Connect with me on Substack: maggielake.substack.com 00:55 - Why Ed Yardeni Remains Bullish 02:00 - Concerns about Recession Fears and Market Bubbles 03:00 - China’s Deflationary Impact on Global Inflation 5:50 - Productivity Boom: The Key to Economic Growth 08:05 - Understanding Inflation and Market Sentiment 11:25 - The Roaring 2020s Scenario 16:05 - Global Geopolitical Risks and Economic Impacts 18:05 - Gold at Record Highs: What’s Driving Demand? 19:00 - Fiscal Spending and Bond Vigilantes 24:00 - Oil Prices and Bond Yields: Key Correlations 29:00 - Managing Stock Valuations Amid Market Enthusiasm 33:50 - Portfolio Strategy: U.S. Stocks vs. Global Markets 36:00 - Closing Thoughts: Staying Balanced in an Optimistic Market
Not a Yank, Singaporean. Ma'am you do need to push back on your interviewee spew sometimes, to clarify & explain their casual causative chain of logic. This bud seems divorced somewhat from reality as to the relationship, btw the US Treasury & as to what are the outer bounds of what the Fed can actually do & as to whether there some kind of collusion btw both. It's possibly not as independent as he seems to very explicitly imply. Maybe it was true during the Volker era, but it's quite debatable as to how true it is now.
This is an economy of the haves and have-nots. For those heavily invested in the stock market, wealth is increasing. This is happening because the liquidity injected into the system has been spent on consumer items by the middle/lower middle class, and saved and invested (and is growing) by the upper middle class. The problem is that inflation is creating a condition where so many are losing ground, living pay check to pay check with no social mobility. They can't afford a car, a home, and even groceries are to the point that their options are diminishing. Ed Yardeni might as well say "then let them eat cake".
I think you''re correct. This is the bifurcation we've seen happening since the GFC. This is the phenomena that lead to WWII, the American Civil War, The American Revolution. Have you heard of Neil Howe by chance? The Fourth Turning is real and it's coming to a USA near you.
If you allow me to print $14 trillion and sprinkle it across the US economy for the past eight years, I’ll show you a real good time too. without this massive deficit spending, the US economy would collapse. Way of life is built on debt. How long can the party go for, we’ll see.
There may be a productivity boom coming, but there was one in the 1920’s and it led to over production and deflation. In the meantime, we can have a melt up in the stock market.
Tariffs on Chinese goods went from 5% to 25% under Trump, that means everything from China is now 20% more expensive, it's bewilders me that we don't hear more talk of this.
It's not linear. China has also gone through a very rough period over that same timeframe. Manufacturers slashed list prices as large inventory buyers turned to other markets.
@@avernvrey7422 A 20% increase in tax on goods is a 20% increase to the consumer, there's no alternative explanation. The convoluted logic here is to dissuade sales by increasing the cost of Chinese goods to encourage the purchase of American made Goods (nonexistent now), that's a delusion, we will never be able to compete against their labor costs, regardless how expensive you make Chinese goods.
I believe there is a recession at hand when only 12k net jobs were created in which the government hired hired more workers than the private sector lost.
He never said that. He said people at the bottom, ie hourly paid retail/fast food jobs, which is true. you never heard of cali 20$ an hour minimum wage.
@@lawLess-fs1qxhe does exactly what he claims bears do. He begins with a conclusion: the economy is strong. He then finds ways to interpret data in a way that supports this faith based idea. In the case of wages keeping up with inflation, the way in which he ignores reality to support his view is by comparing the wage increases of low income earners to the inflation rate numbers that are an average of all consumers. So the low income earners experienced more inflation than wage gains, but he figures out how to convince himself of the opposite.
