Breaking news. The Senate confirms Todd Blanche as

attorney general in an early morning vote, 50 to 49.

The nomination is confirmed. Applause broke out on the Senate floor.

What this means for the future of the Justice Department.

Digging into the jobs report. U.S.

employers unexpectedly cut jobs and the unemployment rate fell.

It is the fall in unemployment rate that's due to the wrong reasons.

What it means for the fed and interest rates.

And an apparent financial lifeline for live gold.

It says found an investor to keep the tour going because this is always how it

goes live. Gosh, you never get the full picture.

The latest as live golfers tee off at Bedminster.

Happy Saturday. Welcome to Bloomberg.

This weekend we're coming to you live from our world headquarters here in New

York. I'm Christine Orsini.

I'm David Gura alongside Lisa Mateo. It is Saturday, August the 8th.

I want to say welcome to all our listeners and viewers across all of

Bloomberg's platforms on radio, television, streaming app, Bloomberg.com

and watching us on the Bloomberg Business app.

A lot of action in Washington to the wee hours, late night slash early morning

for our Capitol Hill colleagues. Yeah.

After looking like perhaps there were some holdouts right on party lines with

with the two usual Republicans, uh, having concern, uh, Susan Collins and

Lisa murkowski, party line vote. Todd Blanch confirmed as attorney

general. That's right.

That came on the heels of the sanctions bill being passed, the Russia sanctions

bill being passed. Um, lawmakers very eager to get back to

their districts. The summer recess begins in earnest.

But, um, this an achievement for the president, who was, I think, wondering

if this was going to happen, had talked about keeping Todd Blanch as acting

attorney general, should it not? Maybe through the midterms.

I'm going to dig into all this in just a little bit.

But first, let's get to the headlines with Lisa Mateo.

Lisa, you got it. On that overnight vote that followed a

tough confirmation fight that exposed concerns about party lines, about

installing President Donald Trump's former personal attorney to lead the

Justice Department. Now, yes, it comes after Republican

Senator Bill Cassidy said he would support Todd Blanch to be the next

attorney general, while Senator Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa murkowski of

Alaska opposed. Also this morning, the Senate has passed

a stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown by the end of

September. At that move, it shows how both parties

are looking to avoid a fight before midterm elections.

The vote was 90 to 6 to keep federal funding at current levels through

December 11th, and prevent the Trump administration from transferring the

funds to Border Patrol overseas. Russia and Ukraine.

They exchange overnight strikes Ukraine's capital while it came under

attack by ballistic missiles and drones, with fires reported in several districts

and three people killed in the Keith region, and a fire that was sparked at

an oil refinery in southern Russia by Ukrainian drone debris, injuring five

people. That's according to the regional task

force. Meanwhile, the U.S.

Senate had passed a new Russia sanctions bill championed by the late Senator

Lindsey Graham. Now it authorizes punishing tariffs on

China, India and other top buyers of the country's oil and gas, as well as

extending an extended Iran sanctions. Now, Senator Darlene Graham, she talked

about what it meant to her late brother. He believed that this was the most

consequential piece of legislation that he had ever led.

And I'm proud to carry the torch to the finish line.

Lindsey was committed to achieving a peaceful resolution to this war, and I'm

confident that these sanctions will pave the way for bipartisan legislation that

passed the Senate, 86 to 11, and still has to pass the House.

A federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump cannot build the

white House ballroom without congressional approval, and must stop

construction on the $400 million project.

Now, the president called the decision unjust and said he would appeal it to

the Supreme Court. Democratic Senator Peter Welch stressed

that Congress would never give approval for that ballroom.

These are vanity project, and some reports indicate that the president is

spending literally 70% of his time, uh, the presence of busy person.

And there's a lot of things he's got to pay attention to, uh, including the war

in Iran. Republican Senator John Hoven, he

supported the construction, saying that it will be something that future

administrations can use. And after surprising strength earlier

this year, the labor market is weaker than previously thought.

U.S. employers unexpectedly cut jobs in July,

and hiring in the prior two months was revised lower.

Nonfarm payrolls day decreased 23,000 last month, following a combined 103,000

downward revision to the May and June figures.

The unemployment rate that fell to 4.1% and wage growth.

That's low. Dave and Christine, I know you're going

to be talking more about this with Anna Wang.

Uh, coming up. Yes.

Our chief U.S. economist.

And fascinating to see here the effects of the immigration policy on the size of

the labor market, something we're going to get into with and a little bit later,

safer bump. Did it hold up or did it go over the

World Cup predictions from last month? Stay tuned.

Thanks. All right.

Thank you Lisa. Back to that breaking news now out of

Washington, D.C., the Senate confirming President Donald Trump's pick for

attorney general Todd Blanchard. We're going to go now to Laura Davidson.

She's Bloomberg News, Washington deputy bureau chief.

Laura, late night for our colleagues on the Hill before everybody tries to skip

town. This looked like when I went to bed last

night, it wasn't going to happen. Possibly.

Um, and then you had but you had Bill Cassidy, who had been, like, the big

holdout, coming out and changing his mind kind of yesterday.

And then it was a holding pattern. And then all of a sudden this got pushed

through this morning. Can you walk us through how this came

about? Yes.

This is how Congress, uh, frequently works is there's a whole lot of nothing.

And then suddenly, uh, you know, in the wee hours of the morning, you're able

to, to get the votes and push something across the finish line.

Once Senate leaders have exhausted everyone and they're, uh, you know,

agreeing to vote for things. Um, so this is really, um, you know,

sort of a remarkable end to a weeks long saga.

Have you had, uh, you know, multiple senators coming out and expressing some

concerns about Todd Blanche and also just how Trump is influencing the

Justice Department, particularly this $1.8 billion anti weaponization fund

that would have gone to support, um, January 6th, uh, insurrectionists and

other um, allies of the president as well as the, the president being able to

cut a deal with the IRS, uh, to, uh, save himself from any tax audits.

Um, so, uh, you know, they were able to get some concessions, uh, you know, some

Republicans were able to get some concessions from the Justice Department

that really limited the scope of that tax deal, as well as that, uh,

essentially table and killing off, uh, that, that anti weaponization fund.

Uh, you still had two senators who said, no way, uh, Susan Collins and Lisa

murkowski expressing broader concerns. But the last vote, what everyone was

waiting for, uh, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, he is a lame duck senator.

Uh, Trump essentially opposed him in his primary, and he is, uh, will be leaving

Congress next year. Everyone was watching him.

He came out on the Senate floor yesterday and said, look, uh, you know,

I, uh, have some, uh, problems with how the Justice Department is being run, but

I think that Todd Blanche is going to be better than any other, uh, candidate

that Trump is going to put forward. And so therefore, I'm going to go ahead

and give him my support and vote yes. Let me play a bit of that sound from

that speech. Again, this was highly anticipated given

that murkowski defected. Collins defected.

What was Bill Cassidy going to do? Let's let's play listen to what he had

to play a little bit of what he had to say here on the Senate floor.

Mr. Blanche is not perfect.

And he will tell you this, but the choice is not between perfection and Mr.

Blanche. It is between Mr.

Blanche and another acting attorney general who may not run the department

effectively under President Trump, and who

indeed may not be as good as Mr. Blanche.

Laura, let's pick that apart a little bit there.

Not not a ringing endorsement there. The devil you know is really the

endorsement I would want going into a new job.

I'm sorry. David, what do you what do you make of

what the senator had to say there? The rationale is he presented it there

on the Senate floor. Well, I think you just have to take a

look at some recent history. If you look at, you know, who Trump has,

uh, talked about having a top that, uh, the Justice Department of the past.

You his first pick back when he was recently reelected in in 2024, he wanted

Matt Gaetz, uh, the really, um, embattled and the scandal plagued, uh, a

member of Congress who had, uh, had a facing all sorts of allegations of, you

know, underage sex charges and a whole bunch of problems that really got a very

quick, swift no, um, from Senate Republicans.

That's when he pivoted to Pam Bondi. Of course, now Blanche will be replacing

Bondi. Uh, but I think, uh, you right.

You know, in that speech, Cassidy mentioned that he thinks that, uh, Todd

Blanche will be a hands on administrator and sort of be able to run, uh, a very,

very large department with thousands and thousands of, uh, lawyers and that he's

not worried, um, sort of broadly about, um, you know, Mr.

Blanche, his character, uh, whereas, uh, he, you know, sort of suggested that

there would be other candidates that the president might be interested in who,

uh, where he would have more concerns with.

You mentioned that, uh, there were these two big concerns, and one of them was

this anti weaponization fund. and Blanche kind of explain what he did.

He kind of wrote a memo or a promise that it's gone away.

But my understanding is it's not really binding.

Right. So it was enough.

It was enough to get him over the line. But can he change his mind?

Yes. This is really kind of the legal

question surrounding this. What some members of Congress wanted is,

is this written into law saying that this could never come back up again?

Instead, what they got is sort of, you know, sort of a memo from the Justice

Department saying this is this is going away, but this is, you know, continues

to be, uh, concerning to to some members of Congress that this could, you know,

come back up in future deals, you know, as we've seen, uh, you know, Trump, uh,

time and time again, uh, you know, has has said he didn't really want this to

go away, even though his allies and aides were telling him that this was

going to be sort of sacrificed, uh, you know, for the broader good of getting

his attorney general back across the line.

You know, we've seen this on on a whole broad range of issues where Trump says,

you know, I he he's moving on, but then suddenly brings it up.

We've seen this with the reflecting pool.

We've seen this with the ball room that he continues to fight on some of these

personal priorities for him. I don't think that what we saw last

night meets the strict definition of a voter Rama.

We had Stephen Dennis, our colleague, on, a few weeks back, and we talked.

We talked about that with him. But there was a string of legislation

that the Senate dealt with before departing Washington yesterday.

Another had to do with spending. And I want to ask you about that, Laura,

if I could. I mean, customarily or at least in

recent memory, there have been a lot of these kind of last minute spending bills

that have been quite acrimonious. They've led to government shutdowns.

Um, what was passed, I think was a 96 last night.

Um, was not that it didn't seem like it went down to the wire in the same way

that it hasn't in the past. Um, what did the Senate accomplish in

that regard? What does it mean for the fall as we

look ahead to the midterms in terms of how the government is funded?

Yeah. So what they passed is what's called a

continuing resolution or a CR. This is essentially a stopgap government

funding bill to keep the government open, um, past the deadline when a

current funding is set to expire at the end of September.

This would keep the government open until December 11th.

So essentially kicks the can down the road, uh, beyond, uh, the midterm

elections, which no one wants to see a shutdown happened during then.

What they haven't resolved yet is they haven't come to agreement with the

House. So good points for them doing their

advanced reading. But they have not reached the advanced a

group stage, uh, project of this. Um, so when the, uh, when the Senate

comes back on September 14th, I know they have just about two weeks to work

with the House to get a bill passed, so there's still a chance of a shutdown.

Chances ticked down significantly last night when they were able to at least

get something on paper that, you know, had broad bipartisan support.

Uh, but we still could be, uh, you know, talking about a shutdown in late

September and in other votes. The Senate also passed this, uh,

sweeping Russia sanctions bill yesterday.

Um, that has the senator, the late Senator Lindsey Graham s name on it.

We talked about a little bit earlier. So it does a couple things.

It allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 100% on Russian energy

importers. These are countries that are taking

energy from Russia. But it also has some other less popular

clauses in there, including it can give the president more flexibility to raise

import taxes on other major economies. and it seems to give him the ability to

unilaterally waive these sanctions if he decides they're not a good idea.

So this did get a lot of support. But can you walk us through what's in

this bill and how effective it's likely to be?

Yeah, this is really, um, kind of be a tricky one, as there was, uh, you know,

a kind of a classic, uh, um, uh, cooperation of coming together of a

bunch of different pieces. Something for everybody to like, but

also something for everybody to dislike. Um, so it had, um, these Russian

sanctions, which are, you know, very much something that, uh, both, uh, you

know, sort of hawks on the Republican side as well as some Democrats wanted to

see happen. But these sanctions come in the form of

tariffs, which Democrats are not super pleased about giving the president more

authority when it comes to tariffs. Um, this also embedded additional

sanctions. Um, also on, uh, on Iran and Iranian oil

producers, uh, to to to bolster some of the uh, sanctions that have been coming

from the, the Treasury Department and gives Congress a little bit more control

over that. This is really kind of the strongest

rebuke we've seen. Um, you know, in terms of the Iran war

coming from Congress, they've largely ceded their power, to the white House

and Trump on this matter. But, you know, it ultimately did get

across the finish line. Part of that is because this was one of

those centerpiece pieces of legislation that that Lindsey Graham had died just a

couple of weeks ago, had wanted to get done.

