says he and president biden have begun consultations to replace the last remaining treaty limiting nuclear weapons. another point of agreement, the return of ambassadors. >> with regard to the return of ambassadors to their workplaces, returning the american ambassador to moscow and our ambassador to washington, we agreed that they would return to their service. as for the timeline, tomorrow or after. mark: president putin describes his talk with president biden as constructive as he and mr. biden broached thorny issues including cybersecurity and political dissonance. utile republican senator mitt romney is optimistic about striking an infrastructure deal. he is part of the senate bipartisan group negotiating a compromise package.

in-patient -- democrats say they are ready to move ahead without republicans if there is no deal by next week. the white house is no deadline has been set for a deal. the u.s. economy is on the way to a post-covid recovery. this phone of confidence from secretary janet yellen, testifying for the senate finance committee. she thanked congress for passing the $1.9 trillion pandemic relief bill in march. challenges remain, including wage inequality, declining labor force participation, racial gaps, and rising inflation. she is urging lawmakers to back president biden's proposals for a multi-year $4 trillion spending plan on childcare, infrastructure, and green investments. a bipartisan group of senators is still trying to reach a compromise on an infrastructure plan. global news 24 hours a day on air and on bloomberg quicktake, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton.

this is bloomberg. ♪ jon: 1:00 a.m. in -- matt: welcome to "bloomberg markets." the fed decides. we will count you down to the fomc rate decision. plus, the latest from geneva. vladimir putin says the u.s. and russia will return their ambassadors to their posts in moscow and washington, d.c. and we will take live comments from president biden following his meeting with vladimir putin. all of that and more, coming up. the president has yet to step out. as soon as he does, we will

bring you his remarks live as well as the q&a. let's take a check of what is going on in markets. we have reports that stocks are doing some selling on the s&p 500. we were unchanged throughout the day, but the s&p has come down closer and closer to the fed meeting. the bloomberg blog says blocks are responsible selling shares amid trading. the u.s. 10 year yield below 1.5% at 148.54 right now. the question of this coiled spring and will it be set off, the answer in less than 57 minutes. u.s.-dollar -- u.s. dollar index unchanged. brent crude, the global benchmark up and there is talk about wti rising to these levels and beyond as global demand picks up. as you may have noticed, the

fomc decision comes out today at 2:00 p.m. eastern. jay powell's press conference a half an hour later. for more, let's bring in bloomberg's economic policy correspondent, michael mckee. what is the main thing you will be watching for today before the dot plot comes out? michael: the dot plot will be the first thing on people's minds. you also will want to have a shot glass ready. calmly times those jay powell say transitory talking about inflation. the dot plot right now forecast no rate increase until at least 20 24. there are 18 members and only seven saw a rate increase in 2023. if three dots move up, then the fed is weighing rates move earlier them a most of the markets had anticipated. the other question is about inflation. transitory has been the feds

where. -- the fed's word. they are respecting their economic survey, 2.4% inflation for the year. they may have some explaining to do, as they say in the business. matt: on the blog, "markets are coiled like a snake." the risks have been called asymmetric because no one expects them to get more dovish. the only thing they can do is stay the course or take a turn towards tapering. why is this market pricing a 10 year at 148 right now? michael: a couple of reasons. one is they are buying into what the fed is doing. another is a lot of buying by foreigners who are hedging other bets right now because the u.s. is the safest and the strongest economy at the moment. what we are watching is to see

if there is a reaction, like you talk about, a coiled spring ready to move, that comes back the other way once people get their initial reactions out of the way. because the fed is not expected to do anything today. the one thing they might do is change the interest on excess reserves. that is a technical tweak, not a monetary policy moves. matt: there has been more talk about the danger of the situation from peter hooper at deutsche bank, the bank of england, and then on bloomberg opinion today. is the fed setting itself up -- is it cornering itself so that if you do see inflation show up as more than transitory, they are forced to raise rates faster than they normally would and push the economy into a recession again? michael: that is going to be one of the questions that jay powell is asked because we do not know

