SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER at adamtaggart.substack.com (or upgrade to premium to receive our "Adam's Notes" summaries to this interview & all others on this channel, plus the new MacroPass service)
What a difference between an academic and real life practitioners. She hedged many questions you asked with complete ambiguity. She even said don’t take her rule too seriously. I had to stop listening.
Calls are hard because it's always in transition/grey, and not black and white. If something is going up something else is going down. Best approach is to find the up now and avoid the down then vice versa. Apply to what you're looking at. Business owners must do this on the street. Academics have to come up with a way to "describe" some kind of generalization. There is no 0 and no 100. Whatever It is to you and your position is the real world.
Great example of political affiliation clouding the judgement of an economist, even when their own celebrated work points in a very clear (but politically inconvenient) direction. Sad.
She knows exactly where the truth is. But she has to lie to get another gig if Kamala wins. "Former economic advisor int he Obama administration" told me all I needed to know about this guest. Politicians are not truth tellers. They're lie tellers. If they tell the truth they don't get selected and elected.
Democrats are masters of drinking Kool Aid. I think we now have another term to go with the awesome term "gaslighting", it's when you can't gaslight any longer because the truth is finally indisputable, I call it the "Biden debate moment". In the case of economics its basically the same as a "Minsky moment". Currently the narrative among the elites is that the economy is returning to normal. Claudia Sahm herself explained at the beginning that the point of her work in creating the Salm rule was to take the politics out of calling the recession because this happens every time, the incumbent is politically motivated to gaslight the public about not seeing anything wrong so they can get reelected and the opposing political party is motivated to call it a recession. The irony of all this is that Claudia Sahm herself is trying to tip toe a tight rope around the fact that her rule is triggered but because Biden's in office she can't say we're in recession so she basically word smiths for an hour to give non answers.
Simple %wage gain - % official inflation numbers are what economists like her like. If inflation is 3% and you got a 5% raise in february, you are better off.
actually that is a partially true statement. Thosee on welfare food stamps section 8 all of the above and anything else i missed ARE doing better... for section 8, california at least in sd county rewrote math formulas for section 8 and income earners which hadn't been done since the 70's and some of those people are paying $250 less a month... i know some of them.... i think for MIDDLE AMERICA, MIDDLE CLASS.. they are getting wiped out
Most guests come here with a presentation, some times a modified form of the reports they send clients/subscribers. Claudia came with nothing just to riff podcast style.
Well, Truman famously said that he wants a one handed economist because they all make remarks followed by “but on the other hand.” I don’t mind the multiple positions as long as they start with a “base case” and then list possible alternate outcomes with likelihood (percent approximations, even) and rationale, and with reasons why a pivot might be warranted at a future point because unexpected obstacles arise. Economics is a humanity, after all, not a science.
Admittedly, I haven’t finished listening to the entire interview BUT, right out of the gate, she seems hesitant to offer a concise opinion or perhaps she is contemplating how what she says today will affect the future of how well her “rule” is regarded. She may be affected by a political bias or something but I would just expect someone who came up with an economic “rule” for a reliable sign of an economic shift, to have a little more confidence in what she is seeing or willingness to pin down a more direct statement than what I’m hearing so far in this interview.
She is so couched/political (wishy-washy?) in her responses that they offer no insight beyond what we already know about the Sahm Rule having been triggered. If economists have a bad rep, she reinforces it. I gave up after 15 min.
100% agree, im only about 10 minutes in and I can already tell this is going to be a difficult interview to listen to. Will give it a few more minutes....
If someone has an opinion that the Fed or government intervention can provide a net benefit, this interview could change your mind. Monetary policy and data uncertainty make lag and magnitude effects guaranteed while fiscal policy is inherently unfair and politically charged.
I don’t have much respect for Claudia. I asked her an innocuous question on Twitter last February on the Fed’s intentions regarding rate policy and received a vague answer about mandates. I asked her politely if she could be more forthcoming in her response and she blocked me! Of course people can block anyone they choose and she didn’t owe me an answer, but come on.
We are in a recession heading for a depression. No Jobs, the number is way higher than what's being reported. Inflation is through the roof people are broke and business are closing their doors.
It is so simple. Dave Packard and Bill Hewlett formed HP and Silicon Valley. Their professor at Stanford University said never work for corporate. When I was young there was such hope. I went into Engineering. You could toss a rock and hit a company. Then the Business majors got involved. They gave away the Country. What I mean is, an economy is defined as Engineering, Manufacturing goods. Since the late 80s the real economy was destroyed. They can create the 90s and make 1000s of Router companies, they can take the 2000s and make a housing bubble, they can create the AI bubble. No matter what, we have lost our Engineering, Manufacturing and selling goods. So now it is a matter of time. We have one thing left, print money.
How about a rule against deficit spending in times of economic growth. How about a Swiss debt brake rule, not mailing checks to people who don't work. Public assistance for able bodied people should require work.
She’s gone down a data rabbit hole trying to verbalize her study without committing to it ? Yes painful talking about this and listening. Political parties won’t let her do this. They want total fiscal control and not lose their power and wealth. In my opinion by not taking political control in her model the power they thrive on she’s spinning her wheels but she is justifying her job good on her. I feel her pain! So we should be prepared for a painful uncertain future per normal. Nothing new here.
@pamelagriffiths5248 All she can do, is spin imbecile word-salad nonsense. She is patronizing and incompetent at the same time. Obvious DEI Hire. Lets not sugar-coat it about this inept person. Adam is playing with our financial future here.
It's interesting to have an academic's perspective on the current state of the economy, most of the interviewees on this channel are practitioners, rather than theorists and this is a nice change. It's very interesting to see that even our most celebrated academics don't know what's going on.
Since were talking academic… She’s coming from a Keynesian perspective as to her reactions to the economy. Would love to see an Austrian economic school’s perspective.
Nowadays, you don't go to college to challenge your views. You go there to confirm and reinforce them. BTW, I'm an academic myself (physics prof), but I'm the tiny minority that isn't a rabid liberal.
So when the economy is doing good , you give the credit to wall street and when the things go bad , it is government, right ! Like GFC 2007-2008 , it is government faylt?
