hit by false allegations in a scheme by liberal elites and that -- and the republican establishment to sink his candidacy. moore of sexually assaulting them decades ago when he was in his 30's and they were teenagers. --ve gaines will oppose steve daines will oppose the senate tax bill as currently written. says the senator is concerned about how the proposed tax cuts will affect main street as opposed to big companies. senate republicans need 50 votes in order to pass the legislation. hasnew york supreme court steered clear of the controversy over guns.

one case was seeking controversy -- seeking a right to own a semiautomatic assault rifle. prince harry and his fiancee said how they got engaged over a "cozy night cooking roast chicken." >> can i say this? >> i have been bring in my finger -- i had the ring in my finger. it was just the two of us. mark: the royal wedding will take place next spring. global news, 24 hours a day, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. ♪

julia: live from bloomberg's world headquarters in new york, i am julia chatterley. we are 30 minutes from the close of trading in the united states and opec uncertainty is weighing on energy stocks. louis: the question is, -- oe: the question is, what'd you miss? scarlet: elizabeth warren joins about ther take agency she helped to create. and shoppers are expected to spend $840 million online by 10 a.m. today.

tells us more about the e-commerce players. julia:. what'd you miss? $840 million worth of deals, just before breakfast. mobile is up 21%. overall web traffic was up 12%, with a total of $840 million worth of transactions. all of this before 10 a.m. eastern time. $6.6 billion is expected to be reached by the days and. -- day's end. we are joined by the ceo and chairman of saks 5th avenue. we have talked about the transformation within the retail sector before, but i want to

talk about the shocking season we have seen so far. how optimistic are you? are looking at 4%-5% of total retail. we're off to a good start. are the connected retail sales to how people are feeling? the optimism is driving the growth of the stock market. the overall stock market is getting wealthier. unemployment, at the levels we are at, you are starting to see a bit of a wealth affect. -- wealth effect. scarlet: individual companies have been learning as they go along.

stephen: the early on internet learnedlearn how to -- how to use the net well. having great mobile applications, buying online and picking up in-store. just thelonger internet guys are winning, and the brick and mortars are losing. walmart is a major internet player. you have a bifurcation of retailers providing home convenience with how you experience online or in a store. costco doesn't have much of an internet presence, burlington these are a number of ones that are more brick and mortar players, but they are winning.

mentioned, wee talk about brick and mortar and the gainingng shares of e-commerce and amazon gaining in that. are we missing that some of these traditional brick and mortars are improving their e-commerce offerings and we are not giving them enough credit? trying. they are are they providing convenience, or value and experience? every retailer is out there changing. but the consumer is changing faster. are they keeping up with the changing pace of consumers? some are in some aren't. -- and some aren't. joe: what do you think explains this? management, why have

some companies got it and some haven't? stephen: it is clearly about leadership. i would've said walmart was dead in the water some years ago, and that you had a fundamental company change. laurie made some fundamental changes in the culture, he became much more aggressive in trying things. now, they have all these different kinds of innovative approaches. scarlet: is it a new generation of ceos leading the charge? is ceos that have the foresight and are willing to take risks, but they can't take johnson, who ron almost destroyed jcpenney. scarlet: those customers didn't

change quite the same way others had. stephen: they didn't bring in new customers fast enough for the customers they fired. every company is a different story, what is right in terms of the kinds of changes required in order to navigate the environment. consumers want things differently. the millennial customers want crafted goods, locally sourced, the kinds of words that are important for that consumer. some companies are adapting, but the mast product, everyone -- mass product, everyone gets the same thing, will go to the lowest common denominator. julia: who will get this? : some of these traditional department stores or not evolving much. a lot of them are consolidating

of closing stores, and a lot them are thinking they are changing, but their financial situation may not be strong. you have margins that are being squeezed, shipping is expensive on the internet, so margins may not be as high. you have major investments in store associates in the store serving customers. you have some that don't have the resources, maybe not because of lack of effort. the issue is finding the right solution. scarlet: closing stores as a form of change. we will continue on that. you are sticking with us. ofwill dive into the future the retail industry, especially what to do with all that real estate. this is bloomberg.

♪

scarlet: what'd you miss? sold its flagship and there iser, now plans to revamp the space. sadove, former chairman of saks fifth avenue is back with us. stephen: this is specific example can't be exactly copied, largely because you had a very unproductive store.

deal forwonderful hudson bay. there are very few iconic properties that generate that kind of income. you also have a fundamental issue in terms of what you are going to do with all of the excess space, how are you going to use it, and reinvent the ma ll? joe: there is a lot of excess capacity in new york, as anyone who walks around in new york has seen. is that about landlords still needing to cut their prices? stephen: if you go up madison vacancyyou will see 27% rates. the rents are starting to come down. but the rents are still too high because of the amount of retail going on in some of these spaces

isn't where it was -- madison avenue doesn't have the tourism it had several years ago. some of these independent landlords are paying debt service at a certain rent level, and they are having a hard time lowering the rent. joe: if they could lower it, wouldg aside the debt, they find something better at a smaller price? price,: at the right there is plenty of demand for retailers on madison avenue. julia: how much of a discount do they need to give? think where they are is still much too high. scarlet: they have been filling the gap with the pop-up stores. stephen: that is a short-term solution. you have a ways to come down to fill up these places with rent.

