally, pricing and higher interest rates and pulling forward that view in the last month or so. tom: we talked to lisa earlier
about shanghai and 30,000 people sequestered at disneyland. bring that over to better pandemic statistics here. bring that to a president who has to return to a fractious washington. lisa: and bring it over to the anti-forecast of frances donald. how do you square the bifurcated nation of the emergence from a pandemic with what is happening in the global economy, when you do have china with self-imposed restrictions that are at least in part going to get worse as you see certain upticks in the virus? tom: commodities, hard, soft. you mentioned iron earlier. why. -- why? jonathan: they want blue skies in china for the winter elliptic's. it is the demand peace in china i don't quite get right now. we talked about the robust demand. we talked about the story that came out overnight. china urging people, local
governments to stockpile necessary goods, food into winter. what is going on in the world's second largest economy? i don't have a clean read right now. tom: i have a clean read. it is called wheat. you have seen this, whether it is rice, wheat, corn, whatever, they are coming out, wheat over eight dollars a bushel. i've got one data point this morning, eight dollars a bushel for wheat. in my span of commodities, that is unimaginable. jonathan: i will get to the major cross asset seems outside of wheat. i am with you though, tom. equities unchanged at 1.55 percent. crude lower 1%, $83.20. we just settled down going into tomorrow. there's even a rally in bdp yields -- in italian bonds. bdp yields a whole lot lower. tom: let's bring in geoffrey yu
of bny mellon on the linkages of these turmoils. you have the same question i asked jon ferro. what is the thing you are watching right now, the many turmoils that are out there? what is the singular market dynamic that matters? geoff: i would just tuck on -- just touch on one word from the rba overnight, possible. the rba said rate through 2024 is plausible, 2023 is plausible. if everything is possible, it is a free-for-all. jonathan: it is different for the rba to do it. could chairman powell say the same thing? geoffrey: absolutely not. he knows that front end will tighten global financial conditions, and that is probably something you don't want to do.
so they've got to be very careful about the messaging, but the fed has the luxury of being the first mover. we have talked about the normalization of inflation, but this has been a process since march. he can just put these things in the market, but it will be a tricky game plan ahead. jonathan: the bank of england encouraged it. the chief economist on thread needle street is saying this one is a live meeting. we have been burned by this kind of language before by the so-called unreliable voice of governor carney. geoffrey: it is a live meeting, but for the wrong reasons. instead of talking about the economy and monetary policy, it has become a live meeting testing the bank of england communication strategy. that shouldn't be what monetary policy is about. on the other hand, given communication is already a part of monetary policy, you could argue the boe has every right to
focus on this. on balance, they will probably move to validate things as well, but i don't think they can have the time, and it can afford to wait. lisa: stocks have remained incredibly resilient with this backdrop of volatility. just to give a sense of how much it has increased, you look at the implied volatility index, it has risen to the highest since the end of the march 2020 disruption that we saw. why are we not seeing the same volatility in stocks? why has there no been -- why has the been no bleed over to risk assets? geoffrey: firstly, this new round of movement is driven by the front end. i think that is what we always expected. i think more people are wondering why we are not seeing any moves higher within 10 year lisa: -- within 10 year. secondly, i think it is u.s.
specific. there's a good indicator of good demand, good wage growth. that starts to offset some of the margin erosion because you can prop up prices. if you look at china, look at europe, far less capacity to pass on prices. on that basis alone, u.s. equities can continue to outperform. lisa: what is the trigger to end this? geoffrey: one is if wage growth and demand growth starts to collapse within the u.s. then we have a problem, and i think that will be reflected in the yield curve as well, and if china within the next quarter or so doesn't show any additional signs of pickup, i think the global economy will have a problem heading into next year. tom: the mother of all banana skins is leverage. we are going to institute leverage into this volatile moment, all the turmoil we have talked about. what is the reality forward, the value at risk reality forward?