@@Zummbot we already had multiple negative quarters and ppl are destroyed financially and only ppl that benefited from this transfer of wealth either big corporations or business owners are spending propping up the system making it look better then it really is
She was painful to listen to for several reasons, so I only lasted to halfway. My takeaway: I think her rule works even though probably designed for wrong reasons. She can't say the truth because of who provides her with a pay check and being indoctrinated/educated a certain way. Academics in this area still seem to be out of touch with reality. That probably sums it up to halfway at least 😁.
@rjnoiseux Come on...we need financial straight talk. Would you not agree, She is the most incompetent guest ever!! Don't sugar-coat it. Adam is playing with our financial lives.
As always, a great analysis. Newcomers often wonder if it's too late to navigate the financial market, but the market is always unpredictable. Trading has more advantages than simply holding, so it's important to learn before diving in. Active trades are necessary to ride the market's waves. Thanks to Whitney Eston insights, daily trade signals, and my dedication to learning, I've been increasing my daily earnings, managed to grow a nest egg of around 127k to a decent 532k. Kudos to the journey ahead!
Scary if I’m hearing it correctly, we need the sahm rule to let them know when to send out the stimulus checks? We know how that turns out..l Geeeze...
My advice to everyone is this : if you want to grow big this year especially in your finances. Be willing to make investments. Saving is great but investing puts you on a pedestal where you wouldnt have to worry about savings as you do now. Thanks to larysa Caba, my portolio is doing really great and im proud of the decisions i made last year.
I feel one Of the greatest challenges that we first timers face in the ma rket is that we end up losing all we have,making it difficult to find ourselves back to our feet. My biggest advice is to always seek the services of a professional just like I did when I ventured into it for the first time. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I now make huge profits by weekly through her services while still learning to stand on my own.
I think she trades for everyone I meet. I met her twice at a meeting in Germany and after her lectures from Ella I had to personally ask her to be my financial advisor. she is definitely good.
I have never seen a trader as open and transparent as Larysa Caba with her clients. The way she decides to make a profit for her clients. she allows you to express your fears and she still rests your fears and that is my respect. I don't normally comment on videos, but this word should be included. she is really cool.
I'm new to this and have heard that now is an excellent time to buy. However, I currently have cash sitting in my bank account that I would really like to put to good use because inflation is at an all-time high. Who is this coach that you mention, and do you mind if I look them up?
Last time i heared Claudia, she was say everything was great and we were all imagining it. Now her own recession rule is triggered, lol no wonder she sounds so confused explaining that.
She worked as an economic advisor for the Obama administration. That's all I needed to know about her and the interview went EXACTLY how I expected. These people are the useful functionaries of Marie Antoinette.
Of all the questions she was asked, that was about the only one she seemed to sort of answer, at least from my understanding: She thinks the Fed SHOULD have started cutting in July and normalize rates fairly quickly since we seem to be in a situation where the economy is weakening and she said earlier in the interview they shouldn't be waiting until all hell is breaking loose and panic cutting and forcing fiscal policy to "act in haste" (her words) AKA throw trillions of dollars of pork barrel spending at the economy with 900 page bills that congress has 3 hours to read before they vote on it or risk blowing up the economy, like we did the last 2 times we had recessions. However she also made clear that she does NOT think Fed policies have anywhere near the magnitude of impact as fiscal policy, especially given the scale of fiscal response we saw in 2020 and 2021. I agree with her. The Fed had interest rates at 0% and bought $9T worth of securities over 13 years and never caused inflation, even with Trump cutting taxes in 2018 on top of that. Then when the government did unprecedented fiscal action there's inflation and everyone blamed the inflation on the Fed?
@@nemesis0865They know this then and keep that information from the public. It's nefarious. The Fed does print & fill bank reserves. They control the money supply
As a competent economist, she is very circumspect and equivocating - important qualities for those who dabble in the dismal science. She tries to be apolitical and non-ideological, but this is just not possible in a policymaking environment. She sounds like a Keynesian and so has a far different interpretation of fiscal and monetary policy than would an Austrian-schooled economist. She seems to accept the dual mandate of the Fed and ignores the negative consequences of direct stimulus of the magnitude we experienced during the pandemic, and that pandemic policies were inevitable. Many economists and policymakers would disagree. Social interaction protocols were necessary, but not much else. Shutting down small businesses and disrupting the supply chains and services was probably unnecessary. Adam's anecdote about the Kashkari revelation are a case in point: working classes that were given stimulus checks weren't too happy when housing, healthcare, education, energy and food prices ate them up and then some. The policymakers deployed money illusion to try to keep the population happy with the policy consequences of the pandemic - it didn't work and experience wasn't necessary to tell us that. The simple economic truths that economic security comes through work, productivity, saving, and capital accumulation hold true - we can never borrow and spend our way to prosperity. But the politicians will try to sell that illusion and policymaking economists risk becoming their useful idiots. They need to acknowledge that the money illusion of prosperity cannot never substitute for the real thing. What the voting public is telling us is that technocratic management has failed.
Economists often support the idea of sending checks to households in an attempt to influence natural economic cycles. However, does it make sense to do this without considering the impact on the purchasing power of the money we earn? The only group that seems to benefit significantly from this approach is the top 0.1 percent, who are heavily invested in stocks and other inflation-sensitive assets.
Adam: I really enjoy your podcast and believe that your guests are excellent. You do a great service. I believe that Claudia Sahm has been the lone exception. With that said, I am going to point out - from my viewpoint as a loyal listener going back several years now - what I believe needs improvement. First of all, I am disappointed in Sahm that she did not give credit to Edward McKelvey from Goldman Sachs, who is the one that developed this. She made a change in order to help eliminate false positives, but Mckelvey developed the concept, so he deserves the credit. After about 30 minutes, I needed to sign off as she was really tough to listen to. Moreover, I could tell you were having a touch time moderating the interview, unlike any of the others I've watched and, I've watched most of them. Sahm is a very "stiff" interviewee. From one of the other comments below, I see that she stated that the proverbial "we" are better off today than 3 years ago...that is simply partisan. An economist should be after the truth, not partisanship. Add the fact that she apparently worked in the Obama admin, well, that there is another negative. Lastly, the podcasts are getting too long. If they could be kept to one hour, which should be plenty, I think that would help the listeners. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm just being honest from my perspective, of course. My background: retired CPA and former college professor of Accounting and Italian immigrant. I try to keep up what what's going on especially in economics and finance and, your podcast is very helpful. Take care and all the best to you. PS: I am thankful for folks like Lacy Hunt, Lance Roberts, John Hussman...and pretty much all the other very informative guests, too many to mention.