julia: if you have six months, who you are repaying debt it shouldn't take an empty building in order to justify the cost. scarlet: what about off-price change? to look at more back stages, with offices. nordstrom rack, we have seen negative comp sales. it feels like eight -- that is what a lot of the companies are focused on. value,: i used the word whether is the burlington, ross stores, they are all value types of stores. and then you have the dollar general's, but there is similar demand for those kind of products. sure you is making

have undifferentiated products and access. t.j. maxx is getting the constant flow of fresh products and turning it very quickly area that is a wall model that a lot of the berlin tens is copping -- burlingtons is copying. them are predicated in stripmall's and they will not be on madison avenue. there is a demand for these types of formats. the question is how you repurpose certain kinds of space so you get more of them? macy's,e talk about what that company should or could do with its billions of dollars of real estate. in seniorhey brought real estate executives. they monetized a number of the their stores, -- a number of

their stores, selling off real estate. they are working aggressively to monetize real estate. could they sell herald square? people talk about it being worth $5 billion worth of value. much of who macy's is is embedded in that store, and could you cut down the space? it is an iconic store, very close to what saks fifth avenue was like when i ran it. , and the identity corner of the business. it is a very important part of who they are. i don't know if it makes sense to do something like that. julia: it would feel like a capitulation, even if it weren't. stephen: it certainly would

change who the company is, and i don't know if it is necessarily the right thing. making it more economically viable might be better. scarlet: the former chairman of saks fifth avenue, stephen s adove, thank you. julia: our stock of teh hour -- the hour -- emma chandra is here with more. emma: analysts are downgrading. this is from a cell to a neutral -- sell to a netural. square this be year, but the rally we have seen is overdone.

prices up over 200% this year. my terminal shows the russell 1000 financial services index. it is clearly what is boosting this index this year, up over 200%. already priced in, with this idea of emphatic related to competition .ith other companies analysts also called into question the way investors have rewarded square for its legendship with bitcoin. scarlet: what is going on with bitcoin? square was going to

let some of its users with the cash app purchase bitcoin. they said it could be really significant, if cryptocurrency comes mainstream. saying, let's not jump the gap. if bitcoin takes a rest, we can take a look at that chart, -- >> even if it doesn't really matter, it seems a good way to ride on someone else's butt. even if there is nothing fundamental there, we can see how the stock jumped by associating with it. joiningis is squre bitcoin, but this particular analyst threw cold water on it. if it falls, if this could be a

bubble, it could be bad for square. julia: i want to go back to macy's. about what you emailed me. emma: you were talking about what macy's might do with harold square. other stores have released some of their floors, including in places like seattle -- least some of their -- leased some of their floors, including in places like seattle. scarlet: coming up, homeownership has started to recover, but it remains near at an all-time low. this is bloomberg. ♪

joe: what'd you miss? as markets around the world continue to rally, demand for volatility protection drops. this is a bank of america index. we have talked about the vix being low, but that is one way of measuring implied volatility. evenhave been elevating, with the big rally, we have seen people being inclined to buy protection against risk, but that has been coming down, at its lowest level since the spring. like -- atis looks equities and currencies, but people aren't buying much protection these days because they think everything will go up. scarlet: home sale data today shows unexpected gain in a over, -- in october, at its strongest

pace in a decade colonials -- in a decade. millennial's want to be homeowners too. people under the age of 35 are beginning to buy homes, but homeownership is still well below the long-term, 65.3% average, the redline there. it is unlikely we will get back to those levels, as wages have not been growing, homebuilding andnot turned pace, homeowners -- and home builders are building higher and homes. -- higher-end homes. julia: you have to save to get on the property ladder. let's talk about the holiday weekend. if we talk about amazon, we

should talk about jeff bezos. he has now cracked the 12 billion mark, worth more than $100 billion. only the second person ever to build a 12 figure net worth, besides bill gates, who hit that and you have1999, to add in warren buffett. $78$78 billion. joe: our small figures even in the game anymore -- are small figures even in the game anymore? look at let's take a numbers with fewer figures. the dow is up by 35 points. the s&p 500 index, unchanged. nasdaq, lower. julia: when you talk about that

--d of wealth >> from new york, this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ julia: "what'd you miss?"

stocks mixed. data loss of s&p is still on track for a fresh record. oil flipping from a year high. scarlet: i'm scarlet fu. joe: i'm joe weisenthal. if you are tuning in live on twitter, we want to welcome you. more closing brokerage every weekday from 4:00 p.m. to 5 p.m. eastern. scarlet: let's begin with our market minutes. looks like the s&p 500 will be able to eek out the record high because it is down marginally, but this is the first blush and we will have to wait for numbers. joe: holding at 2600. scarlet: it is holding at 2600, points.dow is up by 24 a big week because we have the confirmation hearing and janet yellen's testimony. we also have everyone monitoring the progress of the senate tax cut bill as well so let's get to some individual names here. western digital declining after togan stanley cut the rating

inglewood from overweight and the price to $90, citing deteriorating prices. seagatesee macron and are also falling in sympathy. meredith agrees to buy time inc. you can see some movements in time and meredith. let's go on to buffalo wild wings. boosting the buffalo wild wings takeover bid. the stock is up by 4/10 of 1%. joe: let's take a look at the government by markets starting with the u.s. two-year and 10 year. look at that. a little more flattening today because the two-year yield ending unchanged, 174, while the 10 year yield is taking a little bit lower -- ticking a little bit lower. a little lower on the 10 year. south africa really big rally in their assets with the yields coming down today. i think julia probably will talk

about the rand in a second perhaps. some relief that some actions that the ratings agency moody's was not as severe as expected. scarlet: could have been worse. joe: could have been worse, so relief for the south african bond. julia: absolutely. let's start with the euro-dollar. i want to give you a look at what is going on in the seven-day chart. some optimism perhaps on u.s. tax reform. donald trump tweeting the negotiations coming along very well, apparently. hope on his part for some form of bipartisanship. i believe that with you guys, but we have seen the euro-dollar trading at 1.19. whether or not we can see it continue to how the session high 1.1961. angela merkel with a conciliatory tone. hopes on coalition talks. i want to move on and tell you what is going on in this.