So this was really done in his legacy and, uh, you know, made it through the

process perhaps more quickly because, uh, you know, uh, that his friends were

doing it in his name versus something that could have gotten bogged down by

politics covering the waterfront here. Um, want to move on to the Federal

Reserve. And the president had some comments on

the fed when he sat down with Jake Sherman, of course, creature of Capitol

Hill, who made his way to the white House to have a sit down with the

president of the United States. He's with Punchbowl News.

And let me just play a little bit about that, about what he had to say about the

Federal Reserve. Should Warsh, Kevin Warsh or Fed Chair

avoid a rate hike before the election? Well, it's up to him a little bit, but

not completely. And he's got a board that's very

political, right. The United States should pay the lowest

interest rate in the entire world. So you think that he shouldn't hike

rates before the election? Uh, it's not totally up to him.

It's up to the board. I think he's great.

I won't be criticizing him. But I've said many times, you know, in

the old days, 20, 25 years ago, called in the old days, if you announced good

numbers, the interest rates went down because you were a bit of credit.

Makes sense. Right now it's a bit cocked.

Now it's all a different thing. If you announce great numbers,

everybody's depressed because we have great numbers.

They think, what are you going to do is raise interest rates?

But in the old days, when you announced great numbers, interest rates went down.

So I want to go back to those days.

The president there are planning on monetary monetary policy with Jake

Sherman of Punchbowl. Um, Lauren, let me just ask you about

something that kind of complemented this.

There was this letter that landed last week.

Dan Scavino, the head of the personnel office at the white House, sent a letter

to Lisa Cook, the fed governor, on the heels of all of the travails that she's

been through and the Supreme Court decision on her appointment, um, saying

effectively, she has to kind of respond to the allegations that I've been levied

against her with regard to alleged mortgage mortgage fraud here by, uh, by

mid-August, if I'm not not mistaken. Where do things stand with and what does

that say about the White House's approach here to the independence of the

Federal Reserve? Trump is not giving up on his attempts

to fire Lisa Cook. The Supreme Court earlier this summer

said that when he went about it, he didn't do it the right way.

So now we're seeing the white House, uh, try some different legal avenues to see

if they might be able to to oust her. Um, you know, we heard Trump say they're

like, look, this isn't all up to Kevin Warsh.

Of course, that's his is the chair at the Federal Reserve, but that there's a

broader board here. So you're seeing the white House sort of

pivot to seeing if they can pluck off other members of the board, that they

could then replace the people who would be more open to the president's, um, uh,

you know, view of wanting to lower interest rates, uh, rather than raise

them, uh, I'll know, you know, the president did get a little bit of, uh,

you know, a boost, perhaps. Yes, in yesterday's jobs report, which,

well, from sort of a top line perspective was was disappointing in

that, uh, you know, we saw some contraction in the, uh, you know, in

jobs, but it at least reduces some of the pressure on the fed to raise rates.

I don't know that that's necessarily going to lead to a rate cut.

Uh, but, you know, uh, we see the white House kind of working all angles here

to, to see if they're able to, to get the monetary policy that the president

desires. And speaking of retreading old ideas, we

also had this Trump birthright tourism executive order that came out this week,

in which the president seems to be trying to reimpose what the Supreme

Court also struck down on making it, restricting those who can qualify for

birthright citizenship, including staff, workers from foreign governments and

babies of mothers who lie about their intentions for visiting the country

while pregnant. But Laura, is there any way to enforce

this? This is a huge question mark on this.

Almost seems destined for legal challenges, and perhaps yet again,

another Supreme Court challenge in the coming months, if not year.

Uh, yeah. This is, uh, you know, essentially the

the white House lawyers have been working overdrive in the past couple of

weeks to respond to some of those losses that Trump had in the Supreme Court

earlier this summer. Uh, to now, um, get some, uh, some new

executive orders or new actions on the board here.

Uh, but the birthright citizenship was sort of one of his most stinging losses.

And, uh, you know, looks from, uh, you know, because of the constitutional

nature of the 14th amendment, there something that he's, uh, you know,

unlikely to have big legal successes on. Lord, great to catch up with you.

Thank you very much for giving us a lot to cover this morning and help us back.

We gave Laura her own vote. Arama, thank you for being so

knowledgeable on all those topics. We appreciate a lot going on a short

period of time. Our deputy Washington bureau chief and

Christine, just want to emphasize again, um, this is kind of anomalous.

How much happened last night in Washington, D.C.?

It is. And on a Friday, which back I was

speaking of reminiscing back in the day used to be quite a slow day for news.

And the only you only heard from the white House if there was something they

wanted to get out and not have a lot of attention drawn to.

But when people are waiting for action, hey, the very last date and time will be

interesting here over the next couple of weeks, just to see how lawmakers who are

now returning to their districts and home states, um, talk about all that's

happened here. And and I think they have some that

continuing resolution, I think is a positive thing.

It's going to allow them not to have to talk about that.

The perils of a potential shutdown. It'll be helpful.

And but, you know, we're still not seeing a big change of policy on the

Iran war, and it's still impacting gas prices, and it's still impacting those

kitchen table prices. And that's what I think lawmakers are

going to hear. The most said that the Pentagon asked

for 70 billion, not a part of that continuing resolution.

So something still looming here. They're exactly right.

All right. We just talked about President Trump's

thoughts on Kevin Warsh. How will the July jobs report impact

next month's decision on interest rates? That's straight ahead on Bloomberg this

weekend on Bloomberg Television radio Bloomberg.com and the Bloomberg

Business. And.

Thanks for joining us live on Bloomberg this weekend.

I'm Lisa Mateo. Let's update you on today's top stories.

President Donald Trump counted $3 billion in U.S.

investments in critical minerals mining to reduce its reliance on China.

At the event at the State Department yesterday, the president said the

projects would create thousands of jobs and promote economic stability.

Trump also announced plans to spend over $180 million to support educational

programs for the industry. Accredited mining programs in the United

States now graduate less than 170 mining engineers each year, while China

graduates more than 3000. And half of our current mining workforce

is set to retire within the next three years.

Well thrown at it that the USA is never again reliant on hostile foreign nations

for the resources our country needs to dominate in the future.

In other news, President Trump has revived his threat to fire Federal

Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over unproven allegations of mortgage fraud.

And according to a letter seen by Bloomberg, cook was told that Trump is

considering removing her and gave her until August 26th to respond to

allegations made by the white House. David and Christina.

Lisa, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Lisa. All right.

Stocks on Friday finished higher despite a much worse than expected July jobs

report. Employers cut 23,000 jobs last month.

No expectations were for job gains about 80,000.

The unemployment rate also dropped. What does this mean for fed

policymakers? We spoke with Anna Wong, the chief U.S.

economist for Bloomberg Economics. The difference between the US falling

unemployment rate on one hand and a very weak payroll on the other hand, in a

July was mainly because in the household survey, it shows that the labor force

participation continue to fall, uh, driven by people, uh, between age 16 to

24. And those folks are dropping out of the

labor market. And because you have a shrinking labor

pool, you don't just don't need a lot of, uh, increase in hiring to cause the

unemployment rate to go down. So it is a fall and unemployment rate

that's due to the wrong reasons. That's so interesting to me because I

always I find that part of that counterintuitive where it's like, well,

the unemployment rate down because people gave up and stopped looking for

work. It also seems an interesting indication

that it's in those ages that you talked about.

So it's younger people who are deciding not to be applying for these jobs.

What are they doing? Are they waiting to enter the workforce?

Are they seeking higher education or is that not clear?

I think it could be a more, uh, um, harmless explanation.

It could be that it is July after work, after all.

And people, especially the younger folks, folks who are waiting to go to

college, the the college students themselves, they're just off vacationing

and they are, uh, just not working in their usual summer job and not looking

for a summer job, uh, in the thick of July.

And I want to play a bit of sound here from Kevin Hassett, the president's

economic adviser. He was on Bloomberg Television on Friday

after these numbers were released, talking about, uh, participation,

talking about the data more broadly. Let's take a listen.

The labor force participation is kind of on a downward trajectory, which means

that the break even jobs number that is the jobs number you need.

So the unemployment rate doesn't go up. Is has gone from 120 hunters 30,000 a

few years ago to maybe about 40,000 now. And so what it means is that what the

market is used to look at, at, oh, it's like a normal tread the water kind of

jobs number, if it's around 100, is no longer true.

I want to get your reaction to a doctor. Has it said there and also just have you

talk a bit more about what you mentioned a moment ago, which is just that the

pool of workers here is getting smaller and smaller.

Yeah. So he mentioned this, uh, break even

concept. So economists, uh, estimate this, um,

monthly pace of job growth that's needed to keep the unemployment rate constant.

And, uh, Kevin Hassett just mentioned his estimate is 40,000.

Our estimate is, uh, around 55,000. The fed and a recent note, they think

that it's closer to zero. So, um, I think that's what he's trying

to. Kevin Hassett is trying to say to kind

of, uh. His point is that, well, well, we are

used to the, uh, you know, 100 K type of monthly, uh, payrolls print going

forward, even a soft ones, that's, uh, you know, between 0 to 50,000.

And in his mind, 40,000 is actually a tolerable and decent kind of number of

job growth. And and I think basically he's lowering

the bar for what constitutes a good labor market.

When you look at the picture overall, there were a few places where you saw

some job growth and there were places that were hit by job losses a little bit

more. Can you just talk us through the

different sectors and some patterns that you're seeing?

Yeah. So, um, the the places that produce the

largest drag is local government education sector.

And it saw a 50,000 decline in a job growth.

That's pretty substantial. Um, I think this is this decrease is a

noteworthy and it's not something that you can just sweep under the rug.

Uh, I think this is a sign that the, uh, higher long end, uh, of the yield curve

that has been rising for the last three, four months already, that is starting to

bite when you have higher long term Treasury yields, that puts upward

pressure on mortgage rates and that has been cooling the housing sector.

And, you know, local government derive a lot of their revenue, uh, from the local

property market. So when when local governments budget

are falling short in the first half of this year, going into the new fiscal

year, they will have less to allocate to schools.

So that's what I'm, uh, seeing. And also going forward to the fall right

before the September FOMC meeting, we have another jobs report, I continue to.

expect the local government sector education sector to be weak because for

this reason, I just don't think it's a one off thing.

Another place that's really bleak is leisure and hospitality, and that is due

to the reversal of the World Cup rate. But here, even here, I think it's, uh,

pretty alarming. So originally it was supposed to be, uh,

not alarming because, uh, in spring we saw that there was a huge increase in

hiring for leisure and hospitality. But in today's report, we also see a

massive downward revisions to the last two months, uh, job fair, and in fact,

100,000 downward revisions to jobs. And a lot of it came from leisure and

hospitality sector. You know, well, we lost that in April

and May. That was a huge increase in hiring in

and uh, hotels and uh, food and restaurants.

It actually didn't happen. It's or it's a very mild kind of

increase. And now with this, uh, last two months

of July and June's negative, large negative print and leisure and

hospitality, it basically means that on net, it's cutting down, uh, leisure and

hospitality, uh, level of employment from even before the World Cup.

Um, so I think I think, uh, that's also pretty weak.

All in all, I think the bad news in today's report, uh, Trump the positive

news. The only really good sector and in terms

of hiring growth is construction. And that's driven by, uh, basically data

centers. Uh oh.

Wow. That's where I is manifest in this, in

this report. I want to go back to the data.

And of course, you swim in day to day in and day out.

Uh, but I think there will be people who look at these revisions and think

there's an inherent problem with the data that we're getting on the job

market today. And you listen to the new fed chair,

Kevin Warsh, one of his many task forces is one that centered on data collection

and the way that the fed looks at looks at data.

Um, do you see an even problems with the way that we kind of gauge the health of

the labor market? Are we not getting the data that we

need? Is there some sort of deficit that that

is stark based on what we saw here in terms of the revisions today?

Yeah. So downward, persistent, downward, uh,

revisions to jobs data has been, uh, the trend for the last, uh, three years.

Really. Um, and whenever the direction of

revisions is primarily toward one direction, in this case, that was it

suggests that there's something more structural going on that, uh, the first

part of the data is not able to show. And usually what that means is that, um,

the labor market is not as strong as, uh, as as as one thought.

So this means that whenever you see a blow out job sprint going forward, like,

over 200. Okay.

I think we all have to take it with a grain of salt.

Now, as to the precise cause of these downward revisions.

Well, it is from the birth and death model and also from the lower response

rate in the first, uh, survey of the month.