exactly where they draw the line. they have been unspecific about how long transitory lasts or how high they are willing to let things go before they start to get nervous. watch for any kind of comment from him on that. he has worked very hard to keep his options open in past news conferences. maybe we do not get a specific answer, but if he suggests that the fed has limits, then you can see that kind of market reaction. we don't exactly know where the fed would draw the line. matt: we have not been adding jobs as quickly as the fed anticipated over the past couple of payroll reports, but we are adding a solid amount. i think we had more than half a billion jobs added in the last report. what does the fed want to see? where do jay powell and he's colleagues -- his colleagues see the natural level of unemployment?

michael: they still think it is somewhere around 4%, but they noted we were able to be below 4% for many months before the pandemic without touching off inflation and their bid is that that still holds. they are not looking at the number of jobs created each month, as the number of people who are out of work who were working a year ago. the employment to population ratio. they want to see more of people come back. they are watching the unemployment rates for women and minorities, trying to get more of them into the labor force. those other criteria for them. so far, there has been progress. the question is is it substantial progress, which is the phrase that jay powell has used to talk about when they might want to start tapering. matt: we are going to get a summary of economic projections, michael. what are traders going to be focused on? what is the fed going to say about inflation? michael: you have to figure they

are going to move up their inflation forecast. 2.4%, what they saw for the end of this year in march, is unrealistic at the moment the way inflation is going. the question is how far do they raise it and how does powell explained that. the unemployment rate, they think 4%, it could go lower than that. the way we have been going, it is probably going to stay the same. ddp will be interesting. they forecast 6.5% for this year. some people on wall street are higher than that. for the second quarter, the atlanta fed forecast is for 10.3%. if we did that kind of number, it raises the stakes for the fed in the sense that the faster the economy goes, the more inflation we make it. matt: so much attention, as usual, focused on jackson, which comes at the end of august. is that where you expect as well to finally get the fed laying the groundwork of what plans are

going to look like? michael: there is a narrative on wall street that it is probably a good place for jay powell to give a speech. it is away from other monetary policy and central bank moments and it has been used before, particularly by ben bernanke to lay out policy plans. my intent at the fact they, at the next meeting, might lay out some plans. with the inflation rate moving at rates unexpected, and they may talk about the meeting before we even get to jackson hole. matt: thanks for joining us. mike mckee, talking to us about what to expect. stay tuned for full coverage of the fomc rate decision. "the fed decides" is our special coverage. it kicks off in 20 minutes with

tom keene. we are still waiting for the latest out of geneva. we saw that stage set for president biden to come out. here it is. a gorgeous shot over lake geneva. any minute now, he should come out and give his account of his bilateral meeting with president putin. we are all also waiting for president putin to leave. he is going to get on his presidential aircraft and fly out of geneva any minute. things are moving along here as they get set to move along in washington, d.c. that is president putin's state car. a fascinating vehicle. almost like a rose rose -- rolls-royce, but his own russian build. i probably should not be talking about it this much. this is bloomberg.

♪ matt: this is "number markets." -- "bloomberg markets." following the summit with russian president vladimir putin, the shot overlooking lake geneva. everybody waiting for the president to come out. josh wingrove is on location live in switzerland. let's sum up what we heard from

president putin. the headline is that diplomats, ambassadors will return to their place of work in moscow and d.c. what else did we hear from president putin? josh: this is going to be one of those cases where there are working groups, discussions, that kind of thing and they will report back. that is always the time to temper expectations. they have some small things they complained to progress. you mentioned the ambassadors. one thing that came out of that statement by president putin is that he denied responsibility for cyberattacks, saying it is not russia doing this on the same scale as americans, or even other countries, canadians, latin america. that was one thing biden had set the frame for, that he believes russia is harboring criminals that are targeting america as