it is going. cannot ge-- it is bitcoin. cannot get away from talking about bitcoin. no. i'm sorry. ron chart. i don't know what happened there. i was going to make the point and try to find the chart again that the volatility of bitcoin right now is at 15 times the volatility of euro-dollar. joe: all you have to do is look at the chart. know, but when we go back to conversations we were having early on about young people getting into bitcoin -- what would i do without you? scarlet: let's go to the bloomberg. bitcoin having to $10,000 pushing the volatility to 100%. julia: i was way off. i given. -- i give in. in south africa, the rent living up to its reputation -- rand living up to its reputation.

s&p downgraded them. lumpaw a two cent slot o on friday. rudy's help them. joe: that is what i meant to say. julia: we still have one rating agency. that is the critical element to that story there. joe: now finally, let's take a look at the commodity markets. oil and gold. oil down 2%. we have the big opec meeting but still hanging below $50 a barrel. gold a little bit higher. just for context ahead of the opec meeting let's take a look at the five-year chart, of west texas. you can see how far we have run lately. a multiyear high. still nowhere near 2013, 2014, but at the mid-2015 levels. we will see if opec and deliver news that will sustainable market. those are today's market minutes. scarlet: for more on today's

market action or non-action, let's bring in cameron. i say nonaction because the s&p 500 inching lower. the dow is up by 22 points. it feels like the holidays have not really started for the markets. cameron: well, maybe they have. either that or a hangover from getting turkey -- eating turkey leftovers. a busy week with potential key catalysts coming up. the market easing back in or a little reticent doubling new risk ahead of what will be a big week. joe: obviously the biggest story this week is the tax bill and a question of whether the senate can get it out and continue the process. when you look at the market right now, what can you say about what is being priced in? cameron: well, that is sort of the holy grail. joe: that is why you are here. cameron: depending on where you look, you might get a different answer.

one of a popular indicators is to look at the index of high tax versus the s&p. that is actually lower since the election last year. nothing is priced. that might get a little bit too narrow. alternative approaches to look at the small-cap index. unable to play some of the exporting of intellectual property games that allow large-cap stocks. the weighted average of the russell is about 31%. the equivalent with the s&p 500 is 24%. the russell has actually gone up a little bit recently, which does indicate at least some modicum of optimism i think on the tax run. julia: great to chat with you. we will move on to mick mulvaney because he is holding a presser with a small group of reporters. let's listen to what he has to say. a unique story. >> in terms of that new attitude

we are taking in light of the fact that the imitation is now in charge but i will say this ain't thing i told these folks today is what is happening immediately. effective today, we present a similar in place here to what we did across the entire executive branch at the outfit of the administration. we did a 90 day hiring freeze. would put a 30 day hiring freeze here at cfpb. probably more portly, we put a 30 day immediate freeze on any new rules, regulation, and guidance. everything in the pipeline stops for at least 30 days while i get a chance to see exactly what is going on and kick the tires here at the bureau. additionally, there will be no payments out of the civil penalty fund for at least 30 days while i get a chance to see what is happening with that. i think there is in excess of $50 million in that fund. i want to get a handle on what that fun is about before we start making any distributions. there will be obviously this.ions to

got a chance to talk to legal and enforcement today and some things going on in existing lawsuits. i will be briefed tomorrow on the 100 or so lawsuits that the bureau is involved with. briefed on that tomorrow. clear statutory deadlines, those will continue to be met if they are legal deadlines as far as litigation. built anything discretionar onill be briefed tomorrow the lawsuits and the enforcement actions and so investigations and rulemaking that is in the pipeline. whenideas tomorrow as to some of the next steps may be. lastly, and then i will take some questions, folks asked me if i will be here. some folks in the press have asked that, some here at the agency. i keep saying agency, i apologize. the bureau. the president made it clear that he wants me here.