@@lawLess-fs1qx(food, transportation, and shelter saw more inflation than other segments of the economy) So a low income earner for whom food, transportation, and shelter is 100% of their expenses experienced more inflation than a wealthier person who has lots of frivolous expenses that didn’t go up as much in price
Wages have not kept up with inflation, idk what metrics you're looking at Ed. Average wages since 2019 up about 25% while M2 up about 38%, assuming those government figures are accurate. But if we use the metrics for inflation that they used in 1980s, which we should, then without question, wages have not remotely kept up with inflation. But what's most troubling for me is the labor market. We've not once gotten into an uptrend in unemployment, and avoided a recession. Every time without fail in history. This is not me being as Ed calls, "a perma bear" this is me looking at something with a 100% accuracy at predicting recessions, and becoming bearish. To be bullish right now is to suggest "this time is different" when we don't have any indication that it is.
To be fair since 08 we have been printing money to brute forces are way out of them and all that has been done is kick the can down the road probably making the next downtown much worse. When will it happen nobody knows and like 08 and the recent recession it will happen quik and fast leaving everyone no time too react. I listen to both sides the bulls and bears and live my life not worrying about it too much but I do prepare for both scenarios
Ed Y is usually right. No doubt about it. But usually isn't always. History does repeat itself. When values are this high I always sit out the songs. Buffett does too. Nevertheless a lot of money can still be made. I just don't want to play near the edge of a cliff. Not selling either.
good to hear a contrarian. Mainstream economists forecast a recession every year for the last 3 years. I got so sick of hearing about inverted yield curves never been wrong.
@@marekan1410 Well he didn’t really talk about anything specific/tangible in any meaningful way, that’s my point. Are you implying that I’m unreasonable because I didn’t single out one of the dozens of tired platitudes tabled in the discussion? Because you’d be wrong about that.
@@marekan1410one example is the way Ed lies to himself about the strength of the labor market. Abysmal labor market data came out in the last week in the form of both payroll data and job openings data
@@marekan1410one example is the way Ed deludes himself into thinking that low earners are doing fine. Because necessities went up in price more than other stuff, low earners, who buy almost nothing other than necessities, experienced more inflation. To keep them from quitting jobs that no longer covered rent, employers had to increase wages for these low earners. Now note Ed’s take on this. He compares the overall inflation experienced by the average consumer to the high wage inflation of the low earners and concludes that even low earners are fine, so what could possibly go wrong 😑
@@marekan1410one example is how he brushes aside unusually low personal savings rates as surely being entirely due to the increasing fraction of spenders who are retirees who have ended the saving-up portion of their lives. Notice there was no attempt at using data to support the idea that the low personal savings rates are due entirely to this effect. He just chooses to believe it, then announces it as THE explanation.
@@marekan1410I recommend Ed’s RUclips channel because of how many charts they DO show, but in terms of how he analyzes the data in front him, I’m consistently deeply unimpressed
Baby boomers pulling money out of their portfolios may be good for the economy, but what about the effect on the stock market? Obvious question that was not asked! Though I appreciate your show and am glad you’re on your own now. Thanks for all of the great interviews Maggie.
Productivity that only benefits the already welathy, is in and of itself a recession. We shouldnt be talking about how the top 10% are doing. We should be talking about how the bottom 90% are doing in part and in whole.
That actually happened up until the late 1970’s.Productivity gains were equally shared by workers and capital. Beginning in the 1980’s all productivity gains were accrued to the capital side of the ledger. In 1965, a worker earning minimum wage could theoretically purchase a house for cash in about 6 years if he saved all his money and spent zero. Today it would take about 25 to 30 years. In my view the problem is that the federal minimum wage is rarely increased to reflect productivity gains. And everybody uses the minimum wage as a reference wage. If the government says $7.25 is a fair wage, all wages are compared to it, pulling all wages down, because that’s the reference wage. To account for productivity, the minimum wage should be around $ 25-30/hr. That would put in in parity with 1965 purchasing power.
@@77magicbus maybe he means if you bought the firms that made up the average then, and rode most of them down to zero, without adjusting or reinvesting... or maybe it was just a thoughtless comment...