far as ransomware. president putin denying that. there is a draw there. i suspect we will not take putin's word for that. if russia would not do anything about it, that implies that biden will have to consider some sort of retaliation on his own. beyond that, looking forward to what he has to say about navalny and others. matt: it is interesting because the last big summit between the u.s. and russian president, we saw president trump. he did take putin's word or his claim that he was not involved, russians were not involved in u.s. election hacking in any way. but biden wants to set the opposite tone and at the same time, cooperate with gluten on a number of things. what can they -- cooperate with putin on a number of things. what can they work together on? josh: i'm just hearing that we

have a two minute warning for biden. we will be hearing from him shortly. there are ways they can work together. ukraine remains an issue. cybersecurity stuff remains an issue. i don't know that there is going to be a ton of immediate progress and the fear was that biden would give equivalency or world stage to putin in the eyes of some who believe that was not deserved. biden is going to thread the needle right now. as putin's chief rivals have told him, this is the time to have a meeting and so they have had the meeting and we are all waiting anxiously to see what he says and what pledges he got from putin. probably less is a guarantee that those things will happen, but more as a mile marker for

potential legitimacy for biden to respond. matt: we will go to president biden as soon as he steps out. he has essentially thrown in the towel on nord stream 2. willing to help the u.s. and still determined to buy more russian gas. there is not much he can do about turkey buying russian weapons. it is interesting that russia's second-biggest army is buying from vladimir putin. what about lukashenko and belarus? is there anything he can do about the fact that putin seems to be supporting this dictator in doing things like stopping down on democratic protesters and downing a flight? josh: he said he would raise it. beyond that, it is hard to see. this is a case of mere piracy, coming out strongly against it. as for tangible responses, i don't know. i think that biden really views that this is sort of an atrophy

position and they have gotten out of step with each other and pushing back to russia. he is hoping the united front gives pause to putin when he is considering new measures. on an unrelated note, we are hearing what biden gave putin right now and it includes a pair of aviators, sunglasses. that, i suppose, sets some kind of tone. that is a very tangible thing. matt: biden is famous for wearing those aviators. i have seen putin wearing aviators, but they are not gray -- ray bans. there comes the president in those sunglasses. let's hear his remarks. pres. biden: i know it was easy getting into the meeting. no problem getting through those

doors, was it? anyway, hello, everyone. i just finished the last meeting of this week's long trip of the u.s.-russian summit. i know there was a lot of hype around this meeting, but it was pretty straightforward to me. one, there is no substitute for face-to-face dialogue between leaders. none. president putin and i share a unique responsibility to manage the relationship between two powerful and proud countries. a relationship that has to be stable and predictable and it should be able -- we should be able to cooperate where it is in our mutual interests. where we have differences, i wanted president putin to understand why i say what i say and why i do what i do and how

we will respond to specific kinds of actions that harm america's interests. i told president putin my agenda is not against russia or anyone else. it is for the american people. fighting covid-19, rebuilding our economy, reestablishing relationships around the world with our allies, and protecting the american people. that is my responsibility as president. i also told him that no president of the united states could keep faith with the american people if they did not speak out to defend our democratic values, to stand up for the universal and fundamental freedoms of all men and women. that is part of the dna of our country. human rights is going to always be on the table, i told him. it is not about just going after russia when they violate human rights. it is about human -- we are.

how could i be the president of united states of america and not speak out against the violation of human rights? i told him, that unlike other countries, we are uniquely proud of the idea. you have heard me say this again and again. we do not derive our rights from the government. we possess them because we are born period. and we yield onto a government. i pointed out to him, that is why we are going to raise our concerns about cases like alexei navalny. i made it clear to president putin and will continue to raise issues of fundamental human rights because that is what we are, that is who we are. we hold these truths self-evident of all men and women. we have not lived up to it completely, but we have always

widened the arc of commitment and included more and more people. i raised the case of two wrongfully imprisoned american citizens. paul whelan and travel brief -- trevor reeve. i also raised the importance of a free press and freedom of speech. i made it clear that we will not tolerate attempts to violate our democratic sovereignty or destabilize our democratic elections and we would respond. the bottom line is i told president putin we need to have some basic rules of the road that we can all abide by. i also said they are areas where there is a mutual interest for us to cooperate. for our people, but also for the benefit and the security of the world. one of those areas is strategic stability. you asked me many times what was i going to discuss with putin before i came. i told you, i only negotiate with the individual.