my name is on the door. i want to be here.i want anything coming out of your that i don't know about because it will be leaked to me anyways so it will have to be good quality work that this administers and can be proud of. it will be here three days every week and across the street at: d three days -- atom omb three das a week. i have worked 16 hours a day and seven days a week. nothing new. working a little extra is not that big a deal in the final scheme of things. with that, we will take questions for a couple minutes if that is all right. yes sir. >> what did the president tell you about what he wants from you? >> he wants me to fix it, get it back to the point where it can protect people without trampling on capitalism, without choking off the access to financial services that are critical to so many folks. so many folks in the lower and middle classes, folks trying to

start their own businesses, breakout, get credit for the very first time, we need to figure out a way to follow the law and protect citizens, but do so in such a fashion that is not choke off the access to capital. what does that mean? access to money that is important for so many people in small business and private lines. that is the charge he has given me. we both share the belief that this particular bureau under the previous administration had gone too far over towards strengthening access to capital, making it difficult for financial services to flow. and as a result, holds that we were trying to help, we hurt. we are trying to fix that. >> how long does he expected to be in this position? >> it is up to the senate more than anybody else.the president is interested in naming a permanent quickly as as possible, as quickly as the quality of the candidates allows. my guess is you will see fairly

swift movement on that. swift movement on the president's part has very rarely translated into swift movement on the senate's part so we will see how long it takes. we will go across the room. yes sir? [indiscernible] >> the court can do whatever the court is going to do. that is fine. i have read the legal opinion of not only the department of justice, but as interestingly, the legal opinion of the general counsel here. the president is right. my guess is the court will hear the same arguments from capable folks. the court decides to issue a temporary restraining order, what are we not succumb to the building, i will absolutely follow the law. i want to make a perfectly clear. around here, that is what we do in the executive branch. i will be here until either the court or president tells me otherwise. [indiscernible]

i don't know how to into that question. i will talk about my previous statements about the bureau. how about that? my opinion of the structure of the cfpb has not changed. i still feel it is an awful example of a bureaucracy that has gone wrong when it is almost entirely unaccountable to the people who are supposed to oversee it or pay for it. i still have the same fundamental principle misgivings about the way this bureau is structured. i think it is wrong to have a completely unaccountable federal bureaucracy. i think it is completely wrong. i am just learning what the powers i have as acting director. they would frighten most of you. it would were you to think about how little oversight congress has over me, now as i am the director. how little oversight the committees have over how the cfpb functions. studiedif you really the constitution nature of our

government, the way bureaucracy is supposed to work, it would frighten and disturb you that this agency is as independent as it is. and it does not surprise me that this is to the extent that we are having a succession challenge launched by mrs. english. it does not surprise me that grows out of an agency that thinks it is not accountable to anybody in the first place. none of that has changed. that being said, i cannot change a lot of it because it is statutory. it is up to congress to fix it. >> i have a quick follow-up to that question. you call the agency in the past a success. how can you ensure the american people you are the right person? >> actually, if you look at the line, it was a joke in a sick, sad kind of way, which is slightly different, but the sentiment is the same. the reasons that i said that, the reason that i still believe are this agency is flawed

reasons that i think back home would agree with. when i was at congress, if the cfpb did something to you back home that you did not like, ok, there was literally nowhere for you to turn for a redress. you cannot call your senator.you cannot call eigha congressman. you cannot call the president. it was a completely unaccountable agency, and i think that is wrong. i think citizens should always have some ability to hold the bureaucracy accountable, and they cannot hear. that is why we need structural and legislative change the way this place is run. that is outside the bounds of the director to fix. yes, ma'am? sorry. toyou find a power struggle be often? struggle and power battle -- >> i think it is more awful for

the people who work here. i do not know her. there are two full to shoulder to work today claiming to be director. i can assure you there was one person who showed up claiming to be director. she was not here. again, she is a private citizen. she has the right to do what she did. i understand she brought the lawsuit in her private capacity. i assume she is paying for her own lawyers because the cfpb is not. the cfpb did not approve that. she has the right to do that. again, we move on here and let the courts do as they will. i did not see her here today. i have been here since 7:30. it is ok, i will go this way. in your meetings with staffers today, we receiving pushback -- were you receiving pushback? >>. questions. i was candid with them. i told him i am not here to shut the place down because i am not

allowed to do that. we will run it differently than the previous administration did. they appreciate that. . there is a lot of folks who come from other agencies. they are professional. they know the gig for lack of a better word. i appreciated the candor they showed to me. that was a sort nearly professional -- that was extraordinarily professional. [indiscernible] >> if the law allow this place not to exist, i would sit down with the president and tried to make a case that other agencies can probably do this job just as or if not more effectively. if i had to chance to change it to put it on appropriations and have subject to oversight of congress, i would do that. yes, sir? >> a couple of things. you have any plans for her ongoing appointments for her directors here? do you have any regulations to

address? >> to your last point first, no, not yet. i will be here all day tomorrow and thursday getting a chance to go through the pipeline and regulations and so forth. there is not much i can do about it. once it is gone from here, finally gone from here, the next step in the review process for lack of a better word would be a cra. as much as i think the president just signed today on the arbitration rules, so that is the ordinary course of business and we will follow the ordinary course of business around here. regarding this english, i don't know. i have no matter. if you don't call, you don't show, you don't have a job the next day in the ordinary world. yes, ma'am? [indiscernible] >> i think the president has called her that a couple times before.

probably not the last time he has called her that. i did think it was interesting that -- i have not seen the lawsuit yet. i do not know if i have been named as a defendant. i heard a rumor that i have been named. i have not seen a lawsuit nor have been served with it so i am speculating about what is in the lawsuit, but i have read accounts that one of the assertions is this agency needs to be independent. , i todayme time toda reports that ms. english is on the hill with mr. schumer and miss moran. who does she want to be independent from? i have no comment about mrs. lawrence comments on me -- warrnen's comments on me. [indiscernible] >> yeah. just there be any concerns

about where the independent agency is headed? >> my understanding is first of all it has to become a number one. in order for the president to fill this out, there has recently who is currently senate confirmed anyway. my guess is everything person falls into that will report to the president, number one. number two, this is how it has been done here. people forget the first acting director was the treasury secretary. i will be as closely tied to donald trump as president and secretary geithner. i don't think that is any different about the structure. that is one of the ring reasons why the lawsuit is ill-founded. secretary set up the agency. >> right. is there a question there? >> i am just saying. >> no.