how many people are going to lose how much money? geoffrey: we have to look at credit spreads. that's one of the first derivatives in the yield curve. the other banana skin is if terminal rates go up, if trend goes up thanks to investment, genuine housecoat growth, or anything like that, then credit will have an issue. who has been funding u.s. credit over the last years? it is the asian investor, the sovereign wealth funds. they have higher staying power as well. tom: so they are leveraged up. they are the funder of immediate resort, i guess. what do you say to them about which spread to watch? which is the part of the curve that is there tea leaf to know they are in trouble? anchor: -- geoffrey: firstly,
india 10 year is your best benchmark for where people think their terminal rates are. if you go further, if we really want to look for the rate, than also don't forget europe. europe credit spreads, madame lagarde knows that will target credit. tom: you just mentioned the vix rate. let's go nerd right now. how do you judge the dynamics of the rate where negative yields are? geoffrey: that is going to be heavily contingent on where the inflation trajectory is. you're going to get an upward drift in real rates. secondly, what is productivity growth in the u.k.? in the u.k., it is productivity. is productivity going to rise in the u.s. tax to tech and
government -- u.s. thanks to tech and government investment? that is when credit might get a bit nervous. markets, if you look at what the u.s. is telling you, the 10 year is not expecting any rise in terminal rates anytime soon. jonathan: great to see you in the office. thanks for being with us. geoff yu of bny mellon, thank you. let's spend some time on china. a report this morning from several outlets that yahoo! has shut down services in china. "in recognition of the increasingly challenging business and legal environment, not the first to do so. china said increasingly, foreign companies are finding it difficult to operate there. the story for tech has been our story for a long time. tom: huge for semiconductor production out of taiwan. you heard me say this 47 times. i want to know how western banks
adapt to what yahoo! and lincoln are adapting to -- and linkedin are adapting to. jonathan: linkedin is probably the better example with what is happening in china. tom: it may be two years too early. it is business as usual in hong kong. jonathan: for many people, it is not business as usual. lisa: i wonder how different it is for internet companies given some of the restrictions we have seen from chinese authorities in recent week. jonathan: a conversation we need to continue, not just on the regulatory side, but on the demand side of that economy. one to watch, that is for sure. equity futures unchanged on the s&p. all-time highs in america. heard on radio, seen on tv, this is bloomberg. laura: with the first word news, i'm are right. shares of tesla are falling. elon musk says the company has not signed a contract with hertz
yet for that record order for cars. last week, the rental car company said it would buy 100,000 model three sedans for 4.2 billion dollars. that sent shares of tesla rocketing to a record high, but musk tweeted there was no signed agreement and that has a would only sell cars to hertz for the same margin is to consumers. the race in virginia will offer the clearest picture yet of how republicans face the midterm elections in 2022. mcauliffe is betting that the former president's legacy will turn out democratic votes. nancy pelosi plans to push forward with a vote this week on president biden's economic agenda legislation. she's getting pushback from moderates who want a detailed analysis of the full cost and economic impact. that echoes complaints from
democratic senator joe manchin. he says congress needs more time to assess the bill. former opioid makers have scored of the first win in the four year litigation over the drug. johnson & johnson, tesla, and others defeated a lawsuit by local governments in california that claims they created a public health crisis with misleading advertising. the government wanted money to beef up policing and drug treatment budgets. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on bloomberg quicktake, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm laura wright. this is bloomberg. ♪
outstripping the rises in wages? does that become a spiral, where we see prices and wages rising together or doesn't become something that is negative for demand? jonathan: that final point is a key question. andrew hallman horst of citigroup -- andrew hollenhurst of citigroup. s&p futures are just about positive after a record close yesterday and a third day of gains. yields basically unchanged to 1.55% on tens. front ended focus going into the fed tomorrow. wti down 0.7% on the session. tom: some of the other commodities up 100% on a nominal basis as well over the last four or five years. javier blas joins us now. this is your energy conversation of the day.