Um, and I think the BLS is actively trying to address this problem.

Uh, earlier this year, the BLS announced a, um, methodological change in the

birth and death model that is supposedly, uh, will be better able to

capture these real time, uh, an increase in hiring and decrease in hiring from

jobs, going out of business or, uh, new businesses forming.

Um, I think I think that, uh, uh, I think the BLS and other federal agencies

are actively trying to work on this problem.

Um, and it is not because, um, any federal agencies did.

Attention is fudging the numbers. And speaking of Kevin Warsh, uh, they do

have another meeting coming up. Uh, it looks like your projections are

saying you're expecting giving weak payrolls and higher layoffs, which

you've been telling us. Do you think is a stronger signal, the

drop in employment rate? We're also expecting a soft CPI to come

out. You think that means fed rates are going

to hold in September? Yes.

So so many analysts after today's weak job report says all attention will be

focused on next week's CPI. Um, so my team has spent the last year

painstakingly working on collecting millions of prices every month.

Uh, we call this project the Bloomberg Price Project.

And our, um, assessment from looking at, uh, July's, um, prices is that it will

be a modest next week, year over year, core CPI is likely to come down to 2.4%.

And that is that the lowest year over year reading in more than five years?

That is a very significant because one of the very, uh, very popular talking

points amongst the FOMC hawks lately is that inflation has been about target for

more than five years, and therefore the fed needs to, you know, start hiking

regardless of, uh, you know, the data. Well, if CPI is coming down to a new low

in more than five years, it means that that talking point likely is expiring.

Um, taking away a one big reason for why so many FOMC members want to hike rates.

Maybe I could close by asking you, as we kind of linger here on, uh, the Fed and

Kevin Warsh, sort of how he might be processing the data that we got from the

Labor Department on on Friday of this week.

Um, during the last FOMC at the press conference, he talked about the strength

of the labor market. So much more attention was paid to the

inflation side of the Fed's dual mandate.

Does this at all complicate his thinking, the thinking of other policy

makers going forward here? Obviously it seems like absent him

talking as much as his predecessor did, were listening a lot more to fed

governors, other members of that committee, sort of.

What are you listening for? How does this change the way that the

fed is approaching the US economy? Well, you know, I think that today's

payrolls report vindicated, uh, Warsh position not to hike rates in the last

meeting, but it didn't vindicate his communications style.

Uh, the way he explained the decision last week was one month of data.

Doesn't matter. So by that logic, then to, uh, today's

weak payrolls data factor, very little in its thinking.

Um, but it factors a lot to the market's thinking.

Kevin Warsh also said that let's let the market, uh, determine the signal and

let's reduce that communication. So to get a cleaner read of market

reaction to data. Well, the market today tells Kevin Warsh

that, well, maybe you don't need to hike rates as much in September.

Uh, judges, judging from the futures pricing of uh, the chance of, uh, a rate

hike in September. All right.

And along our chief. Thank you for the US.

Sarah Bloomberg, thank you so much.

Thank you for joining us live on Bloomberg this weekend.

I'm Lisa Mateo. Let's update you on today's top stories.

Eastern China is bracing for Typhoon Dolphin.

Authorities have been shutting down schools and tourist activities.

The storm is expected to bring heavy rain, severe flooding and possibly

landslides when it makes landfall late Sunday.

National authorities will. They've declared a level three emergency

response, the second lowest level drought conditions on the island of

Puerto Rico has forced the U.S. territory to enforce water rationing

measures in San Juan and other major cities.

Starting yesterday, more than 180,000 customers will be without water for 48

hours at a time as part of an alternating schedule.

But thousands of Puerto Ricans were already experiencing water shortages up

to a year before that. For unknown reasons, people have been

lining up to receive water from tankers. July was the driest month on record for

San Juan in more than 120 years. In sports.

The PGA tour continues at Sedgefield County Club in North Carolina, topping

the leaderboard. Bo Hassler at 12 under par, followed by

a tie for second between Jordan Smith and Ben James at 11 under par.

Meanwhile, PGA tour CEO Brian Rollup says there's no merger and no

conversations with Liv golf and that the PGA tour is focused on its own product.

What PGA Tour Enterprises allowed us to do is to evolve the PGA tour, where most

professional sports have gotten. We've actually capitalized it and turned

it into a commercial business. And the strength of that commercial

business funds innovation. It funds player purses, of funds,

everything. Well, I spoke exclusively to Tom Keene

and Scarlet Fu on Bloomberg Money. David.

Christina, Lisa, thank you very much and interesting conversation.

We're going to play a bit later here about the future of Liv golf's.

This kind of dynamic between these two tours is really fascinating right now.

And whether there's enough audience for both of them, not aside from the

funding, whether people just want to see that much golf.

I know you love saying they love it. Yes.

Thank you. Thank you.

Lisa. All right.

This morning, we're taking a closer look at a migrant crisis that sparked a

global reaction. That's last week in the tiny Spanish

enclave of Qatar. About 70,000 people rushed across the

border from Morocco. Nearly 100 died trying to swim around

the border fence there. And a new weekend as some excuse me.

Mariam Charity, a senior researcher at Oxford University, looked at how this

crisis began. Much for joining us.

If you could just explain. For those who are not familiar what this

territory is, who it has historically belonged to, and why, it's contested a

little bit. Okay.

Well, uh, first of all, I, um, Salta is not in mainland Spain.

Ceuta is on the African continent, and, uh, it's been under Spanish control.

So to and its sister, um, city, uh, called Melilla under Spanish control for

um, uh, over 500, uh, years now. And, uh, and it's not part of the

Schengen space either. So, uh, when people, when Moroccans go

to south, uh, they're not necessarily in, uh, you know, in that Schengen

space. That's an important distinction to

highlight. Um, and so, uh, over the past 30 years

or so, um, you know, there have been successive, um, um, attempts to cross

regularly to, to those, uh, uh, Spanish enclaves.

And, uh, what happened last week was, uh, unprecedented, uh, in scale and

unfortunately in human loss as well. Uh, because within the space of 48

hours, it's been reported over 70,000, uh, Moroccans and, uh, a small number

of, of sub-Saharan migrants as well, uh, made it to, to South that, uh, they soon

kind of, uh, returned some of them voluntarily, but uh, is over uh,

reported about 3000. And so who are still and so uh, with the

a large minority of uh, majority of, of unaccompanied minors, lots of us have

seen the images and the video of this and, uh, perhaps are aware of the kind

of social media fervor surrounding all of it.

And in your piece for the weekend, you write, this did not resemble a centrally

coordinated propaganda campaign. What have we learned about what brought

this about? Absolutely.

I think there is no single explanation to what happened.

Social media might have acted as a catalyst and, uh, helped.

So synchronized kind of frustrations that already existed among the those who

made that question in terms of, um, unemployment, low wages or limited

mobility opportunities, uh, uh, to, to go to Europe or even to, uh, go to Sota,

as previously was the case for the local population.

Uh, in, in, uh, in Sota in uh, where uh, local locals were able to go for the day

and, and come back without needing any visa or, um, any there was a kind of a

local, uh, so arrangements, but unfortunately, since the pandemic that,

uh, and mutual kind of, uh, agreements is no longer there, which meant that,

um, those successive um, uh, um, mass crossings, uh, happened, uh, more

frequently. So, uh, yes, I think the, the,

you know, there is no robust evidence either to, to support the fact that this

was only smuggling, uh, networks that facilitated this, because actually the

closeness, uh, uh, to the, you know, between miracle and, and or at least the

neighboring town. And so, uh, you wouldn't need a

smuggler. So most of those who've made it made it

on their own and and also the kind of the political organization or state

institution being the sort of centrally behind it is, is not quite founded.

Let me ask you lastly, just about the legacy of this event.

So as you've been saying, there have been other mass crossings before,

nothing of this scale or magnitude. And we've seen the way that that many

politicians around the world have kind of focused on this as some sort of

rallying cry. Do you think that this will prevent

other efforts like this in the future? Given the amount of death that we saw as

a result of this, the amount of injury or does this portend, do you think more

attempts at kind of mass crossings like this in the future?

I think there are no guarantees. Uh, the, uh, you know, um, attempts of,

uh, maybe not of this kind, but, uh, attempts to cross irregularly to, to

Sota or mania for that matter, uh, won't happen because, uh, as long as you have,

uh, the same driving forces or driving factors, uh, in terms of unemployment,

in terms of, uh, you know, uh, uh, like close to 3 million, uh, Moroccans who

are not in employment, education, young Moroccans in education or training.

Um, you know, the the aspiration is still there to, um, get a better future.

To get a better job for themselves and their families.

So, um, that's, uh, probably, I think all the, you know, the, the floating,

uh, barriers and all of that are not going to dissuade these, um, young

people or, uh, yeah. To to to try and cross, uh, irregularly

as long as there is no legal pathway for them to go.

And, um, the second thing, uh, what I've noticed in terms of social media

activity following the crossing is that there are two different types of new

messaging going around. The first one is around, uh, those

who've made it to, to, um, narrating their experience, narrating how.

Um, actually, now that they've made it. Probably it's not worth it.

You know, like, they weren't able to eat for days.

They weren't able to access any, uh, help.

And so there is that messaging, uh, going around as well, and the other

messaging that has surged in the past few days.

Unfortunately, our messages from smugglers who are, uh, treating this as

a, as a golden opportunity because now they know that those, uh, you know,

those routes are going to be, uh, tighter in terms of, uh, um, uh,

immigration enforcement. So that then that makes the, the, the

opportunity for those migrants to, uh, cross on their own, less likely.

So they will have to re, uh, to, to get the help of a, um, a smuggler.

All right. And up next it is Bty dubs.

Um, now for something completely different.

David Gura, would you spend $100 for a hot dog?

Um, no, I would not. But before we get there, let me go back

to what you're just talking about. I mean, you've been tracking this story

very close to the Cedar story. Yeah.

I'm curious what stood out to you. I mean, for me,

it's the fact that she said this could happen once again.

I mean, I think we're looking at this kind of as a landmark event here, but

she was saying we saw it back in 2024. It's likely to happen once again.

What do you make of the swirl of social media surrounding all of this?

I mean, it's interesting because there's a lot of chatter online that this was

prompted by someone there's, you know, unfounded rumors of government agents

being in the crowd. It just seemed to organize for a lot of

people. But as our Bloomberg folks analyzed it,

it's all in a local dialect. It's all in Arabic.

But it does seem something is driving this.

And we've seen this with caravans in the U.S.

as well, right? Something sparks that and everybody

shows up at the border. So I think it is likely to happen again,

even though in this case, most of those migrants were sent back and are saying

pretty openly, don't do this, it wasn't worth it.

All right. Now back to that hot dog.

No, I would not spend hundred dollars. Looks quite the subject change.

All right, Lisa and Betty Dobbs, coming up next, we're going to dig into

something a little more cheerful. Stick with us.

All right. Welcome back to Bloomberg this weekend

or better. I'm Christina Ruffini with David Gray,

who's not going to argue with me about how you still think about $200 hot dog.

I think Lisa is about to tell us about the dog, as well as other stories you

might have missed this week. Lisa fast becoming an obsession.

Really? Are you starting with this or starting

with something else? All right, I'm going to start in slow.

We're going to play. We're going to get ready to build the

anticipation for the hot tub. It's hi everyone.

Can't wait. Okay.

I really can't stop talking about it. So please speak.

So David doesn't anymore. Preseason football.

Oh, my gosh, here we are. All right, I'll check my phone.

He's already starting to talk about the preseason football.

Okay, so Bloomberg Weekend has a story out.

Sports fans tear down $2,000 streaming boom to follow.

That is $2,100 hot dogs, by the way. He seems out of control as David Gura

just is the reason why these pro league, they're just signing these deals with

multiple services, right? Because you're sitting there trying to

watch the game and you're like, where to playing?

Is it on the worst time? Is it on?

This is it on Peacock. Is it on where we go?

How hard this was? Because we know I don't watch the sports

ball. But when I did actually try to watch the

World Cup, the only place I could find it on the 18 streaming services I get

was like Univision through NBC. I watched it in Spanish.

You did? Yeah.

There you go. Well, it was really hard, but

I can see it in Spanish. But I'm not going to keep going.

Let me let me break down how the 2000 comes out.

Okay. So these are for people who, let's say

you're you're from upstate New York and you moved to Florida, but you want to

watch your New York teams. Okay.

Here's what you got to do. You have to pay $130 a year for MLB to

watch Yankees. Maybe.