i will be as independent from donald trump in this role as richard cordray was an timothy geithner word from president obama -- were from president obama. english, will she be allowed to come into the building if she shows up tomorrow? what is her role? what is it look like if she does come in? >> to the payday rule, i think i am getting briefed on the rules and regulations tomorrow. i think that has already gone over to the federal registry for printing. not really sure. i will have more details on that tomorrow. as to ms. english, yes, if she wants to show tomorrow, i think she is still employed here. i think her id is still good, still valid. certainly not taking any steps today to terminate her if that is your question. yes, sir? >> you said you have not seen her today. >> i don't know the rules. on the know the rules

private sector. the public sector are very different. a no call no show for one day justifies termination. we expect people to work. folks who are here expected to work. maybe she took a vacation day for thanks giving weekend, i don't know. we'll find out. we expect people to work here. a buddy of mine wrote me this morning and said only washington, d.c., can you get sued for showing up to work, which is what i got sued for apparently. yes, sir? in the back. [indiscernible] >> the american people right now, all you are trying to do, and all congress has historically failed to do --arding the budget [indiscernible] >> being budget director is a

full-time job. this will be a heavy workload for the next coming months or weeks or however long i am here. i am comfortable with the team i put together at omb to cover this workload during this period of time this turns out to be and i am hopeful to put a team here at cfpb as well that can do the same thing.very encouraged by the quality of people i met today, the professionalism of folks i met today. my guess is while it will be a lot of extra work, we will be period atvote for a sign. -- of time. >> the argument for the independence is that congress, the federal government have not done anything in the financial process to push back -- crisis to push back. what do you have outside of this

organization that the organization has done anything to push back against wall street like the premise president prome would? >> i will not litigate the causes of the financial crisis and what did or did not happen, what agencies did their job, and what agencies did not do their job. looking forward, i do think you have to raise a question as to what happened here. i asked this question today of the folks at cfpb and hope to get some answers tomorrow. i was disturbed by what happened with wells fargo, wells fargo was doing to their customers. i don't know if you saw when the ceo of the company came before the house financial services committee a year ago. why want to know is, cfpb gets a lot of credit for finding wells fargo. why did they miss it? what was happening here? and here we have elizabeth warren's dream of what an agency is supposed to do and that ability and independence to go

anywhere and do anything and not have to worry about politicians. they get free money from the federal reserve. they don't have to worry about appropriations. they are given every single tool necessary from the outside looking in, i think. maybe i will find out something different. every single tool necessary to prevent that from happening at wells fargo or at least discovering it, and they did neither. so the question becomes, can you really regulate at-bat behavior? i don't think you probably can. are we going to fill an important role to make sure we are looking over the shoulder of folks try to take advantage of consumers? absolutely.we are going to continue enough function . at the same time, to think the cfpb will prevent the next financial crisis is probably a little naïve. if it could not prevent wells fargo, you have to worry about that. >> any allegations beyond simply criticizing the organization and counting president trump cabinet, what are you going to do to fill the void you just talked about?

>> that is a fair question. going to find out why. i asked that today, and the folks here took it seriously. i hope to get briefed tomorrow on the background of wells fargo and a couple of other things that went down the last couple of years to find out what went wrong, if anything went wrong, and to figure out how we can fix that so we can stop that kind of stuff next time. that is what any good director would do in these circumstances. anybody who has not asked a question yet? yes, ma'am. [indiscernible] was there any coordination in the white house and the senate counsel or any conversations put out? >> not that i know of. i did not know the doj was working on theirs until it came out. yes, sir? last question. no. not at all. all right, thank you very much. we will keep you in the loop as anything develops tomorrow. appreciate your time.

julia: that was cfpb interim director mick mulvaney talking to reporters after the first day of work at the cfpb. -comments that he made their in terms of some of the -- fascinating comments that he made there in terms of there being a 30 day hiring freeze, regulatory and reactions. he will be briefed on cfpb's lawsuits, and he will be present there three days a week. he was pressed on his relative level of independence versus former director richard corkery. he said he will have the same level of independence. he did reiterate a few times about the accountability of the consumer financial protection bureau. he said they are simply not accountable enough. behind the scenes, we know there is potentially a loss of going on between the person that richard clarida pointed, which is leander english, which was his chief of staff and longtime aide. even he was confused about the workings of that, but he has not

spoken to her today. let's bring in bloomberg's national political reporter who is on capitol hill. just want to get your comments on this. to what extent the power play now will be going on at the cfpb is going to impact president trump's efforts to roll back some of this regulation, your take? >> a very unusual situation. we have a term war between two figures, both of whom think they are in charge, both of whom started this day assuming they were acting director of the cfpb. you have leander english, was appointed by the outgoing chief richard corgi. the statute suggests that the outgoing chief can appoint the successor as opposed to the president. the white house has a very different view, that separation of power clearly gives the president the authority to pick the successor for richard cordray. here you have mick mulvaney clearly speaking as though he is the one in charge, the one calling the shots while he under

dralish is suing -- lean english is suing to establish her position as acting director. a highly unusual situation. president trump has a pattern here of appointing people at federal agencies and departments who are openly hostile to its mission. you have rick perry at the department of energy, scott pruitt sued the epa over and over again and now is in charge fant, betsy devos not a big of public education leading the department of education, no and now mick mulvaney who has racism's of cfpb in the past now running it. a unique approach to government. joe: let's talk about some of the criticisms because mulvaney was pretty clear. if it were up to him, he will get rid of the agency or fold it in or have the powers be delegated to other existing agencies. he cannot do anything about it, but he says if only you knew the powers that the director had come you might be disturbed. what specifically?