“What I had proposed was putting stimulus payments on auto pilot” These people are part of the problem. Claudia Sohm is literally so confused that she started to apologize that her Sahm rule perhaps being too stringent - two days before it was triggered. I completely understand questioning our theories, but often I feel bull street / intimidation front runs it. I hope Claudia learns something about herself through what we are invariably coming up against
@@khutzey4149 She is not confused. She doesn't want a recession call at this time and wishes her rule would shut up about it. After the election she will relax about it.
I appreciate the guest sharing her expert knowledge, and I’m sure it’s all very valuable; but there is a pretty big gap between what we ordinary citizens need to hear and her attempt to analyze recession in technical terms. The economy is a big mess out there, we woke up to a world of inflations that no households and businesses are ready for, poor federal policies in borders and hiking rates way too aggressively, and political divisions that are growing more extreme each day. Recession? I’m afraid the problems have gone beyond that a while ago. If this expert has worked for the Federal Reserve and she’s still having trouble giving a straight answer as to where we are now, that alone explains why we are in such a mess😂We can really use experts on this show who can tell us what storms are brewing on the horizons and how average people can prepare for that. As a concluding remark: thank you Adam for trying your best to translate the session into common language 😂🙏🙏
"Not having recessions" policies seem to be destroying the middle class while benefitting the wealthiest the most and massively growing size of the government. Inverted incentives
Listened to the whole interview while driving home. My impression was a whole lot skirting around her own rule. And I would think logically sending out checks automatically would help drive back up the inflation. I do think the supply chain had to play at least some part in driving up inflation.
Reading someone of the comments prior to watching the interview to see if it’s worthwhile and I have to say it doesn’t sound like it is based upon the general consensus. … fell asleep after 17 minutes.
She is typical OUT OF TOUCH saying we are better off now than before covid, every goods and services nearly DOUBLE, while salaries up around 12 %. She sing and dance, she knows WE ARE ALREADY IN RECESSION, then she basically say her rule does not work. Typical politician. Sad, if people cannot afford MCDONARD 5.00 SPECIAL, we are IN RECESSION. no need for Nobel prize economist, those people are out of touch.
I love this interview. She is so honest about what both she and policymakers don't know. I’m not a big fan of government interventions ( experiments ) but she at least seems aware of what we don't know. Very impressive!!!
you will only know what they want to know / you will only see what they want you to see. most ppl are made to believe only a few options never a win win win situation.
She appears to be an economist who has been thrust unwillingly into politics. Given she worked in the Obama Administration, I can see why this might be the case.
I will never listen to this woman again if I can help it. I downloaded the interview for a walk and then was stuck. Definitely a politician selling something. She was painful to listen to--dithering, girly-ish, like a character from Veep trying to not say the obvious truth. Her hesitations and sighs--it's such hard work being a big thinker. This one stopped me in my tracks--"so many policy levers to pull." She referenced one up front--when to know it's the right time to send out stimulus checks.
@frankrusso2093 Wow! So well said. And I hope I do not offend anyone...but if this woman's double-speak, word-salad doesn't scream DEI-Hire, I don't know what does.
So the goal is that we never have a recession again? We NEED prices to come down so that people don’t have to live pay check to pay check. This will not help.
If everyone living paycheck to paycheck received $5,000 directly into their bank account, I believe the clear majority would have spent that money in a handful of months. For a great many people, if you increase their income they will spend it irrespective of how irresponsible that is given that they have no long savings.
@@blairmassey635 yes thats what I'm saying - they'll just end up living paycheck to paycheck again even if they had an extra 5K, 10k, or more on hand right now. Likewise, if the prices of everything came down 10% a great many people would increase their spending to accommodate the fact that they can now afford more. The cycle then would repeat itself. Part of the problem is cost of living being too high, I agree. But for an absolute multitude of people its also basic responsibility of finances.
@@MatthewGrace99 I think it’s twofold. Some people spend all they have because inflation is eating up their income. Some spend all they have because they don’t think they’ll ever get ahead. My ex-in-laws were like that. Whenever they had money they spent it. Why save when you believe you’ll always be poor?
The Sahm rule starts the economic downturn signal then the Fed cuts rates so the yield curve reverts and then the stock market goes on it’s downward trajectory..
A while ago, on TDLR, she said she didn't think her own rule would apply this time. Curious to hear if she's since changed her mind about her own indicator. Yes, kudos Adam on the incredibly timely booking.
@@FreeSpeech4All that was many months ago though, back when many Adam guests were coming on excited that the recession "was here" and they were hoping the Sahm rule would confirm it
I started reading comments before I watch interviews, whether it is worth to spend hour and more. After reading about 10 comments, it is clear to me that this is just another clueless quacker, who is not worth listening to. Thanks for sparing me of wasting almost 2 hours folks.
So she was born Claudia Foster, married and divorced a Sahm, and now a Baker? Makes no sense. Her verbal communication is quite bad, and good example of why academics don’t always fit
More or less what I expected. As far as technocrats go, she's a superstar, something akin to the Michael Jordan of government bean counters. I think that spending so much time studying macroeconomic data in ivory towers like the Eccles building has permanently distorted her ability to draw any meaningful conclusions from the statistics she parses through. She acknowledges, albeit in a circuitous manner, two very important things in this interview: 1) the data are flawed (it's called the dismal science for a reason, studying human nature on a national or even supranational level and forecasting based off of that is foolhardy imho) & 2) getting a clear and accurate picture of what is occurring within a large and complex system like an economy is, at best, extraordinarily difficult under most circumstances. The foundations upon which our most powerful decision makers are enacting policy are kaput; yet they continue to go to the phds, statisticians, mathematicians etc to understand our world and they in turn keep churning out an avalanche of data points that could be used to support any narrative that one so chooses. It's such a paradox that amidst all these sophisticated econometric models we are more confused than ever about the state of the economy. I know that I sure as hell don't have any answers but I also know that people like Claudia Sahm don't either. In many ways they are utterly useless and listening to her stumble around Adam's questions strengthened this conviction within me.
Thanks, Adam. It was really interesting to find out why the Sahm Rule was developed (fiscal stimulus) and Claudia's admission that it's a very conservative threshold because of this, due to the need for certainty. Thanks again.
Lots of talking with head tilted back and eyes closed- disappointed with bias to invent automatic triggers to helicopter money from government- rather than outlawing it.