Okay, then you have to subscribe to ESPN plus during hockey season to watch the

Sabres. You have to subscribe to another five

streaming services to make sure you get every Buffalo Bills game, because

they're all in different streaming services.

Out of control, I'm telling you, out of control.

I know we all hated cable, but like, can we just go back to cable?

I really was a better deal. And I had cable and you still can't

watch because some are, like exclusive to these services.

So it's enough to make you go to a sports bar where you can watch it on TV

no matter what. But no, it's true.

And actually, so I have a son who's a Yankees fan.

It's quite hard because games will be blocked out as well.

You can't. You're local and you can watch it really

in the blackout. Yes.

So it's it's designed to infuriate. It is like what's the way.

Who else are you guys? Are you guys to find a cooking shows?

I am, I, I really am I do I love watching them okay, so guess who has

won. U.S.

Secretary of Health, Human services, RFK junior.

I did not know this, but the thing I like about cooking shows is it's not

politics. That was a radical turn.

Okay, it's got to show the Washington Post, though.

The show is on. It's on YouTube.

The reviews are out. This one's from the Washington Post.

RFK Junior's cooking show is a rich person solution to a poor person's

problem. Interesting.

Okay, so the show was basically based on this premise that yes, America's diet is

horrible, right? So he has a special celebrity chef each

time who goes along with them and they want to hear it is how to cook

delicious, nutritious meals with real ingredients at affordable prices.

So that's the price, I promise it is. But here's the problem that The

Washington Post found is that in an episode, he goes through salmon cakes.

Right? How to make it?

Um, the arugula salad with it. And he says the recipe is going to work

for about $4.91. The problem is that that's the price per

serving, bro. You're on a regular salary.

If you want a little over Uggla, you know, if you don't want to buy the whole

container of of mayonnaise, avocado mayonnaise.

So it doesn't take that a consideration. They say it really comes out to like

$73.46 a person. So that's like right.

Yeah. So it's a big difference if you think

about also like economies of scale when you're cooking for a family, like even

as a single person who tries to cook, like sometimes it just doesn't save you

that much money because you can't eat it fast enough, you can't make enough, and

you have to buy a giant thing of a little giant thing of olive oil.

Like, if you don't have that stuff in your house, it's really expensive.

Yeah. Second show here by a cabinet secretary,

Sean Duffy had that show travel show with his family.

But it's not out yet. Nobody knows where it is, so stay tuned.

We'll give you an update. He missed that.

All right, it's a smidgen I do. Okay, okay.

You want to get to the hot dog? Can we do it?

Let's do it. Why?

She. Wall Street Journal has it out.

You got to see the pictures. Okay.

The rise of the $100 hot dog is that caveat.

If you're if you're listening on radio, there is caviar on a hot dog.

Okay. This is we have a rich man's $100 sour

cream. Glitzy okay.

The golden glitzy. It has Mars Capone, 30 grand caviar, 24

karat edible gold flakes. And it's served on a fresh croissant

bun. And yes, there was a hot dog included in

that vodka that had gold flakes in it. Gold lager.

Oh, that was a college favorite. That was a class.

I continue to derail this segment. I'm just going to take it down there

because where can I get these hot dogs? Listen, you can get this, okay?

So there's one at, um, Breckenridge Ski Resort, right?

And these are the towels. Should have gone while you were in Aspen

instead of the tower. Voices.

You can get a tower of hot dogs for $60, $60.

And instead of a foot long, how about a two foot long pillow here?

And a 19 inch fan. All right, we are going off the rails.

Um, it's $45. First field in Denver.

Let's move on. Why is it all in Colorado?

It's because I hate that.

Because my home state, um, likes to eat things outside, and, I don't know, it's

just like stuff. There's no.

There's. So there's no score.

What's the story that fired you? Let's hit it.

Okay. So private colleges are admitting more

students who didn't apply. This is a bluebird.

This is actually interesting because I just met my daughter, received a letter

from a college she never applied for, and said that she got an 18,000

scholarship to it. So this is happening.

Here's a reason why. Okay, so the Common App, this is where

parents kind of sign on and you can click.

And it makes applying to schools super easy.

But they're now doing um, they're participating in um, uh, direct

admission. And so what that means is that, you

know, kids can just start getting these admitted into these colleges I have

never applied for. And so what it's doing, they're saying

it's opening up to a more diverse crowd. It's helping because all these colleges

are fighting to get students to apply, and the private ones are closing down a

lot. Um, so it's just a way to kind of

increase their enrollment. And, and students are saying it's

opening up their eyes to the scholarships that are saying that's good

for TCU is you take the SAT in those colleges.

It's not an offer, but they will try to recruit you.

And I did get a letter from a school I'd never heard of and ended up going there

because they gave me money. So it's kind of a cool thing.

I think that it is. It is like that more than $100 hot on

the David for this. So thank you Lisa.

With we are coming up on 8:00 in New York City.

Berkshire Hathaway set to release its earnings just moments from now.

We're going to watch as that crosses the terminal, bring you those results as

they come through. And if you're not sick of us, the next

hour of Bloomberg this weekend starts right now.

You.

See me.

Welcome to Bloomberg this weekend live from New York with David Gura, Christina

Ruffini and Lisa Mateo. The latest headlines, analysis, big

interviews, and the stories that hit home on your days off.

Welcome back to Bloomberg this weekend. It is 8:00 am in New York from our world

headquarters in Manhattan. I'm Christina Ruffini.

I'm David Gura alongside Lisa Mateo. Bring you the latest breaking news

reporting, analysis live this morning, every weekend morning from 7:00 to 10:00

Wall Street time. We're going to focus on markets in the

economy here in this coming hour. Uh, Berkshire Hathaway reporting

earnings, second quarter earnings uh 12.98 billion up 16% year over year.

We're going to dig into those a little bit more in at least just watching these

rolling across the terminal as well. Uh, but another record setting week for

Wall Street on the heels of a jobs report that really surprised a lot of

folks here. The unemployment rate ticking down,

right. 23,000 job losses.

Not a great jobs report, but because projections are now likely that interest

rates won't go up. It seems like the market took that and

ran with it. And we're gonna talk about that, and

we're gonna talk about Berkshire Hathaway, which, uh, they're, you know,

the big first, uh, reporting was our first day, and we ended up also having

the year on for that day. Other matters intervened.

So it's it'll be nice to dig into that and kind of see how the company doing.

Uh, since the big guys stepped away and we've got Abel in charge now.

All right, um, Lisa Mateo watching the terminal as I am, as you are.

The numbers are coming in. Give us the headlines, if you would,

Lisa. All right.

Yeah. Investors are really looking for more

clues about just how CEO Greg Abel is going to steer the company after taking

over from Warren Buffett this year. So I want to get to some of them.

One of them is coming across right now. This is Berkshire Hathaway.

This is second quarter earnings uh 12.98 billion.

That's year over year. That's an increase of 16%.

So that's what we have coming across right now.

But a lot has been going on with this. I mean this comes after Berkshire went

on all the way in on the housing bet with the acquisition of Taylor Morrison

home. Uh, we're going to have Bloomberg

Intelligence, Matthew Palazzolo, he's going to go into more details, um, with

those numbers later this hour and what they're going to do with that $400

billion cash pile on top of it that, uh, so many people are paying attention to.

Let's get to some other news this morning.

The Senate, while they have confirmed President Donald Trump's former personal

attorney as attorney general. Now, in an early morning vote, this

happened. The Republican led Senate had voted 50

to 49 to make Blanche the second confirmed attorney general since Trump

returned to the white House last year. Also this morning, the Senate has passed

a stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown at the end of

September. The move shows how both parties they're

looking to avoid a fight before midterm elections.

The vote was 90 to 6 to keep federal funding at current levels through

December 11th, and prevent the Trump administration from transferring funds

to the Border Patrol. Overseas, Russia and Ukraine exchange

overnight strikes. Ukraine's capital will came under attack

by ballistic missiles and drones, with fires reported in several districts and

three people killed in the Kiev region and a fire.

It was sparked at an oil refinery in southern Russia by Ukrainian drone

debris, injuring five people. That's according to the regional task

force. Meanwhile, the U.S.

Senate, they passed a new Russia sanctions bill championed by the late

Senator Lindsey Graham and authorizes punishing tariffs on China, India and

other top buyers of the country's oil and gas, as well as extended Iran

sanctions. The senator, Richard Blumenthal, called

it a momentous day. President Zelensky is watching in

Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is watching in Moscow.

I'd like to think Lindsey Graham is watching as well and proud of what we've

done, because today we send a message to vibrant fruit.

You will not win this war. The bipartisan legislation that passed

the Senate 86 to 11 and must still pass the House and a federal appeals court.

They have ruled that President Trump cannot build the white House ballroom

without congressional approval, and must stop construction of the $400 million

project. The president called the decision unjust

and said he would appeal it to the Supreme Court.

David, Christine, I just want to get you a few more headlines on Berkshire that

just came out. Uh, the cash pile that we were talking

about, it falls to 365.51 billion. Um, in the second quarter.

So that was under a lot of, um, a number that a lot of folks were waiting to

hear. We're going to dig into that more, as

you see, because of that acquisition party part.

Right. Still pretty sizable are 365 billion.

Exactly. So more on that to come here.

Um, in just a few minutes time. All right.

Thanks, Lisa. All right.

As Lisa just mentioned, we've got breaking news.

Just hours ago, the Senate narrowly confirmed Todd Blanch as attorney

general, but was down party lines 50 to 49.

Republican Senators Lisa murkowski and Susan Collins sided with Democrats,

while outgoing Senator Bill Cassidy decided kind of at the last minute to go

ahead and confirm Lynch. The incoming attorney general was a

controversial pick by President Trump. Is Todd Bland served as the president's

lead defense attorney for the 2024 hush money trial.

Joining us now is Bloomberg's senior D.C.

editor, Wendy Benjamin. And Wendy, great to have you with us

here. As we take stock of what was a busy

evening and early morning in Washington, D.C..

Talk a bit about this. I mean, Todd Blanche had been serving as

acting attorney general, and I'd been wondering over the last few weeks sort

of what difference it would make, notionally to have him there in an

acting capacity or a permanent one. The president even floated keeping

around in an acting capacity. If he could get the votes here before

the midterm elections. Um, talk about the importance of this

vote and indeed, what Bill Cassidy supported the nomination says about the

Senate today. Sure, David.

And as Lisa was going through all those bills, you know, um, many a couple of

them passed overwhelmingly Bipartisan language was it?

Which is amazing these days. But, uh, this one squeaked by 50 to 49.

Todd Blanche is not popular with either party in Washington.

If it wasn't for Bill Cassidy once again voting, apparently holding his nose, um,

saying he was holding his nose for this, this nominee, um, it wouldn't have gone

through without intervention from the vice president.

So it's, um, it's an interesting nomination.

I mean, Trump could have kept him as acting for as long as he wanted, but it

never you know, they like the permanence of having a Senate confirmed cabinet

member. Um, so as you said, Todd Blanche was

Trump's personal lawyer during his criminal trials.

And, um, continues to act in a way that has made people suggest he is still

Trump's personal lawyer. The Justice Department once treated as

an almost independent agency in the executive branch.

Trump has really involved himself in every detail, directed prosecutions.

And Todd Blanche is willing to go along with that.

And that gave the two Republican senator Susan Collins

and Lisa murkowski. Enough pause, especially over this tax

audit deal and the weaponization fund. But Bill Cassidy was able to find it.

Yeah. Despite his deep concerns, as he put it,

to, uh, to vote for him. It was a little bit of a we were talking

earlier a better the devil you know, argument saying he didn't know, you

know, he's better than some of the other options that could possibly come if he

weren't in charge. I also want to ask you about this Russia

sanctions bill, because we heard Senator Blumenthal praising it and saying it's a

message to Vladimir Putin, which is true on its face.

But there's also a lot of carve outs here.

Right? There's a lot of ways the president can

decide not to enact sanctions or wave sanctions if Congress puts them in.

And it also could give the president more flexibility to raise, uh, tariffs

and import taxes on other major economies.

That's right. Um, I'm not quite as familiar with this

as I should be this morning, but I do know that yes, what this bill does is

really increase tariffs on countries that do business with Russia.

Russia is sanctioned to the hilt. Um, there probably are very few more

sanctions we could add. The US could add, um, on top of Russia.

But what this does is punish countries who continue to supply Russia with goods

and services that it needs to, you know, to keep its economy running in the face

of this grinding, grinding war that Putin just won't.

Um, CNN to uh, so, yes, this bill also passed incredibly bipartisan, I think 86

to 11, something like that. That's that's not good math, but maybe

not. Don't make me do math on a Saturday

morning. No.