now i can tell you what i was intending to do all along, and that is to discuss and raise the issue of strategic stability and try to set up a mechanism. we discussed in detail the next steps are countries could take on arms control measures, steps we need to take to reduce the risk of unintended conflict. i am pleased he agreed to launch a bilateral strategic stability dialogue. diplomatic speak for tell -- saying, get our diplomats together to work in a mechanism that can lead to the control of new and dangerous and sophisticated weapons that are coming on the scene now that reduce the times of response, that raised the prospect of accidental war. we went into detail of what those weapons systems were. another area we spent time on was cyber and cybersecurity. i talked about the proposition of certain critical

infrastructure should be off-limits to attack, period. i gave them a list. i don't have it in front of me. 16 specific entities. 16 defined as critical infrastructure under u.s. policy from the energy sector to our water systems. for us, the principle is one thing. it has to be backed by practice. responsible countries need to take action against criminals who conduct ransomware activities on their territory. we agreed to task experts from both of our countries to work on specific understandings about what is off limits and to follow up on specific cases that originate in other countries. there is a long list of other things we spent time on and the urgent need to preserve and reopen in syria so that we can get food and basic necessities

to people who are starving to death. how to build it and how it is in the interest of both russia and the united states to ensure that iran does not acquire nuclear weapons. we agreed to work together because it is as much russia's interest is ours. -- as ours. and how we can ensure cooperation remains rather than conflict. i felt proud of president putin's press conference and he talked about the need for us to be able to have some way of making sure the arctic was a free zone and to how we can each contribute to the shared effort of preventing the resurgence of terrorism in afghanistan. it is very much in the interest of russia not to have a resurgence of terrorism in afghanistan.

they are also areas that are more challenging. i communicated with the united states's unwavering commitment to the sovereignty of ukraine. we agreed to pursue diplomacy related to the agreement and i share our concern about belarus. we did not -- he did not disagree with what happened, he just had a different perspective on what to do about it. i know you have a lot of questions, so let me close with this. it was important to meet in person so there can be no mistake about or misrepresentation about what i wanted to communicate. i did what i came to do. number one, identify areas of practical work are countries can do to advance our mutual interests and also benefit the world. two, communicate directly as the united states will respond to actions that are imperative to our interests and those of our

allies. and three, to lay out our priorities and values. he herded straight from me. i must tell you, the tone of the entire meeting, a total of four hours, was good, positive. there was not any strident action taken. where we disagreed, i disagreed, stated where it was. when he disagreed, he stated. but it was not done in a hyperbolic atmosphere. that is too much of what has been going on. over this last week, i believe, i hope the united states has shown the world that we are back, standing with our allies. we rallied our fellow democracies to make concerted commitment to take on the biggest challenges our world faces. and now, we have established a clear basis on how we intend to deal with russia

pres. biden: there's much more work ahead. before i take your questions i want to say one last thing. this is about how we move from here. i listened to a significant portion of president putin's press conference. this is about practical, straightforward, no-nonsense decisions that we have to make or not make. we will find out within the next six months to a year whether or not we have a strategic dialogue that matters. we will find out whether we worked to do -- to deal with releasing people and russian prisons are not. we will find out whether we have a cybersecurity arrangement that begins to bring some order.

the countries that are likely to be damaged are major countries. when i talked about the pipeline , that ransomware hit in the united states. i look at him and said how would you feel if ransomware took on the pipelines from your oilfields. he said it would matter. this is not just about our self interest. it's a lot of mutual self-interest. i will take your questions and as usual, they gave me a list of people i'm going to call on. jonathan, associated press. >> thank. u.s. intelligence says that russia tried to interfere in the last two presidential elections and that russian groups are behind hacks and some of the ransomware attacks. putin excepted no responsibility for any misbehavior. your predecessor opted not to

demand that he stop. what is something concrete that you achieved today to stop that from happening again? pres. biden: he knows i will take action like we did when this last timeout. we made it clear that we were not going to continue to allow this to go on. the end result was ended up closed desperate up closing down facilities. -- we ended up closing down facilities. there are consequences. i suspect you may all think doesn't matter. it matters to him and other world nations. his credibility shrinks. let's get this straight.

