the boot. warren buffett's berkshire hathaway sold down apple stake. more details ahead. it's monday, november 4th, 2024 and "squawk box" begins right now. good morning, everybody. welcome to "squawk box" here on cnbc. we are live from the nasdaq market site in times square. i'm becky quick along with joe kernen and andrew ross sorkin. it is election week and markets are gearing up getting things ready to go. if you have been looking what is happening. s&p futures up 12. the nasdaq indicated up by 38. let's take a quick look at treasury yields. yields have been continuing to climb. yields are lower.

ten-year at 4.29. the two-year at 4.16. in beijing, the national people's congress has begun a five-day meeting. investors are expecting to hear details about the size of the fiscal stimulus on friday. ahead of that, you see markets up across the region. shenzhen is up 2%. meantime, let's talk about the shakeup in the dow jones industrial average. the 30 stock benchmark adding nvidia and sherwin-williams and booting intel. the changes made to ensure a more repetitive exposure to the semiconductor and material sector. the change will be effective to the opening on friday. it is a boon to nvidia, but a knock to intel. that's the real truth here. >> we were talking they should do this. come on, dow. s&p does it.

>> they should have done it -- >> we're now in a perfect position. you know what? in the past, we said apple made its move. why are they doing it now? and it continues to climb. it is hard to imagine nvidia goes double to where it is. >> it is not expensively priced relative to sales. >> no way you can argue intel is the bellwether for chips in the u.s. sherwin-williams, i think employees were shocked. what? did i hear that? >> paint? >> chesherwin-williams. >> what's the market cap? >> 90 billion. i was surprised that dow inc. was still in there. it's good. >> meantime, semafor reporting that the policymakers are discussing scenarios if intel needs more assistance beyond the billions of funds the company is

slated to receive from the chips act. intel allocated $5 billion in grants. top officials at the commerce department and senator mark warner has discussed if intel needs more help. it shows intel is viewed as extra strategically important. reports say there's little appetite for a 2008-style bailout. this goes to the idea of how much government funds have gone into intel and idea of picking winners and losers and industrial policy. what kind of face are you making? >> we said all along -- >> it was always going to be a tough road. >> when the chips act passed, it seemed intel would be the one to do it. two years later? >> it seemed to me, the thing i thought, you need to make a lot of bets. you can't put all your bets on

one furtheirm. the issue is like a capital game. it literally is a money game. you can't have 12 fabs or 12 company was fabs because it is too expensive. you almost have to bet on one or two or three companies maximum. there are not that many more. the question is why they didn't do it to amazon or -- >> four years ago, of course, you give intel a lot of money. it shows you how quickly technology exchange. nvidia is $3 trillion versus $90 billion? >> i was in favor of this at the time of the chips act because the idea of locally sourced was so important from not just pricing, but american manufacturing -- >> national security. >> and defense. i wonder if we offered massive tax incentives to do it instead

of cash or would it have worked if you had done that? >> is it enough money? some of this is tax incentives and some they haven't gotten yet. >> you wonder if they will get it. >> the money was given out in tranches based on performance. the issue is intel is not going to be able to quote/unquote perform. >> right. >> the instances where -- would the government bet on myspace? the instances that the government is better than market forces is rare. it goes all the way back. go back to 1776. it gets tiresome to hear about free markets more effective. they really do work better in just allocating capital. it's very difficult. i'm not blaming the government. no one could have known five years ago what was going to happen to intel and nvidia.

it's just like don't even try. i guess you can -- maybe you're right. so the winner in the marketplace had an easier time or had some assistance instead of picking who would be the winner. >> the tax incentives, is it enough because it is so expensive to build these things. i don't know how you can set it up and incentivize it. >> even with all that help, intel is sucking money. >> it took a long time to start handing out that money. >> what company would you have given it to? >> i don't know. >> the problem is i remember talking to leaders of companies like amazon and microsoft and google, all of them are quote/unquote making their own chips. they are designing their own chips. it was never clear that any of those companies wanted to make their own chips on their own because the economics of them were never great. >> there are people, but asml is

not here, right? >> asml doesn't make chips. >> okay. who does? micron? there are other foundrys. >> tsmc. >> they're trying. >> they are getting money to build stuff here. >> they are getting money to bring them here. >> intel was the only -- that was -- when everything moved out of the country, it's a commodity business. no one's left. >> at some point on the flip side, someone will look at intel and all of the lobbying money spent to get that money because they also probably had -- probably, by a long shot, had the greatest lobbying effort to get that money for themselves. no question. >> right. the fed is going to cut, right? especially after friday after that 12,000 jobs whoeatever it was. the u.s. central bankers will