That's fair. That's always my rule.

I support that, but it definitely was also in honor of Lindsey Graham, um, the

Recently late senator who really, really championed this bill and was a huge

supporter of Zelensky. And it sort of brought that unity about

the Ukraine war back to the Senate, where they had been divided.

President Trump isn't crazy about this because he he says that his ability to

convince Putin to join the peace table will be hurt by this.

But Putin hasn't shown much willingness to show up at the peace table anyway.

One day, very quickly here, uh, we had these, uh, jobs data yesterday.

Um, we heard from Lisa Cook on the heels of that, the Federal Reserve governor.

And we also learned that a letter had been sent from Dan Scavino of the white

House personnel office to Governor Cook, uh, telling her the white House is

demanding more information about, uh, her mortgages as they look for ways to

get her out of that position. In the wake of that Supreme Court

decision. I'd love to get your read on the

significance of that, this this three page letter again, that she received and

what it means for the institutions independence and the path forward here

for the president when it comes to, uh, wielding influence over the central

bank. Right.

Well, that's another agency or organization in which he definitely

wants to put his thumb on the scale of everything they do.

You know, he threatened to Powell Friar Jerome Powell, the former chairman, um,

numerous times. And in fact, Powell, after his term as

chair of the fed and had decided to stay on the board just to sort of keep an eye

on the Fed's independence. Lisa Cook, we thought, had survived this

attempt to fire her, um, on this sort of flimsy charge of, you know, something

wrong with her mortgage payments where she claimed lots of different businesses

were I mean, lots of different properties were her primary residence.

She claims it's a clerical error. There are a number of Trump

administration officials who have the same thing on their mortgage papers of

multiple residences. Um, and so, uh, you know, she thought it

was clear when the Supreme Court said, no, you can't fire her.

And now he's trying again. Um, you know, he's got the chairman he

wants. Um, and there is, um, he's sent her this

letter saying, you know, you're back up and in the hotseat.

So, you know, I'm sure her her lawyers are on top of it.

Um, the courts will be on top of it, and we'll see what happens.

All right. Our senior D.C.

editor, Wendy Benjamin, and joining us from Washington this morning.

Thanks, money. Let's stick with those jobs numbers now.

Wall Street seems unfazed by Friday's dismal jobs report.

All major indexes finished in the green, with the S&P 500 closing at a record

high for the 26th time this year. The Nasdaq and Dow also ending with

their best week since April. Joining us now with more is Joe Quinlan,

managing at head of market market strategy at Bank of America private

bank. Joe, great to have you with us on this

Saturday morning. Thank you very much for for making the

time and definitely want to talk about your most recent note and analysis of

the market, but let me just start with the jobs data and sort of how you

process what we saw yesterday and what it says to you about the health of this

U.S. economy.

Well, it speaks to the underlying health of the economy.

David, despite the myth, when you go beneath the surface, you see the fact

that we had some seasonality with a local government World Cup.

But what I looked at was very encouraging the increase in jobs for

construction and manufacturing, healthcare.

So I spent a lot of time talking to our bank clients, commercial clients, and

they're talking about adding like, we're not shutting it in some cases using AI

automation. But the job market remains, I think,

pretty on solid footing. But are you at all concerned that even

the job growth we're seeing construction jobs?

In my head, when I read that, I thought, oh, we're building houses again, that's

great. And then we dig into it and it's mostly

AI data centres. It seems like it's all the same circular

AI world. I mean, the exposure there to me seems

very high, but you're the you're the expert.

You tell us if you if you're still bullish on this, you know, tell me I'm

wrong. No, no, you're not wrong.

And you're definitely you're on track with that.

You're seeing a huge contribution to GDP Industrialization demanded the materials

demand from data centers. But also you're seeing foreign companies

coming here increase their production chemicals, automobiles and mobile parts.

You're seeing other U.S. companies build out the plant, whether

it's a little bit, you know, factory in addition.

So it is they data center driven. But there's a lot more to this

manufacturing buildout, construction buildout than just data centers.

But it is overwhelmingly it'll alleviate that a little bit here in the 2728.

But when I sit I see the industrialization, the manufacturing

capacity coming back. And related to that defense, defense

spending. We need more missiles, ammunition,

munitions, you name it. That's help driving it growth as well.

Joe, I want to get your perspective on the market that we're in, the moment

that we're in. And your latest note, which I mentioned

a moment ago, it's kind of a refutation of the bear case on on the U.S.

economy and U.S. markets right now.

I read one line from it. Amid the gloom, something curious keeps

happening. You write, the dire predictions of the

worrywart never happened. Disappointing and surprising market

bears. What explains the resilience series as

you see, and what gives you grounds for the optimism that you have about the

markets in the economy? Well, David, the background to that note

was like every meeting I go into, it usually starts with the clients.

Like I'm really surprised about the consumer, the dollar, the federal budget

deficit, the underlying strength of the economy.

So we wrote the piece kind of, you know, leaning against that narrative.

Because when you look at the consumer, sure, it's k shaped.

We know that higher income households are out there spending the federal

budget deficit. I've been debating that for like three

decades. So that's an issue.

But we we're having a we can manage it. The weaker dollar obituary has been

written how many times. I mean, so there's all these kind of

bricks of worries in the wall, right, so to speak, that we got to work through.

And it does weigh on sentiment, and it can keep people out of the market when

they should actually be leaning into the market.

So not that we're not not that we don't have any problems, right?

We got big issues to deal with with our dollar, foreign demand, federal budget

deficit, but the underlying capacity of this U.S.

economy to absorb the shocks, take the blows reset is underappreciated still.

And to me that's a that's a lean into any pullbacks to buy.

You also talk about a couple sectors you're following.

One that surprised me was U.S. solar stocks rose on Friday after the

president ordered this 15% new tariff and a price floor for um, polysilicon

derivatives, which were not really on my list of things I needed to know this

week. But, um, why is this relevant and why

are you seeing this movement in this energy sector, especially at a time when

we're not hearing a lot about solar anymore, a lot about diversification of

our energy sector, despite the need and despite what's going on in the Gulf.

Well, I'll take it from the macro level. We need every source of energy in this

country right now, whether it's fossil fuels or renewables.

So the Gulf War, back early in February, that kind of gave a new life to

renewable sector in general, not just in United States, but even globally in

Europe as well. You look at China, Russia, China, they

say all burns, a lot of coal. Well, that's true, but so do we.

But we're also using a lot of renewables.

So I think it's all hands on deck when it comes to generating power.

And that includes renewables. So I think that's been a hidden corner

of the market that's done very well. But I think that trade is now becoming

recognized. Joe, I'm not going to put in your

position. We have to talk about specific

companies. But let me just ask you about AI

broadly. I imagine when you walk into those rooms

where you're dealing with some some bearish sentiment, there's probably some

concern that you're hearing about AI's future, the path forward.

We've just been through the part of earnings season that dealt with these

hyperscalers and their attitude toward the growth of AI.

What do you take away from that? How does that change or reshape the AI

narrative as you see it? Well, the biggest thing, David, I'm

looking at is like, okay, well, you know, 27 and 28 when we kind of get back

beyond the data center, build out what picks up the slack, and I think it will

be picked up by the transportation, the grid, defense spending.

But the artificial intelligence we're looking at very carefully.

How are companies leveraging this new technology to drive margins?

And you're hearing more and more companies speak to this every earnings

every quarter. Right.

So we're seeing that happen. It's not going to happen all at once.

It's not a hockey stick. You know you go sideways and then

straight up. So it's happening.

And we're that belief that by the time we get to 28, 29, 2030, you're looking

at a different economy, a different workforce, increased productivity.

So that keeps us very constructive on US equities overall.

But there's going to be job displacements right.

We know that. But I think when when we release labor

because of automation or technology then we upskill it.

And that means more income. That means higher paying jobs.

So I believe the I we're early innings with the build out early innings with

the adoption and early innings when it comes to productivity.

But I think it's coming down the track and so do a lot of investors.

Joe Quinlan, the head of market strategy at Merrill Bank of America, thank you

very much. Appreciate the time.

Thanks for joining us on this Saturday morning and hope to have you back on

again soon here. And Christina, from what he was saying

there at the end, I mean, I think it's really fascinating, as we talked to Anna

Wang about that jobs report yesterday, we're still at a point where there's a

lot of questions about the way that I is affecting the US economy, but, um, not

enough hard data yet to draw really concrete conclusions, and also whether

the technology as a whole is going to be really profitable and how to monetize

it. All right.

Coming up. Berkshire Hathaway just reported second

quarter earnings. We're going to dig into those with more

details ahead. And what Greg Abel's big bet on a home

buying company means for the company that's ahead on Bloomberg this weekend.

Welcome back. We're going to turn to that breaking

news for Berkshire Hathaway, the company reporting second quarter earnings just a

few minutes ago with us. Matthew Paul Zola senior PNC insurance

equity analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence.

He's brought a friend as well. That is the squish, mellow Warren

Buffett, which I should say. Matt, before we get to the substance of

these earnings, this is a Berkshire Hathaway.

This is part of the conglomerate which is part of the conglomerate.

It is so a very important part of the conglomerate.

Uh, they bought a company called Alleghany a couple of years ago.

They owned a company called Jazz Wares, which makes these swish, mellow toys.

Uh, and then every year at the annual meeting, they started making a

commemorative. Buffett and Munger squish mellow, and

people line up around the around the convention center.

And you are people because you didn't get one.

You line up for this always people that are lined up for this.

Yes. All right.

I've taken this on another diversion and I apologize for that.

Well, you know, earnings just came out. I haven't seen the line item for the

swish melos yet. But just walk us through the main

takeaways here. I looked at your preview of this

earnings roughly in line with what you expect to do.

I think you said 11 to 12 billion. So right near there, looking at my cheat

sheet a little bit better than I thought, um, the insurance earnings

better kind of across the board. Everything better.

I was a little disappointed with the share repurchase.

So they bought back about $4.5 billion worth of their own shares.

That is much more than they've done over the past couple of years, but less than

I thought they were going to. Given some disclosures they made in

July. You thought around eight.

You thought around eight. Because why are they doing that?

So I think a couple of reasons. So Greg Abel is taking over and my

guess. They don't really talk to anybody.

But my guess is that he's viewing the intrinsic value of businesses a little

bit higher these days. So number one, the insurance businesses

they're over earning. But I think some of the gains are making

or sustainable. So I think he's looking at that a little

bit better. Burlington Northern the railroad he's

got his eyes on that. He called them out at the annual

meeting. He said they're going to improve their

margins there. So I think the underlying earnings power

of those businesses are improving. They have tons of cash.

So I think he's putting some of that to work.

I want to talk to you about that cash though, because their their pot did

fall. I mean, it's still an enormous number.

Um, how much of that? I mean, they bought this homebuilder,

Taylor Morrison, for 6.8 billion, but the math isn't quite matching the cash

to get more than that. So they did a couple things.

They also bought $10 billion worth of Google stock.

Um, they bought a stake in a Japanese insurance company, Tokio Marine.

So they actually this was a, uh, a spending quarter for them.

It looks like I didn't get the full numbers, but it looks like they were a

net buyer of stocks over six months. So putting more money to work than

Buffett was doing in his in his last years as CEO.

Um, let's talk just a bit about Greg Abel.

So this is the second quarter of earnings that we've got from from him

behind you. We had pictures of him at Sun Valley at

the Allen Company Conference. Um, how is his tenure going thus far?

This was a, um, hotly anticipated transition.

A lot of people wondering sort of how much continuity there would be between

Berkshire under Buffett to him. What have we learned over these last two

quarters? What have you learned since you were out

in Omaha for the big event a few months back?

Yeah, I think, um, he is much more, uh, communicative than than Buffett was.

And what does that mean? I mean, I've been to the Berkshire

website, which is janky. I mean, it's like is from like, not

even, you know, HTML out of, uh, AOL days.

Yeah. It's, um, not in that way.

More in the annual meeting talking, having more managers.

They are giving more detail on the companies.

Buffett was always it was great to hear his his kind of wit and wisdom, but he

was really not talking too much about the operating results of the companies.

Uh, so Abel is doing that. He seems to be much more focused on the

operations of the companies. The nitty gritty, Buffett had said over

the past couple of years that he was passing people off to Abel regardless.

So he was kind of running the ship for a while.

Anyway, yeah. Um, so I like what he's doing so far.

Impressed. Especially like seeing him put capital

to work. Does he have his own squash mallow?

And how many of these reports do we have to have before I almost feel bad for the

guy he's going to spend? I mean, he could have this job for ten

years. We could still be comparing him to his

predecessor. I mean, that's, you know, the blessing

and the curse of being the CEO of, uh, Berkshire Hathaway.