Her stutters and babbling make it hard for me to trust her. Especially since she worked for Obama. With all the revisions, we're in a recession already.
Household balance sheets are relatively healthy????? The lower 50% of the population is on financial life support. 90--day credit card and car payment defaults are skyrocketing. 30-day mortgage defaults are now increasing as are auto repos. Covid stimmy checks have all been spent and savings depleted.
But the rich are really, REALLY rich... and the REALLY rich are REALLY, REALLY, *REALLY* rich... and the poor are just broke at $0... so on average, the economy is good! 😂
she's trying to generalize everything , there's a lot of truth in what she says but to understand the Dynamics you must have the information and charts she has access to / or evaluating. bless her heart.
Claudia Sahm is way smarter than I am but she doesn't talk about the government spending that has artificially propped the economy up and kept inflation high. Looks like that is now coming back to bite us
To hear real practitioner, conflicting as some say, cautious… just proves that world and markets can not be mathematically defined and its a process we constantly learn from.
The Sahm rule is not working this time because of the influx of people crossing our southern border for a better life. Of course there's a huge jump in unemployment.
I'm not ready to say the same thing about the inverted yield curve, though. Heck, the day after Powell said it's not working, the market tanked the next day; because he doesn't understand it. The issue is when the yield curve UN-inverts.
This interview confirms to me that the central planners will send out checks if there is an economic downturn. VDE and TLT may pop now but I wonder if the Stimi checks will cause low rates to back up relatively quickly.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER at adamtaggart.substack.com (or upgrade to premium to receive our "Adam's Notes" summaries to this interview & all others on this channel, plus the new MacroPass service)
C-mon man... your guest says @let me share this publicly avaulable chart@... and the URL is blocked by your watermark 🙄
Is that broccoli between the wood?
What a difference between an academic and real life practitioners. She hedged many questions you asked with complete ambiguity. She even said don’t take her rule too seriously. I had to stop listening.
It's almost as if the economy is complex.
Calls are hard because it's always in transition/grey, and not black and white. If something is going up something else is going down. Best approach is to find the up now and avoid the down then vice versa. Apply to what you're looking at. Business owners must do this on the street. Academics have to come up with a way to "describe" some kind of generalization. There is no 0 and no 100. Whatever It is to you and your position is the real world.
She sounds like she is terrified her rule and analysis might help Trump.
Yeah, glad I you wrote this. She doesn't get to the point. Wanders around. Too many words. I am going to stop listening
Couldn’t have written a better summary. Miss ambiguity. It was so tiring to listen to her I couldn’t listen to the whole interview.
Great example of political affiliation clouding the judgement of an economist, even when their own celebrated work points in a very clear (but politically inconvenient) direction. Sad.
She knows exactly where the truth is. But she has to lie to get another gig if Kamala wins. "Former economic advisor int he Obama administration" told me all I needed to know about this guest. Politicians are not truth tellers. They're lie tellers. If they tell the truth they don't get selected and elected.
Very well said.
Democrats are masters of drinking Kool Aid. I think we now have another term to go with the awesome term "gaslighting", it's when you can't gaslight any longer because the truth is finally indisputable, I call it the "Biden debate moment". In the case of economics its basically the same as a "Minsky moment". Currently the narrative among the elites is that the economy is returning to normal.
Claudia Sahm herself explained at the beginning that the point of her work in creating the Salm rule was to take the politics out of calling the recession because this happens every time, the incumbent is politically motivated to gaslight the public about not seeing anything wrong so they can get reelected and the opposing political party is motivated to call it a recession. The irony of all this is that Claudia Sahm herself is trying to tip toe a tight rope around the fact that her rule is triggered but because Biden's in office she can't say we're in recession so she basically word smiths for an hour to give non answers.
46:35 is she serious?
Are you really better off now than three years ago?
Sorry Adam but this guest is disconnected from main street.
Most academics are in La La Land. This is why college campuses are so absurd now.
She is in another world, while inflation DOUBLE NEARLY EVERYTHING, GOOD AND SERVICES
Simple %wage gain - % official inflation numbers are what economists like her like. If inflation is 3% and you got a 5% raise in february, you are better off.
actually that is a partially true statement. Thosee on
welfare
food stamps
section 8
all of the above and anything else i missed ARE doing better...
for section 8, california at least in sd county rewrote math formulas for section 8 and income earners which hadn't been done since the 70's and some of those people are paying $250 less a month... i know some of them....
i think for MIDDLE AMERICA, MIDDLE CLASS.. they are getting wiped out
Trying to "get politics out of it".....😅
First guest I hope you do NOT have on a second time. Nothing to offer but babbling dribble.
Adam had descended into full DEI-Hire nonsense.
I suppose this interview helped pull back the curtain on the level of intellect of our experts and central planner's.
LOL , yes these are the "big thinkers". It's worse than we thought.
She doesnt see the response to the pandemic as worsening the conditions!!! Are you serious?
Bizarre ain't it?
@@JimmyHat-k4t yah!!! And they made a “rule” out of her!! Wtf!!
F--en. Academic
Don't believe your lying eyes because Fulbright scholar.
Exactly
Claudia sounds more confused than I am.
I came here for clarity and am now more
under a Elmer than ever.
Typical academic
😂😂😂
If you spend as much time wandering in your head as she does every day, you'd probably be acting similarly.
Most guests come here with a presentation, some times a modified form of the reports they send clients/subscribers. Claudia came with nothing just to riff podcast style.
Shes part of the establishment so she can’t speak truth…her incoherent vibes triggered my spidey sense
She’s greatly conflicted
and terribly long-winded. This interview could be reduced to half of the time
She has made it worse. I'm shocked at her refusal to be straightforward.
@@nemesisenforcer907it isn’t straightforward
That’s normal for a woman. 😊
Intellectual awareness vs need to be part of a club.
definitely more of a politician than an economist
And she's probably not a politician because her public speaking is, well, not great.
@@janetpelletier1238I mean Kamala Harris is a POTUS candidate and VP. Have you listened to her speak before?
Rule #1 of any economist...If you give a prediction, never give a timeline.
@@nickzivs Yeah, and I don't get it.