he is not the first. many conservatives have been critical about the cfpb. what specifically canada cfpb do that the department -- can the cfpb do that the department finds disturbing? sahil: i don't think mick mulvaney said specifically, but republicans in congress have consistently talked about the fact that the theater phoebe has powers that can execute -- the cfpb has powers that can execute without congress's approval and without congress looking back on it and having oversight and retroactively stop those decisions. it relates to the ability of companies to make decisions that would put consumers in the uncomfortable position of agreeing to contracts that they are not fully aware of. things like fine print and that sort of thing. that has been elizabeth warren's big priority and one of the agency,she created this

basically to protect consumers from things that may not have been seen in the light of day. scarlet: to the cfpbreferred as an agency, then corrected himself immediately and kept referring to it as euro -- bureau. there was a very pointed effort to make sure he didn't say agency. sahil: it may have a legal implication, in that, i fit's -- other, the vs. the white house has a clear case in court for being able to be the final arbiter in terms of who gets to be appointed to that position. i don't know. the cfpb has often been referred to as an agency, but the title is bureau. maybe the white house sees something important there. joe: i want to switch over the tax reform. obviously a huge week. it still looks like there are some senators who are not convinced. we heard from the senator from montana, who doesn't like some of the concerns that run johnson

-- ron johnson has expressed concern about. is it going to pass or not? sahil: i wish i knew the answer. that is a $1.5 trillion question. they don't seem to be quite there. ron johnson and steve daines say on the bill. susan collins has been trending in the direction of no, in large part because of the mixing of health care policy with this tax bill. there he is other concerns -- various other concerns on the $1.5 trillion in red ink over the first decade. corker said he will not vote yes if there is a single penny of new deficit added. they have a long way to go in appeasing the deficit hawks. if they do that, i think they are in pretty good shape. scarlet: they have a pretty long list of things to take care of by the end of the week. sahil from capitol hill. julia: "what'd you miss?"

the power play over who will lead the consumer credit -- consumer financial protection bureau. the departing director and the white house have both named interim chiefs of the consumer watchdog agency. the case will be decided by federal judge timothy kelly, who was appointed by federal -- by president trump. our chief washington correspondent is standing by, kevin cirilli. take it away. kevin: we are joined by senator elizabeth warren. thank you for being here. so much to get through. we just heard from cfpb -- omb director mick mulvaney, saying that he has issued a 30-day moratorium on new regulations from the cfpb. do his actions stand? senator warren: my view is there is an acting director of the consumer financial protection bureau. it's the one that congress designated in the statute

itself. the law says that, if the director is unavailable, that would be rich cordray, unavailable because he resigned, the deputy director, that would be leandra english, automatically becomes the acting director. nobody needs to appoint her. nobody needs to do anything. that's what congress wrote into the law, and that's what was signed by the president. and so, the acting director right now is leandra english. kevin: but you have a situation where one of the two co-writers on dodd-frank says he agrees with you. a prominent attorney says he agrees with you. but, senator, candidly, the administration, the president of the united states, says otherwise. to folks outside of washington, all they are looking at this, who should they believe? senator warren: the thing has gone to court now, but let's be clear.

the president is also bounded by the law, just like everyone else. he doesn't get to make it up as he goes along. he has to follow the law, just like everyone else does. kevin: earlier today, you met with leandra english, along with senate minority leader chuck schumer. would you meet with director mulvaney? senator warren: if director mulvaney wants to come over and talk about the work at omb, of course i would be glad to meet with him. kevin: would you meet with him about cfpb? senator warren: i'm not sure in what capacity he would be here, but if he has ideas and wants to discuss them, i have no problem. leandra english was here today to discuss her plans as the acting director of the cfpb. and, look, i think her plans are exactly right. leandra is somebody who is not a political person. she is someone who was at the agency from its inception. she's been there, managing, helping grow the agency. she has been chief of staff

for the agency. she has not been there in a political position. she has been there on behalf of the american people. so, when that agency managed to force big financial institutions to return more than $12 billion directly to people they cheated, when it handled more than 1.2 million complaints, when it went after wells fargo and outed them for creating fake accounts, leandra was there. leandra is there to fight for consumers. and i think that's what the consumer agency needs. kevin: one of the things director mulvaney said at the news conference was, he doesn't understand why the cfpb didn't catch wells fargo. it's a criticism we've heard from house republicans for several years, as you know. what's your response to that? senator warren: i wish the republicans would just get straight on their story, because what they've said over and over and over is, oh, that agency is just too tough. it moves to aggressively. it moves too fast against these