All right. You mentioned the railroad business.

Talk a bit more about that. If you let me just a crucial benefit, a

crucial part of this portfolio for you for a long time.

Yeah. So, um, they bought the railroad

business in Berkshire. Is is huge on these, uh, monopolistic,

uh, necessary businesses that will be around for as long as time.

Right. So that was the impetus behind buying

Burlington Northern two years ago. What has happened is the, um, metrics

versus public peers are just worse. So they're their operating ratio, which

is a railroad metric. I'm an insurance guy, but, you know,

rail, uh, moonlight as a railroad guy. Um, sure, sure.

The that metric has been worse than their their closest competitor.

And Abel is really focused on improving that.

And it's it's languished for years. So I think, uh, should they do that?

Increases the intrinsic value of the business.

It's it's still a great business for them, but, uh, needs improvement.

One of the places it seems he has stayed pretty consistent is this concentrated

portfolio and really backing these, you know, this handful of just these five

big stocks Apple, American Express, Coca-Cola, Bank of America, alphabet,

Google. Is that going to stay consistent, do you

think is that what investors are still looking for?

Is that continuity, or do they want him to diversify that portfolio at some

point? He explicitly said, we're going to focus

on this core group of stocks and not trade much around them.

Um, I don't think people want to see him, uh, jumping into new names.

They'll I think they'll make moves around the edges, but I think these are

going to stay the core portfolio. Uh, they made some moves around.

Apple took out a lot of Bank of America stock over the past couple of years, so

I think it stays pretty steady. We may want to one back here to the home

building acquisition they made. But before we get there I mean your

bread and butter is property casualty Insurance is hugely integral to this

business as well. What have we seen broadly in the sector

and sort of how does that manifest in the data that we got?

Yes. So one of the biggest things that's

swinging there results is Geico. So um, they owned Geico.

Uh, they've owned it since the 70s. The auto insurance business saw a big

spike in losses and post Covid because of, uh, the cost of auto parts.

So what all of the auto insurance companies did was raise rates a lot.

I don't know if you experienced. I have strongly felt this

car, but you drove a car, you probably experienced this and this was across the

board. So what happened is they raised these

prices. All of the results of the auto insurance

companies got much better, uh, to kind of record levels.

So now what all of the big players are trying to do is grow.

So they're all now fighting. So the pro tip is shop your auto

insurance are good for the company. They're not going to just lower your

price. But if you shop around you probably get

a better deal on your auto insurance because all of the big names are

fighting. So that's going to be the big story is

the swing in the auto insurance results. And that will by billions of dollars

swing their earnings. He plays in railroads and he plays in

uh, insurance recommendations as well. Multifaceted way.

Before we let you go, I want you to play in home building.

I want to go back to the Taylor Morrison acquisition, because it did seem like an

odd time to be betting on the homebuilding market in the U.S..

And we were talking in the newsroom. We were like, well, maybe they also

build data centers, know they build homes.

Why now? And this was something that was like

cheered by Buffett. He said this was a great acquisition.

So they have home building businesses that they own.

Yeah. Um, so this was kind of a compliment to

the home businesses that they already own.

I think it's, uh, they, they do manufactured homes or just Clayton

Homes. So they build the home and then they

bring you your house and they put it down.

Uh, this is more building, more higher end homes on site.

So it was a nice compliment to the businesses that they own.

Berkshire is not looking to time things and get it kind of right at the exact

moment I think they want to be in these necessary businesses, like home building

is going to be necessary over time. So I think that was probably the impetus

for this deal rather than, you know, maybe now's the exact right time to buy

this company. All right.

Let me ask you lastly here, just about the stock.

Maybe we can kind of end on that. So upward three ish percent here over

the course of the year. Um, you don't have to follow the S&P

that closely. No.

That is lagging behind where the S&P is. What is your read on.

What are folks read on sort of how the stock is doing relative to to the

broader index. Yeah I mean the one of the curses of

Berkshire is it gets seen as this, uh, market proxy, but not the not the

current market, which is now dominated by I, I think, I mean, this stock is the

quintessential anti-air name, right. So I think when you see those swings in

tech, it should probably go the other way, but it hasn't.

Uh, I think the overhang is still there. The Buffett, the Buffett kind of hang

over, uh, and people kind of waiting still on Greg Abell, even though I think

he's doing a great job, I think there's going to be that overhang for a little

bit longer. Um, but the value of these industrial

businesses, manufacturing businesses, I think will manifest themselves more over

time. Matt, thank you very much.

Thank you for joining us with this breaking news.

And thank you for bringing swish mellow. Warren Buffett.

Yeah, he was a quiet guest. But you know, we take up some space.

We appreciate taking a back seat to Greg Abel.

Squish me, Greg and Lisa Mateo, we're going to go back to you now for the

headlines. Can you get us updated?

You got it, guys. Let's get right to it.

And of course we'll get to those top stories.

Turkey reportedly restricting commercial ship traffic into the Black Sea.

That's following growing concern from the government after an uptick in

Russian and Ukrainian attacks on the vessels in the area.

Now, sources tell Bloomberg, the Directorate of General of Coastal Safety

has told multiple ships bound for Russia that it is not currently issuing transit

permits for such voyages or needs more time to review applications.

Conservative. Abelardo de la espera.

Yeah, yeah, he was sworn in as Colombia's president on Friday.

Now it took place in Cali. That's at a university auditorium before

Congress instead of the Capitol. Now the move.

It was meant to signal that his hardline approach to illegal armed groups.

Uh, Dylan is spirit is espionage. He succeeds Gustavo after winning a

close runoff election in June. Eastern China bracing for Typhoon

Dolphin. Authorities have begun shutting down

schools and tourist activities. The storm expected to bring heavy rains,

severe flooding and landslides when it makes landfall late Sunday.

National authorities have declared a level three emergency response.

That's the second lowest level and drought conditions on the island of

Puerto Rico. It's forced the U.S.

territory to enforce water rationing measures in San Juan.

Other major cities. Starting yesterday, more than 180

customers. They were without power water for 48

hours at a time. That's as part of an alternating

schedule. People, they've been lining up to

receive water from tankers. July was actually the driest month on

record for San Juan and more than 120 years.

David and Christina, thank you very much.

Appreciate that. Well, who doesn't like free money?

There is a new trend going around called the Pais craze, that has people spending

money at popular retailers to ultimately save money.

Bloomberg's Yana Baker explains. This summer, I've adopted a new ritual.

When I wake up in the morning, I brush my teeth, wash my face, and then I log

into the Duncan app to buy a $10 digital gift card.

It's really important that I do this every single day, or else I'm leaving

money on the table in pays credits. What's pays, you ask?

Well, it's the big banks answer to Apple Pay, PayPal and Google Pay.

It was introduced a few years ago by the owners of Zelle, but it hasn't really

caught on because it wasn't really accepted anywhere.

That's why they've unveiled a huge marketing campaign known as the pays

craze. Dozens upon dozens of credit cards are

eligible, since the company that owns it is owned by some of the world's biggest

financial institutions like JP Morgan, Wells Fargo and Bank of America.

For each card that you activate with pays, you can get $10 back on ten

different transactions. People are striving to make transactions

as close to $10 as they can so they don't spend extra money, which is why

hunting for precisely $10 gift cards has proved popular.

Facebook groups devoted to credit card perks have been overrun with questions

and strategies. With so many people buying Dunkin gift

cards that a $10 day cap was put in place, developing their own digital

wallet is really important for the banks because that means they keep more credit

card fees. The question is, will people use pays?

Once the promotion is over? It's unclear, but the customers I spoke

to said that one hurdle was that it's a little clunky and it's not really

accepted everywhere yet, so you can't use it on Amazon or Walmart.

So it's a bit niche for now, but at least people know it exists thanks to

the pace craze. Um, now I know about it.

I didn't know about it. People are listed about this, uh, in

makeup this week, and I think it's what they were talking about.

But, um, I know a lot of people said it was too difficult.

I'm terrible with this stuff. I am Tuesday's deal.

Whatever. All right, well, if you're better at it

than we are, you can read more about it at Bloomberg.com.

All right. The return of the SAT is coming up next.

Why? More universities are once again pushing

for standardized test scores in their admissions processes.

That's coming up next here on Bloomberg this weekend.

You can find us on Bloomberg Television, Bloomberg Radio, Bloomberg.com.

You can stream the show on the Bloomberg Business app.

Stay with us. I'll be right back.

Thank you for joining us live on Bloomberg this weekend.

I'm Lisa Mateo. Let's update you on today's top stories.

President Trump has revived his threat to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa

Cook over unproven allegations of mortgage fraud.

According to a letter seen by Bloomberg, cook was told that Trump is considering

removing her and gave her until August 26th to respond to allegations made by

the white House. After surprising strength earlier this

year, the labor market is weaker than previously thought.

U.S. employers unexpectedly cut jobs in July

and hiring in the prior two months that was revised.

Lower nonfarm payrolls decreased 23,000 last month, following a combined 103,000

downward revision to the May and June figures.

The unemployment rate will that fell to 4.1% and wage growth slowed.

Trump Media and Technology Group have entered a deal to form a digital

treasury company to buy the Crypto.com Digital token, known as Chrome.

Now the two companies, they also dropped the plan that would have made prediction

market contracts available on the Truth social network.

It comes after Bitcoin prices, while they fell by nearly half to around

65,000 since their peak last year. And what would you do to get 20% off

your next purchase at the pump? Well, one Sunoco gas station in upstate

New York. They're offering the discount deal for

gas and other products to customers who, yes, show off their best dance moves.

I kid you not. People have been going all out.

This video has reached over 1 million views on TikTok.

The promotion does not include tobacco and alcohol, though I'm not sure if any

of them did partake before doing these dances.

Would you do that for 20%? You're darn right I would.

Do you know me? I'm a dancer.

Oh, it's generally my go to description for

you, David Garrard. No animal, no co or wherever I do it.

That's that's a great discount. Also like.

Come on, everybody's laughing. It's a nice moment.

It entertains everybody. It does.

Let's do it. We'll get 20% off.

Come on, 20% off. It's a new craze.

Pays craze to the skin. Lisa thank you very much.

Appreciate that. These are sticking around.

Okay. It's a debate that has split the

academic community, one of the nation's largest university system.

Since 2020, the University of California has stopped considering SAT and Act

scores for admission. Now, thousands of faculty members say

they do not agree with the test free protocol and want the school to

reconsider its test free policy. All right.

Joining us now from Washington with more is Bloomberg education policy reporter

Liam Knox. Liam, this is such a controversial topic

because some people love these tests. Some people hate these tests.

My question is, even if they re-implement the test.

Is that really going to solve the larger problem of these students showing up

unprepared for college level work? It's a great question, and one that's

kind of at the heart of this debate, honestly.

The there are a number of other factors, as I think anyone who has been

observing or living through the past five years with or without, uh, you

know, college age, high school age kids who know there's, uh, been the rise of

of I use in the classrooms. Obviously, the pandemic itself had a

huge impact on a generation of students who went through virtual learning for a

few years and are still catching up. Um, so the question of like, what is the

actual cause of this lack of preparedness is very much up in the air.

But professors, college administrators, um, they want to try everything that

they can to make sure that students who do enter the classroom are ready for the

level of college work that's expected of them.

You mentioned the pandemic. And I got to say, my daughter has been,

you know, she applied for colleges this year.

She's going you just went through. And yes, it just went through this.

And it's funny because you go and they're telling these students that are

there, you know what? This is the last time these scores are

going to be optional for students in coming next year.

You know we're going to change it and that's how we're going to make it.

They're going to have to apply it. So I see this at different different

universities. But explain why you see is so important.

I mean this is one of the last universities kind of making this change

possibly to possibly there are there are a number

of universities that are still test optional, especially the large public

institutions, the University of Michigan, the number of others, um, that

have not gone back on their test optional policies.

What makes you see very interesting, um, is that this is, uh, one they they

weren't just test optional in 2021. They got rid of safety requirements.

They went test blind, which means that admissions officers can't consider

standardized test scores even if applicants submit them.

Um, also, the you see is a massive, as you mentioned, a massive public

university system. And it's not just the elite schools

UCLA, UC Berkeley, um, UCSD that that are in consideration here.

Uh, there's also schools like UC Riverside and UC Merced, which take over

90% of all, of all of their applicants, and sort of a very different, much more

local, um, population, uh, where maybe there's a question of, you know, is one

test policy for the entire system really the the right way to go?