the movie rights have been off the charts. "the world for sale" winning all kinds of business book nominations and awards this year. i want to talk about the professor a rareness -- professor emeritus who did the research on energy input into food. i want you to walk away from opec and tell us what these energy prices due to wheat, to rice, to corn. javier: you are making a very good point. it makes food very expensive to produce because the price of fertilizer right now depends on the location you are looking at, but it is around an all-time high. with american farmers and farmers elsewhere needing to plan the next crop, they will
face very steep increasing costs. that is one reason we are going to have higher prices. tom: i understand rice elasticity in cambodia is different than california. we all intuitively get that. are you framing that it is an interesting exercise, or are we in some form of crisis linking hydrocarbons into food? javier: i think we are in an energy crisis right now. the prices we have seen for fuels across the board, not only oil at $85 a barrel, but natural gas prices particularly here and in asia. prices will have been equal to crisis in the past. we have seen manufacturing capacity being shut down in europe because the price of energy is too high. the same is happening in india
and china. certainly we are in a crisis. i would not call it yet a food crisis because the price of rice remains contained. so far, soybeans, corn, and wheat is where prices are increasing. if rice joins that, i would be more concerned. rice is the main staple for about 3 billion people on the planet. lisa: a lot of nations have said to opec+, please pump more oil. opec+ meeting on thursday. why have they been so reluctant to attach to the reality other people are seeing, which is that oil prices are likely to keep climbing? javier: also india, we are hearing that behind the doors, china is also complaining. so it is a very important group of consumers putting pressure on opec. opec says that the problem is really on natural gas. i think opec is missing the
point to an extent. the market is extremely tight, but opec is more concerned about the downside. in the winter, we may have another increase of covid cases. demand may suffer going into the future. right now, there's a shortage of oil, and opec is happy letting the market go up. lisa: is there another reason? it seems like francisco blanch, who has been pretty accurate at bank of america, said he's expecting brent crude to go $120 a barrel by june 2022. i have not heard one person say they expect a plunge in the price of oil in the near term as a result of an uptick in covid cases. what is opec+ looking at? javier: i think he he is saying, if i will make a favor to the united states which what will you give to me in return? i think it is a geopolitical play. the united states wants saudi
arabia to lead opec to a production increase. saudi is probably asking for something in return. i think both sides will play a bit of hardball. tom: as we have higher food prices and oil, do you have a tip point on brent, a price where the world that has been for sale forever comes undone? javier: i think we are approaching the point where consumers are starting to feel the pain. filling up the car over the weekend, i realized how much gasoline prices have come up over the past three or four weeks in the united kingdom. i thought, well, that is expensive. i am sure many consumers are feeling the same way. in countries where gasoline is heavily taxed, prices are very high.
so i think we are approaching the point where consumers are starting to suffer, but we have not yet seen any demand destruction that will mean our operating point, that we are taking $100 and $125. jonathan: how much is a leader of petrol right now? javier: 143.9. jonathan: well. 58% -- wow. 58% of that is tax? javier: it goes to the u.k. government rather than opec. you want lower prices, you can lower your taxes. jonathan: javier blas, thank you. that break down there at the end, the breakdown of the price, fuel duties about 57, 58 pence, and the prices on top. tom: we've got other states, i
don't have it in front of me, but select the u.s. states are on the edge of that. to bring you over to the crisis, and then you have an entire nation like indonesia with the size of population, where the government unilaterally comes in and fixes the price of hydrocarbon. jonathan: and who wants to be seen at glasgow right now cutting fuel duty, cutting taxes on fuel? tom: when you've got 400 gulfstreams landing, call it worse than davos, it is tangible. jonathan: dp a little reality -- the political reality is pretty bright, isn't it? lisa: not wanting the political ramifications of the price of petrol as it is. jonathan: my bloomberg terminal writing up with people writing in that taxes are one dollar in new jersey. a lot of people frustrated by that situation. i think they feel like they pay
jonathan: live from new york city for our audience worldwide on tv and radio, this is bloomberg surveillance with tom keene lisa abramowicz, jonathan ferro. your equity market all-time highs. into the bond market, 1.5540. a decision from the federal reserve tomorrow, the bank of england on thursday. $83.68 on crude. fantastic to catch up with the author of "the world for sale." e fantastic. -- absolutely fantastic. my bloomberg terminal did write up with people writing about taxes in new jersey. tom: i would suggest there are
different taxes. jonathan: i'm told it was more than that. lisa: you really want to get into this? jonathan: i do not want to get into this. i'm just reading what bloomberg subscribers are writing in. serves me right. crude $83.73. tom: in lincoln, head of u.s. rate strategy at bmo. what shows you in the bond market now there are people harmed by all of this volatility , all of this unique uncertainty? ian: there are a lot of things we can look at in the bond market. we have seen volatility spike, we know there will be people on
either side of that. if we look at the positional surveys, what we have seen is real money remains short duration. people are playing for high rates. that means the trait is towards lower yields. that is what we have seen as a surprise for good version of this year. tom: what is your guesstimate of how that plays out in two fed meetings? how does that play out when there is a spat for a leveraged spat? ian: i think there is a strong tendency in the futures market to price -- to overprice what the fed is going to deliver in terms of rate hikes. right now we have more than two fit hikes priced for 2022. that presupposes a lot in terms of acceleration of inflation.