interfering with the elections of other countries and everybody knew it. what would it be like if we engaged in activities that he has engaged in? it diminishes the standing of a country that is desperately trying to make sure that it maintains its standing as a major world power. it's not just what i do, it's the actions that other countries take that are contrary to norms and it's the price they pay. they are not able to dictate what happens in the world. the united states being one of them. >> you said just now that you spoke about human rights. what do you say would happen if

navalny died? pres. biden: consequences for russia. what you think happens when he says it's not about navalny? and then he dies in prison. i pointed out that it matters a great deal when a country, and they asked me why i thought it was important to continue to have problems with the president of syria. i said because he is violating national norm. it's called the chemical weapons treaty. it -- they can be trusted. it's about trust. it's about influencing other nations in a positive way. would you like to trade our economy for russia's economy? we talked about trade. i don't have any problem doing business with russia as long as they do it based on

international norms. it is in our interest to see the russian people do well. i don't have a problem with that. if they do not act according to national norms -- international norms, guess what? not only won't would not have been with us, it won't happen with other nations. need to reach out to other countries to invest in russia. they won't. -- they won't as long as they are convinced of the fact that the violations, for example, the american businessman that was in house arrest. he wanted to get american business to invest. change the dynamic. these american businessmen, they are not ready to hang out in moscow. i know we make foreign policy out to be this great skill and somehow it's sort of like secret

code. all foreign policy is is an extension of relationships. when you run a country that does not abide by international norms and yet you need those international norms to be somehow managed so that you can purchase a pate in the benefit of them, it hurts you. -- so that you can participate in the benefit of them, it hurts you. my generic point is it is more complicated than that. david, there he is. >> thank you, mr. president. this been a lot of talk about the two countries down into a cold war and i was wondering if there is anything you got from

the cook -- from the discussion that made you think pres. biden: i need to take my coat off the sun is hot. >> that he decided to move away from his fundamental role as a disruptor, particularly disruptor of nato. if i could follow up on your description of how gave him a list of critical infrastructure and the united states. did you layout very clearly what it was for the -- very curly with the penalty was for interfering? -- very clearly what the penalty was for interfering? >> pres. biden: i pointed out to him that we have significant cyber capability. he knows it. he doesn't know exactly what it is, but it's significant. in fact, they violate these basic norms we will respond. he knows.

i think that the last thing he wants now is a cold war. i'm not putting him, which i don't think is appropriate. let me ask a rhetorical question. you've got a border with china. china is moving ahead hell-bent on election seeking to be the most powerful economy in the world, largest and most powerful military in the world. you are in a situation where your economy is struggling. you need to move it in a more progressive way in terms of growing it and i don't think he's looking for a cold war with the united states. as i said to him, your generation and mine are about 10 years apart.

it's clearly not in anybody's interest. your countries or mine for us to be in a situation where we are in a new cold war. i believe he thinks that. he understands that. that doesn't mean he's ready to lay down his arms and say come on. he's still, i believe, as concerned about being encircled. he is still concerned that we in fact are looking to take him down. he still has those concerns. i don't think they are the driving force in the relationship he's looking for the united states. jennifer jacobs. >> thank you, mr. president. is there a particular reason why the summit lasted only about three hours? you know that you are allotted four or five hours? also, did president putin say there were no -- president putin

said there were no threats or scare tactics used. would you agree with that? pres. biden: yes, yes and yes. let me go back to the first part. the reason it did not go longer is the last time to heads of state have spent over two hours and direct conversation across the table going into excruciating detail. you may know of a time. i don't. we did not need, as we got through and brought it -- and brought in the larger group, and my secretary of state was with me the whole time. he had covered so much so there was a summary done. we raised beings that required more and -- amplification to

make sure that we did not have any misunderstandings. it was after two hours that we looked at each other like ok, what next? what is going to happen next? we are going to be able to look back, look ahead in three to six months and say are the things that we decided to work out, did they work out? are we closer to a major strategic stability talk? are we farther along in terms of going down the line? i'm not saying because the president and i agreed we would do these things that all of a sudden it's going to work. i'm not saying that. what i'm saying is i think there's a genuine prospect to significantly improve the relationship between our two countries not giving up a single solitary thing based on values.