meet thursday. the meeting was scheduled a day later than normal because tomorrow is election day. that's tomorrow? fed is expected to cut interest rates by a quarter point. crude prices are rising. opec plus down tries agreed to delay a planned december output increase by a month. it comes as weak demand especially from china and rising supply outside the group have pushed prices lower. opec has already delayed the increase from october because of falling prices and the group holds its next full meeting on december 1st when it is expected to determine policy for 2025. warren buffett's berkshire hathaway sold another chunk of apple stake downsizing the holding for four quarters in a row according to berkshire's quarterly results released on saturday morning. released 67% of apple since the end of the quarter last year.

berkshire has reaped more $10 billion from july since the bank of america investment. overall, if you are alooking, berkshire sold more in the third quarter. the cash pile grew to a record $325 billion. they have now more in cash than they have in their entire portfolio of stocks. >> they got a lot of apple. sold 2/3? 67%? >> 67%. >> what do you think he is getting ready for? >> i have no idea. winter? >> this is like building the ark. that's what it looks like to me. >> it reminds me -- post 2001 when he thought markets were overvalued and had a lot of cash. pr pre-2001. >> apple.

>> it's not just apple, but bank of america. >> what will happen? no more iphones? a.i. will make it more important to go to the next iphone? >> 67% of stock sold, it is still the largest position they have in any by far. american express is second and bank of america is third. >> isn't apple part of it? >> buffett has never been a tech investor. >> why is it no longer a good consumer products play? that's a lot to sell. >> i'll give you the argument. the phone is the phone. it's not the rapid sort of changes are just not going to be there. people are owning their phone or three or four or five years now. >> that should make a difference. >> not really. it may just be a software situation. >> the other speculation is he is selling all of this because he made so much money on it and tax changes, would you be paying much more potentially on capital

gains next year. there are a lot of different looks. >> he always used to say he never made investments or operated businesses because of taxes. he used to say that repeatedly. >> that is out there in speculation. if you think changes could come next year. >> by the way, you may be right. i don't know. >> i don't know ieither. i read everything over the weekend. there are a bunch of different lines of speculation. people point to that. people point to the potential changes you screen overall in t portfolio. by the way, at the annual meeting in may, absent something crazy, this would still be his largest position. it is, i don't think people anticipated how many they sold. the round number is still there, but much lower round number. >> we talked enough about she sherwin-williams. isn't that the one with -- it's

going all over the globe. it looks like they're suffocate. >> what else do they do besides paint? >> it's a building play and it's better than dow. >> holdings? obviously bigger, but i was just trying to figure out what else they do. >> i'll find out. who came up with it? it's a great logo. coming up, tom lee will join us with his call on the market. later this hour, former fed chair roger ferguson will tell us what to expect at the meeting. maybe he changed his mind. "squawk box" will be right back. >> announcer: this cnbc program is sponsored by baird. visit bairddifference.com.

following last week's inflation and jobs data, it's an interesting time to get some perspective from our next guest tom lee. tom is head partner at strategy par partners. you talked about the trump trade being pretty strong last time you were on. a lot of things reversed. djt reversed. bitcoin did not move into the

70s. the low 70s. all of the betting markets, certainly, moderated last week. do you think you have a change in your opinion on the election now? >> um, well, it does seem like over the last four or five days the election really narrowed when you look at betting markets or the polls and i know a lot of people don't necessarily trust polls, but the quality and adjustments made the polls more acc accurate. i think it really is a toss-up and it's going to be a very close election. something our clients are preparing for because we did a survey last week, 76%, we don't think we'll have a winner declared election night. 43% roughly expect it one week r after. i think markets are bracing for the period of uncertainty. i think that's why many of the trades reversed >> we heard about the trading houses are not going to be

putting software updates this week. some people who want to be here rather than overseas to make sure they're closer on the ground to make sure what happens, too. >> yeah. i think it's going to be a week where there's a lot of worry. one thing i was thinking about over the weekend was i think the market's fear of uncertainty will peak before -- it's very likely it peaks before the election outcome is decided. >> the signals we have been looking at and we talked about it at commercial break last week. one of the things that happened in the polls is a lot more women going to vote than before, but these signals, whether it be bitcoin or djt stock or the betting markets may also all be off if this is true on the assumption that actually there are -- is a very small percentage in the betting markets is women. very small percentage of women