Well, Truman famously said that he wants a one handed economist because they all make remarks followed by “but on the other hand.” I don’t mind the multiple positions as long as they start with a “base case” and then list possible alternate outcomes with likelihood (percent approximations, even) and rationale, and with reasons why a pivot might be warranted at a future point because unexpected obstacles arise. Economics is a humanity, after all, not a science.
Admittedly, I haven’t finished listening to the entire interview BUT, right out of the gate, she seems hesitant to offer a concise opinion or perhaps she is contemplating how what she says today will affect the future of how well her “rule” is regarded. She may be affected by a political bias or something but I would just expect someone who came up with an economic “rule” for a reliable sign of an economic shift, to have a little more confidence in what she is seeing or willingness to pin down a more direct statement than what I’m hearing so far in this interview.
Skitty
Exactly what I thought when listening this episode.
I caught the end of the livestream and pretty much had the same sentiment as you at opposing end. It was a disappointing interview.
Yeah, she's like the antithesis of Art Laffer… in economic philosophy and speaking.
She is so couched/political (wishy-washy?) in her responses that they offer no insight beyond what we already know about the Sahm Rule having been triggered. If economists have a bad rep, she reinforces it. I gave up after 15 min.
Spot on & complete dribble.
100% agree, im only about 10 minutes in and I can already tell this is going to be a difficult interview to listen to. Will give it a few more minutes....
If someone has an opinion that the Fed or government intervention can provide a net benefit, this interview could change your mind. Monetary policy and data uncertainty make lag and magnitude effects guaranteed while fiscal policy is inherently unfair and politically charged.
That's why I love Sven's interviews. Or actually Pento.
I don’t have much respect for Claudia. I asked her an innocuous question on Twitter last February on the Fed’s intentions regarding rate policy and received a vague answer about mandates. I asked her politely if she could be more forthcoming in her response and she blocked me! Of course people can block anyone they choose and she didn’t owe me an answer, but come on.
@dt-jy1ig
She is patronizing and incompetent. And blocking someone is being weak. What ever happened to a free exchange of ideas?
Sorry Adam, I could not take her starting off the first question with a BS answer. She obviously has worked too long in DC
She is very patronizing. And incompetent. Perfect for the DC woke crowd.
We are in a recession heading for a depression. No Jobs, the number is way higher than what's being reported. Inflation is through the roof people are broke and business are closing their doors.
I concur
Truth
It is so simple. Dave Packard and Bill Hewlett formed HP and Silicon Valley. Their professor at Stanford University said never work for corporate. When I was young there was such hope. I went into Engineering. You could toss a rock and hit a company. Then the Business majors got involved. They gave away the Country. What I mean is, an economy is defined as Engineering, Manufacturing goods. Since the late 80s the real economy was destroyed. They can create the 90s and make 1000s of Router companies, they can take the 2000s and make a housing bubble, they can create the AI bubble. No matter what, we have lost our Engineering, Manufacturing and selling goods. So now it is a matter of time. We have one thing left, print money.
Big contrast between this woman and Art Laffer. You don't get sound money mailing checks to people who don't work.
not even she knows what is going on its just talk and talk about nothing
She is a verbally vague speaker. She doesn't appear to know much more than the average listener. The hands waving doesn't help.
English is my second language and I thought for a moment that was me, but I came to the comments. Thanks
It’s like Robert Schiller.. housing may go up it may go down. Basically saying nothing over and over
@@dabomboo7o and she is BS us all and she knows far more but dont want us to know you can never trust them for a sec
How about a rule against deficit spending in times of economic growth. How about a Swiss debt brake rule, not mailing checks to people who don't work. Public assistance for able bodied people should require work.
She’s gone down a data rabbit hole trying to verbalize her study without committing to it ? Yes painful talking about this and listening. Political parties won’t let her do this. They want total fiscal control and not lose their power and wealth. In my opinion by not taking political control in her model the power they thrive on she’s spinning her wheels but she is justifying her job good on her. I feel her pain! So we should be prepared for a painful uncertain future per normal. Nothing new here.
I agree
@@pamelagriffiths5248 I sense she didn't come up with the "Sahm Rule". She just reads the script like deep state politicians
@pamelagriffiths5248 All she can do, is spin imbecile word-salad nonsense. She is patronizing and incompetent at the same time. Obvious DEI Hire. Lets not sugar-coat it about this inept person. Adam is playing with our financial future here.
Kammy Harris word salad. Terrible.
My exact thoughts. Adam has become so very, very woke.
It's interesting to have an academic's perspective on the current state of the economy, most of the interviewees on this channel are practitioners, rather than theorists and this is a nice change. It's very interesting to see that even our most celebrated academics don't know what's going on.
Since were talking academic…
She’s coming from a Keynesian perspective as to her reactions to the economy.
Would love to see an Austrian economic school’s perspective.
Nowadays, you don't go to college to challenge your views. You go there to confirm and reinforce them. BTW, I'm an academic myself (physics prof), but I'm the tiny minority that isn't a rabid liberal.
@@lukeearthcrawler896
I’d love to hear the opinion of an Austrian economist, who isn’t in the financial services sector.
Take the politics out of it when your a democrat because she doesn’t wanna put the blame on her party 😂
Exactly. We've been in recession since Q4. I ended up deleting her from my X follows because of her protective politics
@@jonEmontanaSo the 2.8% GDP growth in Q2 was what? Think that will be revised down all the way to a negative? I seriously doubt it.
Q2 GDP growth at 2.8% is not a recession. Even if that gets revised down, not even in the ballpark.
So when the economy is doing good , you give the credit to wall street and when the things go bad , it is government, right ! Like GFC 2007-2008 , it is government faylt?
@@Zummbot we already had multiple negative quarters and ppl are destroyed financially and only ppl that benefited from this transfer of wealth either big corporations or business owners are spending propping up the system making it look better then it really is
She was painful to listen to for several reasons, so I only lasted to halfway. My takeaway: I think her rule works even though probably designed for wrong reasons. She can't say the truth because of who provides her with a pay check and being indoctrinated/educated a certain way. Academics in this area still seem to be out of touch with reality. That probably sums it up to halfway at least 😁.
She's quite rambling and non-commital
@@Jalleur14325 She has to choose her words carefully for obvious reasons 😁
I’m glad you reiterated what she said. She seems conflicted and a little hard for me to follow. Thank you!
All I will say is this. “Not one of your better guests”. That said, thanks for all you do.
@rjnoiseux Come on...we need financial straight talk. Would you not agree, She is the most incompetent guest ever!! Don't sugar-coat it. Adam is playing with our financial lives.