poor, pitiful, giant financial institutions. and then when the american public gets wind of what wells fargo did and the investigation that the cfpb conducted into this, all of a sudden, they say, oh, wait a minute, we are on the other side of that argument. you should have found it faster. you should have been more aggressive. my answer is, give me a break. kevin: should leandra english show up for work tomorrow at the cfpb? senator warren: sure. it's her job. kevin: president trump was speaking at an event at the white house, honoré native americans, once again alluding to you as pocahontas. what's your response? senator warren: this was an event that was to honor war heroes, to honor people who had put it all on the line for america and for america's allies. to honor people who had saved countless lives, both of americans and of our allies

around the world. it's an honoring ceremony, and that donald trump has to get in a racist slur is truly disgusting. look, he's going to keep doing this. he thinks somehow it's going to make me shut up. it hasn't worked in the past. it's not going to work in the future. kevin: two quick questions. there has been a cultural reckoning regarding sexual harassment in the workplace. stephen colbert, earlier this needs to notd this just be discussed in public industries such as the media and politics, but also to small businesses, also to corporations. earlier today, your colleague, senator franken as well as congressman conyers, they have been discussing this. are you satisfied with the response from your democratic colleagues? senator warren: there's going to be an investigation in the senate and the house, and i

think that's appropriate. women have come forward. they deserve to be heard. they deserve to be believed. terrible, bute there will be an investigation here. what i want to see -- i want to see real change. the question now is, is this just going to be a moment where this is on the news, but then everybody goes back to business as usual, or is this going to be a time when there is real change, when the consequence -- where women bravely come forward and another group of women come forward and another group of women come forward -- can it change lives not just for public figures, but for everyone? we will know there has been real change when the shift manager decides that he can't just hand out the best ships to women who will -- shifts to women who will give him sex in the back room or when some guy over in accounting decides that somehow it's ok to come by and press up against

every woman who is making copies at the photocopying machine or that he boss decides is not going to tell dirty jokes and make remarks about women's bodies. when those changes occur, then wewill know, as a country, are better people. we have made real change that we need to make. that's why i'm going to stay in there and fight. kevin: senator elizabeth warren, a busy day and week for you. any preview of what you are going to be asking tomorrow? senator warren: no. just the usual kinds of questions that we always need to be asking the fed about, about attitudes toward regulation, about where he sees risks in the economy, about the approach that he would want to use as the fed chair. kevin: senator elizabeth warren. we always appreciate your time. have a great one. there you have it. senator elizabeth warren, the

senior senator from massachusetts, covering a range of topics on a busy day in washington, d.c. scarlet: thank you so much. kevin cirilli is our chief washington correspondent in new york today. coming up, german chancellor angela merkel is still looking to form a government after coalition talks failed. we discussed what to watch for. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: "what'd you miss?" ireland, eu, and scrambling to find a solution to the irish border question. is in new york today and brings us some much-needed perspective. thank you so much for joining us. great to see you. for those of us who aren't in the u.k., give us a sense of the

pressure, the time pressure that theresa may is under. we hear about deadlines, but i'm not sure how firm these are. : december 14, 15, by then, both sides need to decide whether they want to move on to the next stage of negotiations, talk about trade relations for the time when the u.k. has left. in the first week of december, the u.k. needs to say how much money they are willing to pay, one of the major obstacles so far. they need to get that out of the way. otherwise, there is no way of moving on to trade talks in december. julia: we have the monetary aspect of it. we have the irish border issue. once we tackle all those things, we can move on to the discussion about trade. why is it so critical we get on to the discussion about trade before next year? carsten: march, 2019, they will have left the eu, so you want to make sure you have something in place which at least partially replaces membership of the single market. you need to move on in december.

otherwise, you run out of time. julia: it's about time. the pressing issue of trade and what comes next has been a problem ever since the vote. they wanted to have this discussion earlier, and the eu backed them into a corner. carsten: the ireland situation shows how difficult a choice it is for the u.k. at the end of the day. either you give up on sovereignty or you lose out on market access. joe: explain the significance of the irish border question. the divorce bill. there's a number. they have to meet it and move on. on the irish border question, what is the sticking point and what kind of plausible compromise could be reached? carsten: you are moving towards a hard border. right now, since the u.k. and the republic of ireland are members of the eu, there is no hard border. that has huge of locations for the peace process within northern ireland, the good

friday agreement is dependent on the fact that there is no border between these two sides. that's why it is so tough right now. julia: critical for trade, as well, to come down to it. is there going to be any help coming from germany, in terms of persuasion for the rest of the eu? does a coalition being formed matter for that? carsten: i think the germans were kind of out of this picture from the beginning. u.k., it's been an expectation that the germans would come up with a deal. now that we don't have a government in germany, it was always more important to keep the integrity of the single market together, so i think the room for striking a very d9 deal with the u.k. -- a very benign deal with the u.k. -- joe: doesn't help that it looks like they will get a government in germany -- does it help that it looks like they will get a government in germany? a grand coalition would

have been much better. scarlet: angela merkel comes out looking stronger and better because of the way the talks collapsed initially, and now they look like they can reach some kind of -- carsten: one thing for us to keep an eye on is the membership of the party and whether they want that coalition. once we are through with that, we are looking at a much more benign setup. this?t: did she engineer julia: she made it really difficult for any one to -- anyone to make a coalition. carsten, great to have you in new york with us. carsten nickel at teneo intelligence. jay powell has his confirmation hearing tomorrow. we will speak with james sweeney about what's ahead for the u.s. economy when powell takes the reins from janet yellen. this is bloomberg. ♪ berg. ♪