I think it's absurd to look ahead. And no, I think it's interesting because

I don't know when we were going to school, to me, the tests were kind of

the leveler for kids who didn't go to fancy schools or didn't get that great

grades. Like if they were smart, they took a

great test. They could get money and go to college.

Now it seems almost the opposite is true, because you have wealthier schools

and wealthier parents who can game the system.

They can get these ADHD diagnosis for longer times.

That was a big part of that college admissions scandal.

They can teach the test in a way that people without the money to do that

can't do as well. So there's also like a class and race

argument about this. But but who is advocating for which side

of this at this point? It's become a real mixed bag.

I mean, there is there's an argument that that the, the test, um, kind of

exacerbates racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to elite higher

education, to any higher education. Uh, you mentioned, you know, uh, test

prep. That's an expensive thing to pay for.

And it statistically really, really helps increase, uh, student scores.

Uh, but then there are, uh, you know, admissions officers who say actually

having these test scores helps us what they call the diamond.

In the rough theory, it helps us find students from otherwise underprivileged

high schools in areas where they might not look at or where, you know, grading

might not be the best indicator of possible success, and find students who

really, really stand out. Um, and so there's, uh, you know,

advocates for more access to higher education are also split on this

question to some degree. Liam, there's there's also this

happening in a kind of a political crucible as well.

And I wonder if you could talk about that, uh, as well.

I mean, we've heard from the Trump administration this kind of push to

reform higher education over and over again.

You've written so much about that. Um, you have the Republican candidate

for governor in California really talking about the way that higher

education needs to be reformed as well. How much does this fit into that kind of

current conversation, that Zeit Geist conversation about the future of higher

education? It fits right in there.

And of course, the UC system is saying that, you know, none of those political

concerns are going to affect its ultimate decision about whether or not

to return to test requirements, but this is a question that looms large over the

UC and over all colleges. Um, you know, the Trump administration

has advocated pretty strongly for a return to test requirements as part of

what they say is, uh, you know, reforms to restore merit in college admissions.

Um, Steve Hilton, the Republican candidate for governor there, has echoed

those, uh, you know, those calls. There's this argument that going test

optional is a kind of proxy for race preferences in admissions for a kind of

affirmative action, which, of course, the Supreme Court, uh, outlawed in 2023.

Um, that that's the argument from the Trump administration and those

officials. And so when a place like the you see

which last year, you know, faced a funding freeze from the Trump

administration of more than half $1 billion in federal research grants, uh,

is thinking about this question. It's hard not to, uh, you know, not to

to to see the, um, you know, the federal government's and, uh, you know, the

political questions hanging over this as well.

Um, and I have to ask, also, on the education side, you have another story

that you're working on. One dive into that.

It's about the surge of AI boot camps. Um, so are they effective?

What did you find out? If you can give us a little preview

before. Before it publishes?

Uh, sure. Yeah.

So it'll be out later this morning. Um, I think the question of are they

effective is very much up in the air. And that's part of the, the, the impetus

for the story. Right.

It's that there's this real drive, uh, among workers, students anxious about,

you know, the effect of the technology on the job market, whether it's the

entry level job market or whether they, you know, are trying to get back into

the workforce or pursue promotions or a new line of work.

AI is affecting everything. Or at least that's what you know,

everyone is is that's what's in the zeitgeist.

And so there's this real, uh, urge is real, uh, eagerness to go back and, uh,

kind of upskill in that area. Colleges are also very eager to kind of

meet that need, both because they want to prepare students and because it's a

possibly fruitful revenue stream. But the reality is that nobody knows

what skills employers want from, uh, from, you know, when it comes to AI, you

know, least of all the employers themselves.

And so there's this, uh, you know, there's kind of a, uh, putting the cart

before the horse here a little bit. And, uh, the question is, are these

bootcamps, these very short term, non-degree programs that students are

entering are investing in really going to hold any value?

Previewed there by Liam Knox. Course covers education policy for Sarah

Bloomberg News. That's we're going to come out on

bloomberg.com in the Bloomberg terminal as he said a little bit later this

morning. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Sam. All right.

From the backwoods to the catwalk, how luxury fashion brands are embracing a

very specific type of cameo. You can watch us wherever you are,

wherever you go. Watch us on Bloomberg TV, listen on

Bloomberg Radio, streamed the show live on the Bloomberg Business app or

Bloomberg.com. It's Bloomberg this weekend.

Welcome back to Bloomberg this weekend I'm David Gura with Lisa Mateo and

Christina Ruffini. All right, David Gura.

How often have you worn camouflage? Approximately zero times in my life.

That surprises me. 0%.

All right. So a very specific type of camo that you

usually see in the deep woods is now getting kind of a resurgence.

And you're seeing it on runways and city streets.

Camouflage is getting a surge and it's getting licensing deals with some major

brands. So here to explain what exactly this is

and why it's happening is Bloomberg Pursuits Madison Derbyshire, who has

come with you and maybe not typically. So when I read this and it said camo I

thought like fatigue camo. But that's not quite it.

That was that was what we did in like the early aughts.

But this is a different this is like deep woods camo, 60 foot camo.

We call it hunting camouflage. And when I started reporting this story,

I didn't actually know there was much of a difference.

But it turns out it's an entirely different category of camo, and it's

dominated by a few very large companies in the Deep South.

And I kind of, I, I didn't even know to be looking for it until I had to write a

story last year about hunting that required me to buy an outfit.

Bloomberg bought me this beautiful jacket so that I could do the story, and

I started wearing it around New York City.

You can see it's got like leaves and very tiny.

I started wearing it around New York City, and people would stop me on the

street and ask me where I got my jacket, what designer was it?

And I had to tell them it was Bass Pro Shop from Harlingen, Texas, but and it

cost $15, but it was easily the most complimented item of clothing in my

wardrobe. And I started to wonder, like, why were

people so interested in the style? And then I started seeing it everywhere

in New York City. I wore the wrong one.

I wore the military fatigues, camo. Um, is there a right or a wrong way to

wear it? Like, can I, can I, can I don that the

Yankee hat. Wow.

With the this is a lot of camo. Does this work?

Well I know I think it works. How do you wear camo the right way?

I think she's being very polite. I think it works.

But they they mean very different things.

So the that green hunting or this green came on the oven, your hat was

essentially correct. It was the only camo that until the mid

80s existed because it was created essentially for America's last foreign

war, which was Vietnam. But hunters in the American South were

frustrated that the camo didn't really work with the topography of the region,

and they were still finding themselves, like, very visible to the animals that

they wanted to hunt like turkeys. So there were two, um, two kind of major

players in this one same taxi Hayes, and the other is Bill Jordan, and they

decided to design their own camo and kind of two separate camel empires, one

called Real Tree, one called Mossy Oak. Um, in order to create hunting camo,

That was a little bit more appropriate for the topography of America.

And that camo has not been popular in fashion until very recently.

Like this. Camo was a very big part of the

anti-Vietnam War protest. It's something that you would see in

Abercrombie and Fitch. I know that I wore it like my entire

early adolescence. I wore cargo pants.

But to a lot of people, this camo really suggests military.

It suggests like aggression.

It's very masculine. And there's something that's really

interesting happening with the hunting camo is that the associations people

have with this pattern tend to be very regional.

So people who hunt people are from the South will be very familiar with this

pattern. But until the last five years, you

really didn't see it that often in New York.

Let me ask you about that. So you here are the trends that are

going to Bass Pro Shops and coming to New York City wearing this trendsetter.

Um, you know, you asked if I've ever worn.

No, but I grew up in the South, so it is recognizable to me.

When and how did it make the leap to something that folks here in New York

There be a cognizant in New York would recognize what this is.

American style, rural, southern style has kind of become a ubiquitous

aesthetic for Americana right now. You see, cowboy boots have had this

major boom. Carhartt jackets are everywhere in

Williamsburg, as well as the South and Brooklyn.

Yeah, there's nowhere you can go where men do not want to wear a vintage car

jacket, which when I was growing up, like I have a lot of family in the Deep

South, I was considered workwear. My grandfather used to call it clothes

for honest labor. Interesting.

You bought them in the tractor Supply. They were not sold on high streets of

Paris the way they are now. But what people are really looking for

is this kind of vintage aesthetic. So they started buying the vintage

Carhartt that looked like they had been worn in, like worked in.

And the kind of logical next step for that was hunting camo, because it has

this very American, very rural association.

But people one of the really interesting things about this moment is people are

buying used hunting. So things that have been really broken

and are being worn by men who have never hunted a turkey in their lives.

I was going to ask is like my my issue with the car to someone else who grew up

with people actually wearing this for work is like, you're you're cosplaying a

working American. It's giving like Marie-Antoinette

playing milkmaid. Like, is there something kind of off

about these guys who've never done this, you know, trying to emulate this, or is

that just fashion and just kind of part of the fun?

I think it's both. It's it is fashion.

People want to wear things that suggest an identity that they're, they want to

be a part of, like denim and workwear really entered fashion in the 70s and

80s when it's like blue jeans were not a thing right before they came into

fashion, because people wanted to wear things that suggested blue collar they

want because it was seen as like more virile, more masculine.

And you see kind of the same thing coming into play.

We're in this moment where traditional masculinity is kind of politically

ascendant. And so there are people who are

unironically wearing these clothes, these articles of clothing, because

that's what they think an American man looks like.

And then there are people who might be wearing and like the Balenciaga jacket,

that kind of fashion loves irony, right?

And so love, they want to suggest these things.

And there is something a little ironic about paying $2600 or $2700 for a

hunting jacket that you can get at Bass Pro Shops for $15.

So it is really interesting the way that

fashion takes these controversial images and they ionize them.

And also to some people, like one of the things that I think we don't talk about

enough is there's just not that many patterns that men feel like they can

wear that are culturally acceptable for men to wear, that fit with traditional

ideas of masculinity. You know, they don't really have animal

prints the way that women do. They don't really have florals unless

they're feeling particularly bold. Maybe they have stripes.

And camel is one of those things that men really gravitate towards, and then

women gravitate towards to steal from the men.

Madison, thank you very much. Thanks so much for having me.

This was really fun. The next hour of Bloomberg this weekend

starts right now.

Breaking news the Senate confirms Todd Blanche as attorney general in an early

morning vote. 50 to 49.

The nomination is confirmed. Applause broke out on the Senate floor.

What this means for the future of the Justice Department.

Digging into the jobs report. U.S.

employers unexpectedly cut jobs and the unemployment rate fell.

It is a fall in unemployment rate. That's due to the wrong reasons.

What it means for the fed and interest rates.

And an apparent financial lifeline for Liv golf.

It says it found an investor to keep the tour going.

Is this always how it goes? Liv golf.

You never get the full picture. The latest as Liv golfers tee off at

Bedminster.

Welcome, Plymouth. This weekend we're coming to you live

from Bloomberg's world headquarters in New York City I'm David Gray.

I'm Christina Ruffini. We're here with Lisa Mateo.

It is Saturday, August 8th. Obviously we have this news on the Hill.

Uh, lots of votes happening overnight. We had a Russia sanctions bill.

Uh, Todd Blanch was confirmed. And now the Senate has gone for their,

uh, much anticipated, uh, summer break. But there are other things that have not

taken a break, and that includes the conflicts in Iran, which we're going to

talk to some of our colleagues about this morning, as well as all the other

headlines. Where to start with Lisa Mateo, who the

updates. You got it.

And that overnight vote for Blanchett followed a tough confirmation fight that

exposed concerns across party lines about assailing President Donald Trump's

former personal attorney to lead the Justice Department.

It comes after Republican Senator Bill Cassidy said he would support Todd

Blanch to be the next attorney general, while Senator Susan Collins of Maine and

Lisa murkowski of Alaska, they oppose. Also this morning, the Senate has passed

a stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown at the end of

September. The move it shows how both parties are

looking to avoid a fight before midterm elections.

That vote, it was 90 to 6 to keep federal funding at current levels

through December 11th and prevent the Trump administration from transferring

funds to the Border Patrol overseas. Now Russia and Ukraine exchanged

overnight strikes. Ukraine's capital.

It came under attack by ballistic missiles and drones, with fires reported

in several districts and three people killed in the region and a fire.

It was sparked at an oil refinery in southern Russia by Ukrainian drone

debris, injuring five people. That's according to the regional task

force. Meanwhile, the U.S.

Senate did pass a new Russia sanctions bill championed by the late Senator

Lindsey Graham. It authorizes punishing tariffs on

China, India and other top buyers of the country's oil and gas well was low, as

well as extended Iran sanctions. Senator Darlene Graham, she's talked

about what it meant to her late brother. He believed that this was the most

consequential piece of legislation that he had ever led.