I'm thankful for the comments. I lasted 4 minutes before thinking WTF.. glad I'm overwhelmingly not alone
I can’t believe she’s throwing her own iron clad indicator under the bus today 😂
@mme4211 🤷🏻♂️ seems kinda silly
Clearly she wants no liability for a recession because she understands the "self fulfilling" aspect of it. Anyone would understand this.
As always, a great analysis. Newcomers often wonder if it's too late to navigate the financial market, but the market is always unpredictable. Trading has more advantages than simply holding, so it's important to learn before diving in. Active trades are necessary to ride the market's waves. Thanks to Whitney Eston insights, daily trade signals, and my dedication to learning, I've been increasing my daily earnings, managed to grow a nest egg of around 127k to a decent 532k. Kudos to the journey ahead!
She's mostly interacts on Telegrams, using the user-name...
@WhitneyEston..
Nice info, i appreciate your concern this will help a lot especially to the young investors who have no or lesser knowledge on how the market works.
I appreciate the professionalism and dedication of the team behind Whitney's trade signal service.
Trading with an expert is the best strategy for beginners and busy investor s who have little or no time to monitor their trades.
Part of the problem with success at a young age is lack of experience
How many countries are in recession right now? A lot. We are too.
Scary if I’m hearing it correctly, we need the sahm rule to let them know when to send out the stimulus checks? We know how that turns out..l
Geeeze...
Ok Mr. Taggert but this is Total BS
My advice to everyone is this : if you want to grow big this year especially in your finances. Be willing to make investments. Saving is great but investing puts you on a pedestal where you wouldnt have to worry about savings as you do now. Thanks to larysa Caba, my portolio is doing really great and im proud of the decisions i made last year.
I feel one Of the greatest challenges that we first timers face in the ma rket is that we end up losing all we have,making it difficult to find ourselves back to our feet. My biggest advice is to always seek the services of a professional just like I did when I ventured into it for the first time. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I now make huge profits by weekly through her services while still learning to stand on my own.
I think she trades for everyone I meet. I met her twice at a meeting in Germany and after her lectures from Ella I had to personally ask her to be my financial advisor. she is definitely good.
I have never seen a trader as open and transparent as Larysa Caba with her clients. The way she decides to make a profit for her clients. she allows you to express your fears and she still rests your fears and that is my respect. I don't normally comment on videos, but this word should be included. she is really cool.
I just looked up her name online. she is licensed with credible certificates and has an amazing track record. Thank you for the message.
I'm new to this and have heard that now is an excellent time to buy. However, I currently have cash sitting in my bank account that I would really like to put to good use because inflation is at an all-time high. Who is this coach that you mention, and do you mind if I look them up?
Last time i heared Claudia, she was say everything was great and we were all imagining it.
Now her own recession rule is triggered, lol no wonder she sounds so confused explaining that.
My employment indicator : I've worked for 2 months in the last 12 months. Lots of poverty wage jobs available.
Couldn't listen till the end
This woman's communicating style is painful
she has managed to marry an unsuspecting fellow human being. 😂
She didn’t want to touch that last question about the fed causing inflation with a 10-foot pole😂
She worked as an economic advisor for the Obama administration. That's all I needed to know about her and the interview went EXACTLY how I expected. These people are the useful functionaries of Marie Antoinette.
@@lukeearthcrawler896she happily fed from that trough, so I guess she doesn't want to appear hypocritical by criticising it.
The Fed doesn't cause inflation, government spending does. The government put the Fed basically in a no win situation
Of all the questions she was asked, that was about the only one she seemed to sort of answer, at least from my understanding: She thinks the Fed SHOULD have started cutting in July and normalize rates fairly quickly since we seem to be in a situation where the economy is weakening and she said earlier in the interview they shouldn't be waiting until all hell is breaking loose and panic cutting and forcing fiscal policy to "act in haste" (her words) AKA throw trillions of dollars of pork barrel spending at the economy with 900 page bills that congress has 3 hours to read before they vote on it or risk blowing up the economy, like we did the last 2 times we had recessions.
However she also made clear that she does NOT think Fed policies have anywhere near the magnitude of impact as fiscal policy, especially given the scale of fiscal response we saw in 2020 and 2021. I agree with her. The Fed had interest rates at 0% and bought $9T worth of securities over 13 years and never caused inflation, even with Trump cutting taxes in 2018 on top of that. Then when the government did unprecedented fiscal action there's inflation and everyone blamed the inflation on the Fed?
@@nemesis0865They know this then and keep that information from the public. It's nefarious. The Fed does print & fill bank reserves. They control the money supply
As a competent economist, she is very circumspect and equivocating - important qualities for those who dabble in the dismal science. She tries to be apolitical and non-ideological, but this is just not possible in a policymaking environment. She sounds like a Keynesian and so has a far different interpretation of fiscal and monetary policy than would an Austrian-schooled economist. She seems to accept the dual mandate of the Fed and ignores the negative consequences of direct stimulus of the magnitude we experienced during the pandemic, and that pandemic policies were inevitable. Many economists and policymakers would disagree. Social interaction protocols were necessary, but not much else. Shutting down small businesses and disrupting the supply chains and services was probably unnecessary. Adam's anecdote about the Kashkari revelation are a case in point: working classes that were given stimulus checks weren't too happy when housing, healthcare, education, energy and food prices ate them up and then some. The policymakers deployed money illusion to try to keep the population happy with the policy consequences of the pandemic - it didn't work and experience wasn't necessary to tell us that. The simple economic truths that economic security comes through work, productivity, saving, and capital accumulation hold true - we can never borrow and spend our way to prosperity. But the politicians will try to sell that illusion and policymaking economists risk becoming their useful idiots. They need to acknowledge that the money illusion of prosperity cannot never substitute for the real thing. What the voting public is telling us is that technocratic management has failed.
Economists often support the idea of sending checks to households in an attempt to influence natural economic cycles. However, does it make sense to do this without considering the impact on the purchasing power of the money we earn? The only group that seems to benefit significantly from this approach is the top 0.1 percent, who are heavily invested in stocks and other inflation-sensitive assets.
She's a rich white Democrat. They love inflation.
We get poorer however
Trying to listen to this woman wore me out! ...had to quit listening, around 1/3 of the way through the video.