I assume that a lot of European savings wil eventually flow into the US stock market while manufacturing goes to India. Like this headline is suggesting "Swiss companies are investing more in India, encouraged by a new trade deal with European Union." @@maggielake-talkingmarkets
If retailers think the market will fall, of course it will go the opposite way. Election years are historically bullish, post election years also usually bullish, but when does the party end ? The pullback before election day is very common, so unless price breaks support we're still in an overall uptrend. In 2008 the market did tank, so watch for the break of support(s)
"Who would have thought that the car would supplant the horse when the horse has been a dependable form of transportation for thousands of years?" It's called TECHNOLOGY my friend. Gold doesn't have it. Crypto does.
Maggie, please ask about the yield curve control as a response to rising bond yields, YCC will neutralize the power of bond vigilantes as long as government is OK with rising inflation
Connect with me on Substack: maggielake.substack.com
00:55 - Why Ed Yardeni Remains Bullish
02:00 - Concerns about Recession Fears and Market Bubbles
03:00 - China’s Deflationary Impact on Global Inflation
5:50 - Productivity Boom: The Key to Economic Growth
08:05 - Understanding Inflation and Market Sentiment
11:25 - The Roaring 2020s Scenario
16:05 - Global Geopolitical Risks and Economic Impacts
18:05 - Gold at Record Highs: What’s Driving Demand?
19:00 - Fiscal Spending and Bond Vigilantes
24:00 - Oil Prices and Bond Yields: Key Correlations
29:00 - Managing Stock Valuations Amid Market Enthusiasm
33:50 - Portfolio Strategy: U.S. Stocks vs. Global Markets
36:00 - Closing Thoughts: Staying Balanced in an Optimistic Market
Not a Yank, Singaporean. Ma'am you do need to push back on your interviewee spew sometimes, to clarify & explain their casual causative chain of logic. This bud seems divorced somewhat from reality as to the relationship, btw the US Treasury & as to what are the outer bounds of what the Fed can actually do & as to whether there some kind of collusion btw both. It's possibly not as independent as he seems to very explicitly imply. Maybe it was true during the Volker era, but it's quite debatable as to how true it is now.
This is an economy of the haves and have-nots. For those heavily invested in the stock market, wealth is increasing. This is happening because the liquidity injected into the system has been spent on consumer items by the middle/lower middle class, and saved and invested (and is growing) by the upper middle class. The problem is that inflation is creating a condition where so many are losing ground, living pay check to pay check with no social mobility. They can't afford a car, a home, and even groceries are to the point that their options are diminishing. Ed Yardeni might as well say "then let them eat cake".
I think you''re correct. This is the bifurcation we've seen happening since the GFC. This is the phenomena that lead to WWII, the American Civil War, The American Revolution. Have you heard of Neil Howe by chance? The Fourth Turning is real and it's coming to a USA near you.
Get out of the office and drive around, Ed. The market is NOT the economy.
If you allow me to print $14 trillion and sprinkle it across the US economy for the past eight years, I’ll show you a real good time too. without this massive deficit spending, the US economy would collapse. Way of life is built on debt. How long can the party go for, we’ll see.
Great convo!
Another great video
I appreciate that, glad you enjoyed it!
There may be a productivity boom coming, but there was one in the 1920’s and it led to over production and deflation. In the meantime, we can have a melt up in the stock market.
Tariffs on Chinese goods went from 5% to 25% under Trump, that means everything from China is now 20% more expensive, it's bewilders me that we don't hear more talk of this.
It's not linear. China has also gone through a very rough period over that same timeframe. Manufacturers slashed list prices as large inventory buyers turned to other markets.
@@avernvrey7422 A 20% increase in tax on goods is a 20% increase to the consumer, there's no alternative explanation.
The convoluted logic here is to dissuade sales by increasing the cost of Chinese goods to encourage the purchase of American made Goods (nonexistent now), that's a delusion, we will never be able to compete against their labor costs, regardless how expensive you make Chinese goods.
If they get the old money printer blazing away again everything will look rosy for a little while.
Establishment clown - just ignore him.
Salesman extradonaire. He needs to keep his clients invested.
Ed is living on only one side of the bifurcation.
I believe there is a recession at hand when only 12k net jobs were created in which the government hired hired more workers than the private sector lost.
The man is out of touch. Wages have not kept up with inflation.