as well as a continued improvement in the labor market with no risk from higher prices undermining consumption and weighing on spending into the holiday season. there are a lot of moving parts at this point in the cycle that has me skeptical the fed will be able to deliver in the way the market is assuming. lisa: let's sit on this idea, the pain trade for lower yields. how much lower at what is the trigger? ian: historically, tapering announcements have been positive for tens and 30's so it could well be the passage of the event risk presented by wednesday's meeting that opens the path for rates to grind forward into the end of the year. we dove the budget debate, we have the debt ceiling, we have the treasury department expected to cut coupon sizes.
all of this suggests 10 year yields could end the year in a range of 1.25 to 1.35, and that would be consistent with the trading environment that has been in place for the bulk of this year. lisa: if that is the case and we end up with a 10 year yield of 1.25 to 1.35, do you foresee real yields will go incredibly negative? will inflationary outlook stay where it is even as we see this potential downdraft in yields? ian: one of the fascinating parts of the price action over the course of the last two weeks is in the beginning of october we received more rate hikes priced in while breakevens continued to drive higher and higher consistent with the moves we were seeing in energy. it was not until the last three or four sessions where more rate hikes were happening on inflation expectations and that brought breakevens lower.
i could envision a situation where the fed delivers on tapering, makes it clear the next move will be a rate hike, but not imminent, and nonetheless breakevens continued to grind up from here. it could be the nominal story ended up being one of curtailed inflation expectations, even as we continue to make our way out of the pandemic. tom: what two year yield signals the death of transitory? we are at 0.48%. we have been up .55%. what yield point on a two year signals the end of it all? ian: i have been making the point the market does not own the definition of transitory. the fed owns the definition of transitory. as long as jay powell says the influence of inflation are temporary, the market has to accept that. the best we can do is figure out
any point at which the fed might abandon that definition. i do not see that happening in the fourth quarter. if it were to occur it would be a q1 event. at that point we will already have a two year yield, assuming inflation performs been away -- performs in a way that would force the fed, we have inflation above 65 basis points. tom: i look at the bond market. james sweeney on earlier calling it a ball of spaghetti. how do we straighten out the spaghetti? is it by fed action? is it by market capitulation or market adjustment? who is driving the train into 2023? ian: i would say is a classic tale of two markets at this point. the front end of the market is owned by the fed and they are
setting rate hike expectations which will dictate where two's, three's, and five scout. further out, people are worried about the impact on growth and higher prices forcing the fed to move more quickly than they might otherwise have wanted to move and that is why we are seeing the flattening aspect of the recent price action, which implies if not a policy error, then a policy misstep as the fed tries to navigate us out of the pandemic. lisa: if we talk about a bowl of spaghetti, sometimes this feels like a bowl of spaghetti. i am curious from your perspective, as we look out into the future a lot of people are saying the bond market is sending a different signal than the stock market. stocks are optimistic, bonds are concerned about this policy error. is that the accurate way of reading this or is it rates will remain lower for longer on an ongoing basis once we get over
this and that is supportive of risk assets? ian: i think your latter interpretation is correct and we are in still a very low rate environment. while the upside for equities might be looming over the course of what we have seen the last 18 months, the reality is there is still a solid base for risk assets to continue to perform well in this environment. jonathan: great to catch up as always. in lincoln of the map -- ian l yngen. on the open, we catch up with lori heidel. she is less constructive. tom: you save the gloom for the next hour. jonathan: not everyone is gloomy. tom: there is a guest, lisa. jonathan: lease that be a previous -- ape -- lisa used to