Adam: I really enjoy your podcast and believe that your guests are excellent. You do a great service. I believe that Claudia Sahm has been the lone exception. With that said, I am going to point out - from my viewpoint as a loyal listener going back several years now - what I believe needs improvement. First of all, I am disappointed in Sahm that she did not give credit to Edward McKelvey from Goldman Sachs, who is the one that developed this. She made a change in order to help eliminate false positives, but Mckelvey developed the concept, so he deserves the credit. After about 30 minutes, I needed to sign off as she was really tough to listen to. Moreover, I could tell you were having a touch time moderating the interview, unlike any of the others I've watched and, I've watched most of them. Sahm is a very "stiff" interviewee. From one of the other comments below, I see that she stated that the proverbial "we" are better off today than 3 years ago...that is simply partisan. An economist should be after the truth, not partisanship. Add the fact that she apparently worked in the Obama admin, well, that there is another negative. Lastly, the podcasts are getting too long. If they could be kept to one hour, which should be plenty, I think that would help the listeners. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm just being honest from my perspective, of course. My background: retired CPA and former college professor of Accounting and Italian immigrant. I try to keep up what what's going on especially in economics and finance and, your podcast is very helpful. Take care and all the best to you. PS: I am thankful for folks like Lacy Hunt, Lance Roberts, John Hussman...and pretty much all the other very informative guests, too many to mention.
“What I had proposed was putting stimulus payments on auto pilot”
These people are part of the problem. Claudia Sohm is literally so confused that she started to apologize that her Sahm rule perhaps being too stringent - two days before it was triggered.
I completely understand questioning our theories, but often I feel bull street / intimidation front runs it. I hope Claudia learns something about herself through what we are invariably coming up against
@@khutzey4149 She is not confused. She doesn't want a recession call at this time and wishes her rule would shut up about it. After the election she will relax about it.
I appreciate the guest sharing her expert knowledge, and I’m sure it’s all very valuable; but there is a pretty big gap between what we ordinary citizens need to hear and her attempt to analyze recession in technical terms. The economy is a big mess out there, we woke up to a world of inflations that no households and businesses are ready for, poor federal policies in borders and hiking rates way too aggressively, and political divisions that are growing more extreme each day. Recession? I’m afraid the problems have gone beyond that a while ago. If this expert has worked for the Federal Reserve and she’s still having trouble giving a straight answer as to where we are now, that alone explains why we are in such a mess😂We can really use experts on this show who can tell us what storms are brewing on the horizons and how average people can prepare for that. As a concluding remark: thank you Adam for trying your best to translate the session into common language 😂🙏🙏
"Not having recessions" policies seem to be destroying the middle class while benefitting the wealthiest the most and massively growing size of the government. Inverted incentives
This is shit….
Adam do not have her on again. She is embarrassed about her own rule.
Made it 47 minutes, this is a perfect example of why the US is in deep financial trouble.
Listened to the whole interview while driving home. My impression was a whole lot skirting around her own rule. And I would think logically sending out checks automatically would help drive back up the inflation. I do think the supply chain had to play at least some part in driving up inflation.
Reading someone of the comments prior to watching the interview to see if it’s worthwhile and I have to say it doesn’t sound like it is based upon the general consensus.
… fell asleep after 17 minutes.
Lol! Yes, researchers aren't often charismatic interviewees.
Congrats for lasting that long...I got to the 5 min. mark.
In response to a recession just destroy the currency great
So very hard to listen to. She goes around and around in ever decreasing circles and ends up saying. Nothing
She is typical OUT OF TOUCH saying we are better off now than before covid, every goods and services nearly DOUBLE, while salaries up around 12 %. She sing and dance, she knows WE ARE ALREADY IN RECESSION, then she basically say her rule does not work. Typical politician. Sad, if people cannot afford MCDONARD 5.00 SPECIAL, we are IN RECESSION. no need for Nobel prize economist, those people are out of touch.
I love this interview. She is so honest about what both she and policymakers don't know.
I’m not a big fan of government interventions ( experiments ) but she at least seems aware of what we don't know. Very impressive!!!
Claudia is painful to listen to. I expected so much more from someone as accomplished as she is.
What has she accomplished that made you expect more?
I would've REALLY enjoyed the conversation with her about the workers and them preferring a recession over inflation
@@akumacode she is into MMT. She would simply state the workers would love to receive the checks her rule triggers, and she'd be right about that
The Fed is intentually ignoring her rule. After hearing her describe it, I understand why. Never thought I'd agree with JPow.
What a load of waffle from that woman. Lack of transparency, hesitant and hot air.
you will only know what they want to know / you will only see what they want you to see. most ppl are made to believe only a few options never a win win win situation.
This is the worst guest I’ve seen on the show, completely disconnected from reality.
She appears to be an economist who has been thrust unwillingly into politics. Given she worked in the Obama Administration, I can see why this might be the case.
I will never listen to this woman again if I can help it. I downloaded the interview for a walk and then was stuck. Definitely a politician selling something. She was painful to listen to--dithering, girly-ish, like a character from Veep trying to not say the obvious truth. Her hesitations and sighs--it's such hard work being a big thinker. This one stopped me in my tracks--"so many policy levers to pull." She referenced one up front--when to know it's the right time to send out stimulus checks.
I’ll sum it up for the less intellectuals. We are going down faster than a meteor.
@frankrusso2093 Wow! So well said. And I hope I do not offend anyone...but if this woman's double-speak, word-salad doesn't scream DEI-Hire, I don't know what does.
If the Sahm Rule is indeed that simple, I am impressed by the simplicity.
I watched the first few minutes of her and she sounded like she had a PHD in being very irritating.
She's so cautious and hesitant to make the absolute recession call.
So the goal is that we never have a recession again? We NEED prices to come down so that people don’t have to live pay check to pay check. This will not help.
If everyone living paycheck to paycheck received $5,000 directly into their bank account, I believe the clear majority would have spent that money in a handful of months. For a great many people, if you increase their income they will spend it irrespective of how irresponsible that is given that they have no long savings.
@@MatthewGrace99 We did that with stimulus checks. Look where it got us. 9% inflation. That won’t fix the problem.
@@blairmassey635 yes thats what I'm saying - they'll just end up living paycheck to paycheck again even if they had an extra 5K, 10k, or more on hand right now. Likewise, if the prices of everything came down 10% a great many people would increase their spending to accommodate the fact that they can now afford more. The cycle then would repeat itself.