He never said that. He said people at the bottom, ie hourly paid retail/fast food jobs, which is true. you never heard of cali 20$ an hour minimum wage.
@@lawLess-fs1qxhe does exactly what he claims bears do. He begins with a conclusion: the economy is strong. He then finds ways to interpret data in a way that supports this faith based idea.
In the case of wages keeping up with inflation, the way in which he ignores reality to support his view is by comparing the wage increases of low income earners to the inflation rate numbers that are an average of all consumers. So the low income earners experienced more inflation than wage gains, but he figures out how to convince himself of the opposite.
@@lawLess-fs1qx(food, transportation, and shelter saw more inflation than other segments of the economy)
So a low income earner for whom food, transportation, and shelter is 100% of their expenses experienced more inflation than a wealthier person who has lots of frivolous expenses that didn’t go up as much in price
Wages have not kept up with inflation, idk what metrics you're looking at Ed. Average wages since 2019 up about 25% while M2 up about 38%, assuming those government figures are accurate. But if we use the metrics for inflation that they used in 1980s, which we should, then without question, wages have not remotely kept up with inflation.
But what's most troubling for me is the labor market. We've not once gotten into an uptrend in unemployment, and avoided a recession. Every time without fail in history. This is not me being as Ed calls, "a perma bear" this is me looking at something with a 100% accuracy at predicting recessions, and becoming bearish. To be bullish right now is to suggest "this time is different" when we don't have any indication that it is.
Always enjoy Ed Yardeni. Well balanced says it like it is.
He’s even more blindly one sided than permabears
@@SigFigNewton and he's right more often than the permabears. Upward bias to the market...
I'll take Buffett's side thanks.
Ha, gl fren
@@xDooksx yeah 79 trillion dollars . good luck he says 😂
Sick of the doomers been shouting recessions since the beginning of time they are sidelined and in extreme denials lmao 😂😂😂😂😂
Stay invested after the election.
Finance industry is 70% sales, and scare tactics sell the "analyst's" products better than saying everything is fine.
To be fair since 08 we have been printing money to brute forces are way out of them and all that has been done is kick the can down the road probably making the next downtown much worse. When will it happen nobody knows and like 08 and the recent recession it will happen quik and fast leaving everyone no time too react. I listen to both sides the bulls and bears and live my life not worrying about it too much but I do prepare for both scenarios
Ed Y is usually right. No doubt about it. But usually isn't always. History does repeat itself. When values are this high I always sit out the songs. Buffett does too. Nevertheless a lot of money can still be made. I just don't want to play near the edge of a cliff. Not selling either.
SP500, without the 7 highfliers, isn't expensive at all.
this guy sounds like a fraud to me.
Me too.
hmm not sure i learned anything on this one, good interviewing tho
That 79$tn figure sounds off…
good to hear a contrarian. Mainstream economists forecast a recession every year for the last 3 years. I got so sick of hearing about inverted yield curves never been wrong.
Glad you enjoyed the interview!
Except he’s not a contrarian.
Pretending that 2025 will be a good year for our economy is the majority view.
A strikingly shallow analysis.
@@marekan1410 Well he didn’t really talk about anything specific/tangible in any meaningful way, that’s my point. Are you implying that I’m unreasonable because I didn’t single out one of the dozens of tired platitudes tabled in the discussion? Because you’d be wrong about that.
@@marekan1410one example is the way Ed lies to himself about the strength of the labor market. Abysmal labor market data came out in the last week in the form of both payroll data and job openings data
@@marekan1410one example is the way Ed deludes himself into thinking that low earners are doing fine.
Because necessities went up in price more than other stuff, low earners, who buy almost nothing other than necessities, experienced more inflation. To keep them from quitting jobs that no longer covered rent, employers had to increase wages for these low earners. Now note Ed’s take on this. He compares the overall inflation experienced by the average consumer to the high wage inflation of the low earners and concludes that even low earners are fine, so what could possibly go wrong 😑
@@marekan1410one example is how he brushes aside unusually low personal savings rates as surely being entirely due to the increasing fraction of spenders who are retirees who have ended the saving-up portion of their lives.