there were no threats. as a matter fact. -- as a matter fact, i heard he quoted my mom and other people today. it was very somewhat colloquial. we talked about basic, fundamental things. you know how i am. i explain things based on a personal basis. there were no threats. sue will assertions made. -- simple assertions made. letting him know where i stood. what i thought we could accomplish together and what if there were violations of american sovereignty what would we do. he asked us about afghanistan. he says he hopes we are able to maintain some security and i

said it has a lot to do with you . he indicated he was prepared to help with afghanistan. i won't go into detail now. help with iran. we told him what we wanted to do relative to bringing some stability and economic security to the people of syria and libya so we had those discussions. >> thanks so much. you said that he did not issue any threats. were there any ultimatums made? how would you measure success when it comes to these groups on russian meddling? pres. biden: on cybersecurity, rb going to work out that shar we going to work out?

i don't think they planned it in this case. are they going to act? we will find out. will we commit to act in terms of anything violating international norms. what are we going to agree to do. i think we have real opportunities to move. i think that one of the things we noticed is that people who are very well informed start thinking you know, it's going to be a real problem. what happens if that ransom outfit were sitting in florida or maine? you could see them kinda go we do that but well. -- we do that but whoa.

>> mr. president, one president putin was questioned about human rights, that he said the reason why that he is pushing that she is cracking down on opposition leaders is because he is not what's of the light january 6 to happen in russia and he does not want groups to form like black lives matter. what is your response? >> pres. biden: i think that's a ridiculous comparison. it's one thing for literally criminals to break through the window of the capital and kill a police officer and beheld that it was people marching on the capital saying you are not allowing me to speak and you are not allowing me to do a b, c, d. steve, steve holland. >> president putin said he was

satisfied with the answer about your comment about him being a killer. could you give us your side on this? pres. biden: he's satisfied. why would i bring it up again? >> do you believe you can trust him? pres. biden: this is not about trust. this is about self interest and verification. that's what it's about. i don't say well i trust you, no problem. let's see what happens. as an old expression goes, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. igor, radio free. do you want to go on the shade? can you see? >> yeah.

in a civil society, continue in side russia. voice of america. several other independent media. we are essentially being forced out in russia. my question is after your talk with president putin, how interested do you think he is in improving the media climate in russia? pres. biden: i would not put it that way. improving the climate. i would put it in terms of how much interest does he have in burnishing russia's reputation.

that's a judgment i cannot make. it's not because i think he's interested in changing the nature of closed society and actions relative to what he thinks. it's very different approach and i told him i read most everything he has written in the speeches he has made and i've read a couple of good biographies. i pointed out to him that russia had an opportunity, are brief shining moments after gorbachev and things began to change drastically. what happened was it failed and

there was a great race among russian intellectuals to determine what form of government with they choose and how would they choose it? based on what i believed mr. putin decided was russia had always been a major international power when it's been totally united as a russian state. not based on ideology whether if those -- whether it was going back to, czar -- not based on ideology. it's clear to me and i've said it. i think he decided that the way for russia to be able to a sustained itself as a great power is to in fact unite the russian people on just the strength of the government, government controls.

not necessarily ideologically but the government. i think that's the choice that was made. i'm not going to second-guess whether it could be fundamentally different, but i do think it does not lend itself to russia maintaining itself as one of the great powers of the world. >> may i ask you one more question please sir? >> did you in terms of the redlined that you lay down, is military response and option for a ransomware attack? and resident putin had called you an experienced person. he famously told him he did not have a soul. do you now have a deeper understanding of him after this meeting? >> thank you very much.