Part of the problem is cost of living being too high, I agree. But for an absolute multitude of people its also basic responsibility of finances.
@@MatthewGrace99 I think it’s twofold. Some people spend all they have because inflation is eating up their income. Some spend all they have because they don’t think they’ll ever get ahead. My ex-in-laws were like that. Whenever they had money they spent it. Why save when you believe you’ll always be poor?
wow. i thought maybe i had passed away during the Psychedelic intro screens. wow.
The Sahm rule starts the economic downturn signal then the Fed cuts rates so the yield curve reverts and then the stock market goes on it’s downward trajectory..
Which is so counter intuitive because lower rates is usually bullish for the stock market.
A while ago, on TDLR, she said she didn't think her own rule would apply this time. Curious to hear if she's since changed her mind about her own indicator.
Yes, kudos Adam on the incredibly timely booking.
I saw that, although its hard to tell for certain, she does seem more cautious than she was 6 months ago.
@@FreeSpeech4All that was many months ago though, back when many Adam guests were coming on excited that the recession "was here" and they were hoping the Sahm rule would confirm it
Yikes! I hear stimulus checks and I want to vomit. No one likes recessions, but they clear out malinvestment.
She’s scared her own eponymous data will reflect poorly on her overlords.
Worst interview I have ever seen 🤦♀️
Really Interesting, thanks for having Claudia on!
Brilliant
This woman really needs about 20 more years real life experience
This woman is just not listenable.
I started reading comments before I watch interviews, whether it is worth to spend hour and more. After reading about 10 comments, it is clear to me that this is just another clueless quacker, who is not worth listening to. Thanks for sparing me of wasting almost 2 hours folks.
OMG I’m only 6:38 in and already she can’t speak words. Holy moly
Perhaps she's nervous that everyone is acting like her economic guideline controls the entire economy
@@MrTigerStarX she is most certainly nervous. But I doubt it’s for the reason you suggest.
So she was born Claudia Foster, married and divorced a Sahm, and now a Baker? Makes no sense. Her verbal communication is quite bad, and good example of why academics don’t always fit
More or less what I expected. As far as technocrats go, she's a superstar, something akin to the Michael Jordan of government bean counters. I think that spending so much time studying macroeconomic data in ivory towers like the Eccles building has permanently distorted her ability to draw any meaningful conclusions from the statistics she parses through. She acknowledges, albeit in a circuitous manner, two very important things in this interview: 1) the data are flawed (it's called the dismal science for a reason, studying human nature on a national or even supranational level and forecasting based off of that is foolhardy imho) & 2) getting a clear and accurate picture of what is occurring within a large and complex system like an economy is, at best, extraordinarily difficult under most circumstances. The foundations upon which our most powerful decision makers are enacting policy are kaput; yet they continue to go to the phds, statisticians, mathematicians etc to understand our world and they in turn keep churning out an avalanche of data points that could be used to support any narrative that one so chooses. It's such a paradox that amidst all these sophisticated econometric models we are more confused than ever about the state of the economy. I know that I sure as hell don't have any answers but I also know that people like Claudia Sahm don't either. In many ways they are utterly useless and listening to her stumble around Adam's questions strengthened this conviction within me.
Worse than useless, these people are a net negative and in many cases highly destructive.
Thanks, Adam. It was really interesting to find out why the Sahm Rule was developed (fiscal stimulus) and Claudia's admission that it's a very conservative threshold because of this, due to the need for certainty. Thanks again.
Thank you Adam. I’m always impressed at the quality of the guests you’re able to get on your show.
Thanks for giving me something to listen to as I did my brake job!
Always working on the car and listening 😂
@@eazhar I seem to work every day, I listen when doing all types of jobs!
Is she really advocating more stimulous spending with borrowed fiat currency?
Yes... because she's just another clueless fecking academic. 🙄
Lots of talking with head tilted back and eyes closed- disappointed with bias to invent automatic triggers to helicopter money from government- rather than outlawing it.
Her stutters and babbling make it hard for me to trust her. Especially since she worked for Obama.
With all the revisions, we're in a recession already.
The fact everyone is talking about the Sahm-rule increases the probability it won't work this time.
Household balance sheets are relatively healthy????? The lower 50% of the population is on financial life support. 90--day credit card and car payment defaults are skyrocketing. 30-day mortgage defaults are now increasing as are auto repos. Covid stimmy checks have all been spent and savings depleted.
But the rich are really, REALLY rich... and the REALLY rich are REALLY, REALLY, *REALLY* rich... and the poor are just broke at $0... so on average, the economy is good! 😂
The Fed should have a single mandate, sound money.
Or just have no Fed at all, and have the Treasury have a single mandate: sound money.
Adam said he had lots more questions but not much more time
Adam, just ask shorter questions and you'll have more time
Thank you Mike. I also did not like to hear her use the words "stimulus checks." Another xfer of wealth to the top is all that works out to be
This was an outstanding interview as always. Thanks, Adam.
She can't hold a thought and convey it clearly. Lot's of incoherent word salad, very difficult to listen to.
she's trying to generalize everything , there's a lot of truth in what she says but to understand the Dynamics you must have the information and charts she has access to / or evaluating. bless her heart.
Can you say annoying?
Claudia Sahm is way smarter than I am but she doesn't talk about the government spending that has artificially propped the economy up and kept inflation high. Looks like that is now coming back to bite us
To hear real practitioner, conflicting as some say, cautious… just proves that world and markets can not be mathematically defined and its a process we constantly learn from.
I can't continue to watch this. She is WAFFLING TO MUCH. Hey Sahm how much of a coward are you?
I vote for Michael Preston to be a monthly stand alone guest on this show.
The Sahm rule is not working this time because of the influx of people crossing our southern border for a better life. Of course there's a huge jump in unemployment.
yes. imagine what Kamala will do with that if she is elected? insanity.
Another thing illegal immigration has ruined.
Huh
What are you talking about? These people are not included in the unemployment statistics if that is what you mean.
I'm not ready to say the same thing about the inverted yield curve, though. Heck, the day after Powell said it's not working, the market tanked the next day; because he doesn't understand it. The issue is when the yield curve UN-inverts.
This interview confirms to me that the central planners will send out checks if there is an economic downturn. VDE and TLT may pop now but I wonder if the Stimi checks will cause low rates to back up relatively quickly.