Notice there was no attempt at using data to support the idea that the low personal savings rates are due entirely to this effect. He just chooses to believe it, then announces it as THE explanation.
@@marekan1410I recommend Ed’s RUclips channel because of how many charts they DO show, but in terms of how he analyzes the data in front him, I’m consistently deeply unimpressed
79 Trillion??? 😂😂😂
Baby boomers pulling money out of their portfolios may be good for the economy, but what about the effect on the stock market? Obvious question that was not asked! Though I appreciate your show and am glad you’re on your own now. Thanks for all of the great interviews Maggie.
You think the money disappears once they spend it? Plus, assets include more than stocks.
Productivity that only benefits the already welathy, is in and of itself a recession. We shouldnt be talking about how the top 10% are doing. We should be talking about how the bottom 90% are doing in part and in whole.
He’ll probably pass away without ever allowing himself to realize how terrible for the economy wealth inequality is.
Increases in productivity means higher wages for workers.
That actually happened up until the late 1970’s.Productivity gains were equally shared by workers and capital. Beginning in the 1980’s all productivity gains were accrued to the capital side of the ledger. In 1965, a worker earning minimum wage could theoretically purchase a house for cash in about 6 years if he saved all his money and spent zero. Today it would take about 25 to 30 years. In my view the problem is that the federal minimum wage is rarely increased to reflect productivity gains. And everybody uses the minimum wage as a reference wage. If the government says $7.25 is a fair wage, all wages are compared to it, pulling all wages down, because that’s the reference wage. To account for productivity, the minimum wage should be around $ 25-30/hr. That would put in in parity with 1965 purchasing power.
if you bought the top before the great depression you are still underwater
What? No you aren't. You broke even in about 13 years including reinvesting dividends, 1952 aprox if you didn't reinvest them.
@@77magicbus maybe he means if you bought the firms that made up the average then, and rode most of them down to zero, without adjusting or reinvesting... or maybe it was just a thoughtless comment...
K shaped economy.
Tech workers have lost the most jobs this year. Keep betting on government debt pumping.
@@prolific1518 BUT many of them don't tend to stay unemployed for long. Tech also massively over-hired during the pandemic boom.
@@avernvrey7422 wrong.
Finally! Soooo sick of those permanents on your show! Bring in Warren Mosler or Stephany Kelton to discuss the deficit and inflation.
Ed is full Port Gold and BTC.....Someone is paying him to not panic
Ed you sound shilly. Who is paying you😂
The people whose money he manages? Money managers lose out if heir clients pull 5eir money out
New system Incoming !!!!
Ultimate pumper needs government debt to keep the pump going but wants you to believe the economy is doing just fine.
I'd love to see Ed debate someone like David Rosenberg if Maggie could possibly persuade them to do it 🤞
Thanks for the interview, great guest!
I doubt he’d be willing to put himself in a position of having to counter the actual arguments of people who are beginning to grow bearish
Great stuff, thanks again!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I assume that a lot of European savings wil eventually flow into the US stock market while manufacturing goes to India. Like this headline is suggesting "Swiss companies are investing more in India, encouraged by a new trade deal with European Union." @@maggielake-talkingmarkets
Ed is the best. Thank you.
He pretends to be data based😂
Glad I caught this one
If retailers think the market will fall, of course it will go the opposite way.
Election years are historically bullish, post election years also usually bullish, but when does the party end ?
The pullback before election day is very common, so unless price breaks support we're still in an overall uptrend.
In 2008 the market did tank, so watch for the break of support(s)
🌻🌻❤️❤️🏞️
"Who would have thought that the car would supplant the horse when the horse has been a dependable form of transportation for thousands of years?"
It's called TECHNOLOGY my friend. Gold doesn't have it. Crypto does.
I didn’t know you did interviews outside of Real Vision.
Maggie, please ask about the yield curve control as a response to rising bond yields, YCC will neutralize the power of bond vigilantes as long as government is OK with rising inflation
Time will Tell !!!
Great conversation!!