be a frequent guest. tom: i talked to al from new jersey. look for weekend programming in 2022, the real -- jonathan: i miss lisa's old weekend show. just 30 minutes of lisa rating out everything she wants to show with lisa reading out everything she wants to say that you stopped her from saying. tom: namath the real lisa. -- name it the real lisa. jonathan: the risks just happened to be negative. tom: the biggest negative risk is we are all going to davos. it is under negotiating. jonathan: what are we negotiating? tom: the gulfstream. we have the smaller plane. benioff has 22 seats. we cannot get lisa's entourage
on. jonathan: i am happy to start the coverage. when we get out there, we have to reflect that what happened in 2020 in january when china started to shut down at that conference was totally asleep. tom: i am losing the right word. you are right. happy valley stopped for the president of china and maybe there was not enough skepticism. jonathan: nothing. china will handle it. that was the consensus. it was bizarre. no one wanted to talk about it. jonathan: that is the reason there at -- lisa: that is the reason there are so much skepticism around cop 26. you think it will be flop. this is the fear. that is why you're getting announcements on specifics like methane. people are tired of it. jonathan: for a lot of people there is a positive living crisis. lisa: how they will dovetail
that into a cleaner future while at the same time people cannot afford their bills. jonathan: abramowitz bears coming up this weekend. i am assuming you will recorded. at some point in the week. lisa: find to be more work. jonathan: futures up about 1/10 of 1%. all-time highs into tuesday. tom, we like to give you a rest. arrest on the weekend. watching football. i'm very close to writing into see if they will let us guest host a premier league weekend. wouldn't that be cool? maybe they will let us do italian football on paramount. tom: somebody emailed in and said harry kane looks awfully good with saudi money. jonathan: on newcastle. i saw that too. we will start rumors on their show.
none of it is backed up by a source. tom: daniels says no chance. jonathan: from new york, this is bloomberg. laura: with the first word news, i am laura wright. the biden administration is launching an assault on methane and once the heat trapping gas from escaping landfills. the u.s. has more than 90 nations have signed on to its joint initiative with the eu to cut methane initiatives by 2030. president biden calls methane cuts the most effective strategy for closing -- for slowing global warming in the near term. hong kong is tightening what was already one of the world strictest coronavirus policies and will end coronavirus exemptions for senior executives starting november 12. hong kong has not had a local outbreak of the coronavirus since early june. the city is counting on the restrictions to improve the chances of china opening up to cross-border travel.
delays have gotten worse at the world's largest shipping hub. near singapore the backlog was 22% above normal. there were 52 container ships anchored off the port. that is the highest count since bloomberg again tracking in april. the port of los angeles at long beach cap 79 ships offshore. under armour rose in trading after posting quarterly revenue that beast estimates. strong consumer demand for athletic gear offset problems in the company supply chain. under armour expects revenue to rise 25% for the full year. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am laura wright. this is bloomberg. ♪
the front end of the u.s. curve. i say 50 basis points on the two year is nothing more than a benign reflection. tom: what year they are having, ing. i think been late large out with that -- i think ben laidler out with that. lisa abramowicz and tom keene with a very important conversation. this is the hallmark of barry ritholtz. he is a piñata for a lot of people on social. he always backs his statements with adult academic research. barry ritholtz goes back to someone we lost far too young. i remember in 1980 the sudden death of arthur okin of yale university. it was a shocking loss. tell us what arthur okin invented to put us out of our misery. barry: took couple of things.