julia: "what'd you miss?" the confirmation hearing for fed nominee jay powell is expected to be -- is tomorrow. what will the fomc look like with him in power? let's take a look back at his thoughts on inflation and the u.s. economy. >> it might warrant a faster pace of tightening. it has moved up only slowly toward 2%, which argues for continued patience. we have to be committed to our and weation mandate, need to conduct monetary policy in a way that is supportive of inflation going up. the productivity is not an area of tremendous importance, that no one understands particularly well, but it is something we all

need to focus on and are focused on. i'm committed to making decisions with objectivity, based on the best available evidence, in the long-standing tradition of monetary policy independence. julia: let's get some insights on what the u.s. economy would look like under a fed chair jay powell. james sweeney is a chief economist and head of fixed insert -- fixed income research at credit suisse. the nomination of jay powell, , hopefully, the senate signing off on their version of the tax overhaul bill -- james: they are all important and very related. powell will be asked some probing questions on whether he is a continuation of yellen policy or not. i would think most people in the markets don't expect any kind of abrupt shift, but some evidence -- emphasis on maintaining ongoing low inflation makes

sense. on the tax policy side, that's where there's going to be a major change that's about to happen, not monetary policy, but you do want to ask powell, if you have the big tax stimulus now, how does monetary policy respond. it's all very much tied together. scarlet: of course, if he is seen as a continuation -- he is seen as the consensus builder within the fomc. what parts of janet yellen's regime or tenure can he improve upon? what can he do better? would it be communication? is that monetary policy can maintain price stability, and price stability means households and businesses are not thinking about inflation when they are making decisions. if that's what monetary policy can do, janet yellen has done very well. i think powell has said some things that he would be open to some changes on the regulatory

side. we will be looking for details on that. but i think, in terms of ordinary monetary policy, you're are really looking for whether the balance sheet plan that yellen has put in place is what powell is going to execute and also whether that real neutral rate at 0%, which they have emphasized, is likely to keep being the real neutral rate. i would not expect them to give us the answer to that. on that one, basically, you get about three more hikes and you are at roughly that 0% real neutral rate. they've said that's neutral. if inflation is flat and growth is just coasting along normally, do they stop there? that's the obvious question. joe: let's talk about the intersection of the tax reform bill and monetary policy. there seems to be two views. if the tax reform bill merely delivers a sugar high, then theoretically the fed would offset that and you don't get that much.

if, on the other hand, it can enable structurally faster growth and enable the economy to grow without hitting an inflation speed bump, then there is no particular reason for the fed to tighten. when you look at this particular bill or something that resembles the house or senate bill, do you see a bill that could enable solidly stronger structural growth that the fed would not have to offset? james: we are emphasizing the short-term sugar high aspect of it. we see upside risk to investment, more or less immediately. the part of that is leading indicators right now are suggesting that the short-term investment outlook looks very good. if you are close to full employment and you are adding a boost to investment -- joe: but nothing that would raise the potential speed limit for the economy. james: if you have more machines next to people in the long run, you will get faster growth and better productivity. there are a lot of other things that go into that, too, and we have to be a little careful about overinterpreting

technicals. julia: we heard the exact same thing earlier today. have you spoken to anyone whose opinion you respect who -- joe: we are looking for these people. james: i think there's a view that businesses have just not been confident for a long time so investment has not been strong. and there is a view that you need booms to create long-term growth. julia: and busts? james: well, yeah. thatnk that's the view more optimistic people on this plan have. i think most economists are a bit more neutral, basically, that this is going to drive some short-term growth, you a little more cyclical amplitude, but, in the long run, it's not going to change or projection for trend growth meaningfully -- change your projection for trend growth meaningfully. scarlet: does it accelerate the downturn we will eventually get? james: historically, recessions

are preceded by strong investment growth, construction booms, things like that, but it doesn't mean you never want strong investment growth. in some sense, it increases some inflationary risk, but it doesn't necessarily mean you are to 2020 a recesiosion in or 2019. scarlet: i'm trying to get a sense of timing. james: what i'm focused on is where interest rates are. what we have is a 10-year yield 2.30, which seems extraordinary based on what's happening in the markets. everyone is looking for a trigger that moves those long-term interest rates sharply higher. julia: the risk is that asset prices rally. scarlet: new problems. julia: increasing problems to tackle. scarlet: james sweeney, thank you so much, chief economist and head of fixed income research in global markets at credit suisse. joe: coming up, what you need to know to prepare for tomorrow's

trading day. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: "what'd you miss?" mixed day for u.s. stocks. the dow creeping up a little

bit. the s&p basically -- joe: flat. scarlet: a lot of news coming up for this week. that could be a catalyst for gains or losses. the confirmation hearing for jay powell begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern in washington. joe: economic data -- numbers for consumer confidence for november come out tomorrow morning. julia: don't miss this, the bank of england publishing its annual the health ofn the u.k. banks and the financial sector. scarlet: that does it for "what'd you miss?" " isa: "bloomberg technology up next. joe: have a great evening. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> welcome to "daybreak australia." i am paul allen in sydney. here are some lines just breaking now. the fed expects interest rates to rise somewhat further, the fed to weigh deregulation while keeping core reforms. those lines, just crossing now. betty: his testimony in front of the senate is going to be tomorrow, but these are some his preparedes in remarks. he also noted he will be guided solely by the feds mandate and said thec interest and fed must