no we did not talk about a military response. >> are you saying there is no substitute for face-to-face dialogue. you said the biggest problems for nato are the that shar russia and china. he spoke many times about how you have spent more time with resident she then -- with the president of china than any other world leaders. is there a time you may called him -- you may call him to ask him to open up china to the world health organization? >> we know each other well -- pres. biden: we know each other well, but we are not friends. it's just pure business. >> you said that you are going to press china. you said the g7 were calling on china to open up and let the investigators in, but china said they do not want to be

interfered with. what happens now? pres. biden: the world's attitude toward china is a development. china is trying very hard to protect itself as a responsible and very forthcoming nation. they are trying hard to talk about how they are helping the world in terms of covid-19 and vaccines. certain things you don't have to explain to the people of the world. they see the results. is china actually trying to get to the bottom of this? one thing they did discuss as i told you. what we should be doing and what i want to make a plan to do is rally the world to work on what is going to be the physical mechanism available to detect early on the next pandemic and have a mechanism by which we can respond and respond early?

it's going to happen. we need to do that. thank you. >> the president of the united states. i must paint the picture of 87 degrees, sweltering geneva. a president with his coat off halfway through his rez conference with the aviator glasses on hand -- through his press conference with the a breeder -- with the aviator glasses on hand. still lecturing the press there. we will move on on a day of federal reserve open market committee.

this will be in seven minutes. michael mckee watching the comments from the fed. lisa thrilled they could join again. we will continue on with the markets. >> i want to take your jacket off right now. we've seen this pullback year that people are not quite sure what they are going to get. is powell going to be explicit and if not, the question is where you going to make your bets? >> lisa, i really want to go here. we have guests lined up and we want to fit them in.

lisa, let's frame it right now. why don't you bring in? >> how does the market respond? i love your sense given the fact that you do expect to show a rate hike. i'm wondering what your perspective is about the market response to that policy. >> i think the rate market is set up for a message and if it suggests a height and 2000 -- if it suggests a hike. took about that we are discussing tapering but we are not close to announcing

tapering. what's the timing, sequencing? what we are looking for, i think the rate market has gone higher. >> also, danny blanchflower. you speak of wage inflation. danny: i think he's mindful of a very uncertain world. i think what they are going to say is we don't really know what's coming. there are good signs that we see some change coming but we don't have a crystal ball and i think is going to continue and say waiting watching looking and we are responding in due course.

they can really -- if somebody says they think 2023 this a rate hike, i guess it's wishful guessing because they have no idea. it just reminded me, i once talked to janet yellen who said her biggest mistake was answering a question. i think what he's going to do is say nothing and try to say we are here and ready to act. this is an economy that is proving -- that is improving. that's what i would be expecting. nothing much and trying not to nudge anything. >> is the market going to accept

nothing? when you talk about pricing, right now that's 111 basis points. what's changed is the last meeting. >> i think the fed, powell needs to come on both sides. that it is not transitory and the fed might be behind the curve. do they trigger a recession. that they will tolerate and overshoot. i think they have to calm people down and that's why he has a tough day. they are talking about -- >>

>> thank you so much. we will do this again and soon. valuable conversation. the equity market at negative on the dial. 17.44. i just got a go back to the 10 year yield. it is barely botched. i think we have to go up to six digits. >> oil prices generally rising since their highest levels since 2018. 1.485% 10 year yield. >> we never had a chance to reset. good afternoon. we have heard from the president of the united states. thanks to our team for all of the coverage as they make the

trek back to washington. we would do that in a moment. after that, we've got wonderful conversation economics into finance and investment. the dow, -153. let us go to michael mckee as the fed decides. >> there is no change in rates, but there is a change and when they might rise. the fed now sees first rate move pulling it forward. 13 of the 18 members of the open market committee now see a move into thousand 23. in march, there were only seven. the average rate they see is .625 sent which would suggest just 1 -- .625%. it also looks like they see two