he is known for okin's law, the relationship between employment and gdp, but his big contribution to the current day and age is the misery index. take unemployment and at inflation and it gives you a state of how bad the economy is for the average person sitting around trying to buy goods and earn a living. tom: p did this in the 1970's and i love the fret -- he did this in the 1970's and i can assure you the 1970's was dismal in so many regards. you are pushing back against the doom clue -- the doom crew calling this the dismal 20 20's. barry: the stagflation phrase keeps getting trotted out. if you look at the state of the economy in the 1970's versus today, they are not comparable. the misery index, invented by
okin hit 20 in the early 1970's and 22.5 by the end of the decade and it averaged well over 15 for the entire 10 years. we are averaging six, 7, 8. we briefly got over 15 in the midst of a pandemic and then collapsed back down to 10 or 11. there is no comparison. jobs, wages, inflation, versus the 1970's. it is not a serious comparison. lisa: how do you price in what we are seeing now? which is different? not necessarily stagflation era but inflation running at a higher pace than wage increases at a time we are seeing slowing growth. how do you position around that into a market that is facing a potentially more hawkish fed? barry: let me push back.
when we look at the 1970's inflation was faster than average wages. over the past few years, wages were up. wages are rising faster than inflation. clearly they are component of inflation, but for the average person they are earning more than prices are going up. let's hold that aside. how to the markets price this in? we are at low rates which have been accommodative. the process of normalization, of reopening is taking place. we are dealing with a lot of various issues that the stock market has done a good job of discounting into the future. last year people were saying the market was crazy. this is a pandemic, it is terrible, things will never return to normal. the market got that right. arguably the market is getting the higher rates and modest
increase in inflation, which is likely to pass as things get back to normal. i think the market is pricing that inappropriately. lisa: when you talk to clients looking to invest their money, to they seem concerned about 1970's style inflation. are they looking for some kind of hedge or they accepting the line wall street has come to say, which is that things are ok? lisa: we get a lot of in -- barry: we get a lot of inbound calls from clients who read something in the media. tom: they watch us, they watch bloomberg surveillance and get messed up. just say it. barry: when they see a well-regarded analyst from a well-regarded firms say that 70's show is in reruns and we will go back to it, it raises concerns. the bigger issue we have been dealing with is i am seeing nothing on the yield sign, what
are my options, how can i get some yield when treasuries are paying 1.6 or 1.70. that is the real-world concern of clients, not an academic this is 1970 stagflation. tom: arthur okin, his iconic 1975 paper, e quality and efficiency. the critics to your thesis say right now we have massive inequality and we have a tech efficiency we are all dealing with. push against that. how do we move forward in our present inequality at the dominance of tech on all of our lives? barry: when i went back and looked at 10 data points between the 1970's and the 1920's, they were all different except one, which was increasing levels of civil unrest, which i found ironic.
the thing we are seeing from technology and inequality is technology is making all of us more productive. during the lockdown white-collar workers triple their hourly output and there was probably a little extra time. they are not commuting, they are sitting at the desk earlier. that said, no matter where we look at the economy, we see the benefits of technology, and even something as simple as a restaurant with a qr code so they change the menu without having to wait to print up new physical copies of the menu. taking orders on an ipad, to showing up in processing a credit card with an electronic device. restaurants were thought to be immune from productivity gains from technology. if it has worked its way to restaurants it is everywhere in the economy.
the inequality we are talking about, we are starting to see companies come to the realization we are getting a lot more out of each worker per hour, we can afford to pay them more. that is part of the reason why we have seen this big uptick, starting with amazon and starbucks and costco, but amazon going $15 let a lot of other companies to do that. walmart figured out our turnover is so expensive we are better off paying more for these people will getting more out of them and that is reducing inequality to some degree. tom: thank you so much love the work, project leon bringing out -- particularly on bringing out the good work of arthur okin. headline on hearst. red sticky. tom keene cannot fit into a tesla. lisa: hearst is a deliveries of tesla's have already begun.
"the countdown to the open" starts right now. >> everything you need to get set for the start of u.s. trading. this is "bloomberg: the open" with jonathan ferro. jonathan: from new york we begin with the big issue. the central bank deluge begins. >> you have central banks struggling. >> yield control abandoning was the first step. >> it seems like the market is ahead of what the central banks are doing. >> the market has undergone a significant front end repricing. >> if the yield curve is talking, is anybody risking -- is anybody listening? >> we will see central bankers who get a little bit too