And I'm proud to carry the torch to the finish line.

Lindsey was committed to achieving a peaceful resolution to this war, and I'm

confident that these sanctions will pave the way.

The bipartisan legislation passed the Senate 86 to 11 and still has to pass

the House. A federal appeals court that has ruled

that President Donald Trump cannot build the white House ballroom without

congressional approval, and must stop construction of that $400 million

project. The president called the decision unjust

and said he would appeal it to the Supreme Court.

Democratic Senator Peter Welch he stressed that Congress would never give

approval for that ballroom. And Berkshire Hathaway, he spent about

$4.5 billion to buy back its own shares in the second quarter, and that provided

shareholders with the largest quarterly payout since 2021 operating earnings,

while they surged 16% in the three months through June.

David and Christina. Lisa, thank you very much.

Fascinating to hear kind of the way that investors look at stock performance of

that company in particular. No, it's not beating the S&P.

No. Not even close to it here.

But it's a it's still that thing that people want to hold on to not looking at

a quarterback. And almost the opposite of eye if you're

if you're skeptical of I or you're following this a little bit more, but

not eye proxy for sure. Thank you very much.

Appreciate that. Well, Iran's foreign minister says that

country and Oman, very close to inking a deal on managing the Strait of Hormuz as

the white House is once again saying a deal on the strait was imminent this

week. I will note here on the Saturday that

deal has not yet materialized. Now there are new reports concerning

depleted munitions, and CNN is reporting the chairman of the Joint Chiefs is

looking for an off ramp. Bloomberg News white House National

security Editor Michelle Rasco joins us now.

Michelle, I have so many questions. Um, but I think I'm going to start with

we have all this talk of talk, right. These negotiations, but it's very

unclear if the U.S. is even involved in these at this point.

It seems like this is being worked out between Oman and Iran.

And it does also seem like there is going to be some sort of tolling

structure, fee structure, exactly what the U.S.

said it didn't want and and wouldn't happen when we started this conflict.

Well, that's right, Christina. And I think that's the key point to make

this week as we talk of talks, as you say, I mean, the talks this week were

not about the US in any sort of mediating position with Iran.

It was more about, as you say, the Ron Oman talks, which have always been

about, uh, how do we manage, uh, the Strait of Hormuz, uh, long term

interest, even before this conflict for, uh, Iran to sort of solidify its control

over the strait? It's been an economic concern for

decades, uh, for them to just ensure that they can secure that as an asset.

So the talks this week apparently moved a little further.

If you're reading from Russian state media, which you know, you have to take

with a grain of salt just like any other media these days or trends.

Um, uh, you know, uh, translation of of what the regime is thinking.

Uh, but we do we do have, you know, and signals that they have come to some sort

of agreement on how to toll the streets, uh, which, of course, as you mentioned,

is not in the interest of the U.S. and not with the U.S.

with seeking or declaring that would come out of this.

So there's still no sign, uh, you know, Trump did say this week that he was

involved in the negotiations, but he didn't elaborate on who might be talking

or how that involvement might play out. Um, we do know that there's no formal

talks right now, of course, between the U.S.

and Iran. Uh, and even the media.

Uh, you know, Qatar and Pakistan have been fairly quiet about any sort of

progress there. So we are in sort of even a more a limbo

period than we were before in terms of what is the diplomatic way ahead, and

does it threaten to return us to a sort of kinetic, uh, situation?

Um, and it's a familiar split screen once again.

So we have the president talking about the prospects of a deal, uh, his desire,

I guess, to get both the U.S. and Iran back to a negotiating table

eventually. And all the while, on the other side of

the screen, there is president with his bellicose rhetoric about how long he'll

be willing to be patient until that happens and then what might happen where

he not to be playing out. Kind of in the backdrop to all of this

is the concern about the US's weapons supply.

And we certainly saw in Ukraine this week Ukraine's president, uh, saying,

you know, effectively, their their missile defenses is greatly handicapped

by the fact that there are enough patriots left.

Um, and there was all of this reporting, uh, from the likes of NBC news, other

outlets reporting on the fact that that that stockpile of munitions has been

greatly reduced because of the conflict in Iran.

So, um, president unhappy about that? We saw him, uh, tweeting out posting on

Truth Social earlier this week. The U.S.

has massive amounts of munitions, especially of certain types.

Additionally, large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the US as

needed. Defense companies are building the

largest number of plants and factories in our country's history.

The leakers. He writes of these treasonous statements

are being hunted down. Long term jail sentences will be sought.

Let's look beyond that rhetoric, if we could.

Michelle here. What do we know about the integrity of

the ammunition stockpile? The degree to which that is shaping the

president's thinking about whether or not to go back to a more intensive sort

of military fight against Iran. We'll do it.

I think we can start with, uh, what would be normal in any administration

and any any Pentagon structure is, uh, you know, you don't want your leadership

revealing what exactly the levels of munitions are, obviously, for

operational security purposes. From a political standpoint, yeah.

You have Trump, uh, you know, denying that there's any problem here.

He sees it as a leverage issue. Of course, you know, to say that we're

running low on munitions would be giving and handing something to Iran that they

think they already have, which is an understanding that the US is vulnerable,

that can't, the US cannot, you know, keep up these massive strikes with very

expensive missile defense equipment that's fighting very, you know, small

drones that are pesky at this point. Uh, you know, in some ways, uh, in a, in

a very asymmetric warfare game. So that is a problem.

That would be long standing. But I think what we have here this week

is, of course, the sort of Trump bellicose rhetoric, the bravado that he

brings to, um, every situation, every issue that he, he tries to project his,

his own opinions on, uh, is kind of cutting up against the reality that, uh,

you know, his advisers are telling him that there is, you know, a real problem

here. And it's becoming more obvious.

And one thing I think you can look at, uh, which I really appreciated, our

reporter, Tony Capozzi, had a good scoop last week looking at what has the

administration asked Congress for in emergency funding to replenish those

stockpiles? So that gives you some idea to kind of

back your way into, uh, what we're running low on or what might need to be

replenished, uh, to, to prepare for maybe what's ahead on Iran, but also

other conflicts. And as you mentioned, this is kind of,

you know, running into in a very complicated way.

Uh, other conflicts like Ukraine, where we're seeing, you know, as you

mentioned, the shortage of Patriot interceptors there.

And, and so there's this sort of kind of global competition right now.

Um, you know, in some ways to kind of figure out how can we get these things

produced faster. And, and the president has said that he

is, uh, you know, urged and the defense primes are responding to that faster

production call. Always follow the money.

It's always a good reporting tool. Um,

how much faster can they do this? We have the chief of naval operations,

uh, here. And it seems like.

And our colleague just interviewed the army secretary, and we've all asked this

question. They are reticent to answer it directly

because it is such a politically charged, uh, issue with the president.

But there at some point, to your point, it is becoming more and more obvious.

It is the reality that this is going to become a problem.

And the lead time for a lot of these patriots and bigger munitions is like

five years, so aspirational. The admiral is talking about even trying

to get that cut down to half. What is the plan in the meantime?

What are the options? And is this why you're hearing leaks and

rumblings that folks in the Pentagon are trying to find off ramps to this

conflict? Because in the meantime, there just

aren't that many options? Yeah, well, two things.

I mean, Christina, again, we can look at what happened, what the situation was

before the war, and then now that it's exacerbated with the strains from the

war. So before the war and even decades back,

you always have this debate about can the five defense primes the biggest

defense contractors to the government? Can they move faster?

Can they be more efficient? Can they do more to make sure that they

don't have cost overruns and that they just move on a timeline that works for

the US military and for the US taxpayer. And that's always the pressure point

between government and business on that front.

So those are long standing debates. The Trump the second Trump term, um, you

know, even dating back to its beginning a year and a half ago, was talking about

getting the defense primes and defense procurement in general to move faster,

to be more nimble, to draw on more startups to to get more next gen tech,

um, and to just be less clumsy in some ways than they have been.

And, and, you know, you can imagine how those debates go with those, uh,

executives who have been to the white House a few times.

Um, and, and, uh, it isn't in their interest to kind of speak candidly about

those meetings, but you can kind of read, uh, you know, what those

discussions are now under, under this situation with munitions running low,

you do see, um, you know, more of an effort and more talk from the likes of

Defense secretary, heads up, um, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chairman Kaine and

others to to get those primes to move faster.

And so, um, and then we had, as you mentioned, Army Secretary yesterday.

Army Secretary just called yesterday announcing, um, another kind of avenue

for startups to get more involved. So they're coming to military bases, um,

and they're being invited to, to to move faster and bookings on those military

bases to test weapons. So another, another effort there to to

kind of get this procurement process more nimble and to, to speed up

production. All right, Michelle, Germans go our

white House and national security editor joining us from D.C..

Thank you so much. Thank you Michel.

Well, the next summit between Presidents Trump and she is scheduled to take place

next month in Washington. And the agenda is expected to center on

trade and technology. And for almost a decade, Evan Osnos is a

Beijing based reporter. He's also the author of a book, Age of

Ambition Chasing Fortune, truth, and Faith in the New China.

These days, he's based in D.C., but he recently took a reporting trip to China

in a new piece for The New Yorker. He writes that many of those changes

have taken place since 2013 and saying for a long time, China, look west for

visions of the future. These days, it's favoring its own.

Its approach to I is one illustration of that.

Evan Osnos is a staff writer for The New Yorker, and he joins us now on this

Saturday. Evan, I want to start with, I if I

could, because you I'm going to paraphrase you here, you'll forgive me

for doing that, but you highlight the distinction between the way that China

approaches AI and the way that the U.S. does.

And I think what you sort of indicate is that in the U.S., the debate is about

sort of advanced general intelligence, sort of what that might mean for our

society as a whole. It is a much more kind of commercially

focused aspiration in China than it is here in the U.S..

It is. Yeah.

The conversation in China is about how to get it out as fast as possible as far

as possible. And they're not just thinking about how

do we get it into Chinese factories, but also how do we get it into Africa,

Central Asia, Latin America? And so you have a very different

conversation when you're going around, as I did.

You know, visiting Chinese factories are going to AI consultancies that are

looking at ways of bringing this into very old fashioned factories.

Um, you know, there's not a whole lot of imaginings about, uh, you know, a sci fi

future, even though there are elements of that beginning to present themselves

in the present. Um, it's really about.

All right. How do we go into a brewery, for

instance? That's a real example.

And say, how do we take beer production and put it into the 21st century?

So it is, uh, it is quite striking that when you're on the ground these days

about how I and, and other technologies feel like they are already part of life.

And it seems to me that the energy aspect is a huge part of that.

We were talking earlier with Joe Quinlan from Bank of America, talking about the

spike we saw in solar stocks this week. And he said part of the reason is what

we're seeing in the Gulf in this energy demand.

And China has been really out ahead on energy diversity.

And we're still seeing this, you know, mysterious drop in, uh, oil imports from

China. Is this are they more able to throw

their weight behind this and back, build the infrastructure because of just the

way they are structured with their government, they can long term plan in a

way that a democracy doesn't have to, because we change presidents possibly

every four years. Yeah.

This is both the blessing and the curse of having a centrally planned system.

You know, the blessing, of course, is when you decide you're all in on all

kinds of energy, as they have over the course of the last generation.

They've gone from producing, you know, something like half as much energy as

United States to producing now much more.

And actually, in many cases, it's cheaper.

Um, this is partly because they've been able to say from the top, this is what

we're doing. And then that filters down through the

system, even down into the localities where you get municipal governments that

are even on the individual level. You have politicians in the Chinese

system competing for promotions by saying, look, we are investing in solar.

We're investing in nuclear, whatever it is.

Um, the downside, of course, is that when they go off of true north by a few

degrees and end up on an engineering project that turns out to be either out

of step with market demands or in some cases, like the one child policy, which

I talk about in this piece. Uh, something that produces a huge range

of negative economic consequences, that it's very hard to shift that battleship

before it can cause, um, more damage. So what we're seeing right now is that

this is the moment when those energy investments have paid off, and it's been

very helpful for them. Evan, you can count me among those who,

um, have been introduced to the new China through through your book and

through your writing. And I just wondered if you could talk a

bit about what it was like to return there on this, this reporting trip.

I think one of the things you observe is kind of the quiet of Beijing in a way

that it wasn't before, because there are so many electric vehicles now.

The means of transportation has changed, the means of commerce has changed as

well. The storefronts are less crowded because

people are buying things, uh, with apps and using delivery services.

How different is the new China today than the one that you wrote about now,

you know, more than a decade ago. It's very interesting to see it up close