who trade in bitcoin, not just own bitcoin, but trade. small group of women trading in djt jostock. what do you think of that? >> i think when you look at the iowa polls, senior women voters changed a lot. you're right. these markets can be narrow and they're very responsive to changes in liquidity and it is, i think it's a very tight race. it's -- it's going to be very close. i think anyone who knows who is going to win is really playing with fate because i think it's a really tight race. >> it's interesting from when polls close, too. a couple here. pennsylvania, north carolina and georgia are all east coast. you know, if you have some definitive answers -- supposedly virginia and new hampshire are

closer than people in the harris camp would like. >> i wonder how long it takes when you have so many more people who voted early or mail-in votes, too. those take longer to tally. you may just like default. >> like last time. >> i actually voted last week and i actually had to wait with a lot of people. turnout is really what's going to swing this election. >> there's a number of states, obviously, by the way, get the early votes and don't begin to tally them until afterwards. >> they're not allowed. >> i would raise real questions why they are not tallying them. >> sometimes it is written in the state rules. >> i understand that. there is a view of those cynical about that that they're not counting them until after. >> what if they were counting them early and word got out? >> other countries know that night. we're like a little bit envious.

>> you should be able to count -- >> here is the problem. if they were counting them early and you would not want them releasing the vote count and what if it got out? that's the problem with starting the count early. >> i have not heard that. it's only red states that have done this. you can -- you can think whatever you want to think about that. >> other than this, other than the election. that's sort of what you hear about wall street. elections don't matter anyway. if it is gridlock, which we don't know, i think the odds are on that, too. you are still bullish? >> i'm bullish in the as soon as t sense that the fed is dovish and i don't think it's going to matter who ends up in the white

house even if it is a split congress or sweep, markets do well either way. it sets up for a good rally into user end. when it starts in november, we don't know. >> we were talking about buffett's thinking with apple or bank of america. you take apple and financial and that covers a big range of the markets. andrew thinks he's building an ark. it wouldn't work. >> i'm saying he is building a cash ark. is he doing something also? >> i know part of it he is anticipating capital gains taxes to change, so he is taking that now. he is earning 5%. next year, the cost of money will drop. he'll have pressure to deploy it. >> back to pennsylvania. a democratic controlled house

and republican senate. a democratic governor. they never counted early. they've never counted early. they could not agree. it is not a red state that changed the rules for it. >> you are saying they were changed? >> never been change. they have been trying to change it to early processing. it wasn't a legislature issue. >> in the number of the other states -- >> wisconsin is the state that hasn't changed them. these are old rules. this is not red legislature that came in and did this. these are old rules. these are existing rules out there. >> i believe some states that did this did it for other reasons. >> tom, thank you. >> thank you. coming up after the break, boeing striking workers will vote on a new contract.

programming note, cnbc will be live all election night. we will have reaction from the biggest names in business. it starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern time tomorrow and "squawk box" starting an hour early. hopefully we will have the results, tom. 5:00 a.m. on wednesday morning. stick with us. we look forward to seeing you here. we're coming right back after this. the all new godaddy airo helps you get your business online in minutes with the power of ai... ...with a perfect name, a great logo, and a beautiful website. just start with a domain, a few clicks, and you're in business. make now the future at godaddy.com/airo

(♪♪) the best way to solve a problem is to keep it from happening. (♪♪) at evernorth, we combine medical and pharmacy data with behavioral health data to identify members in need of care. predicting and treating behavioral health issues quickly... while lowering costs for plan sponsors and members. that's wonder made possible.

evernorth health services there are some feelings you can get with any sportsbook. ohhh! the highs! no, no, no. the no, no, noooos - oooooooo! the oh, oh, ohhhhs! now whatcha wanna do with this? but the feeling that, no matter what, you're taken care of. ohhh, i just earned a hotel suite! hee! you only get that here. at the sportsbook born in vegas, where they know how to treat you right. who you talking to jamie foxx? bonus bets. exclusive offers. real world rewards. betmgm. download and bet today.

today, more than 30,000 striking union members at boeing will vote on the contract provided by the leadership last week. it includes 38% wage increases

over four years. boeing's members last voted on that deal on october 23rd and resulted in overwhelming rejection at the time despite endorsement from leadership. and viking therapeutics with success on the clinical trial for the oral weight loss drugs. the study found those taking the highest doses had an average weight loss of 8% in four weeks time. the drug is an oral version of the glp-1 drugs made popular by novo nordisk and eli lilly. i was doing math. 8%. >> how many pounds? >> that would be good. it doesn't start with a two. all right. >> ugly fat in my head.

>> shares falling out of china showing tesla sold 68,000 cars. that is down 5% from a year ago n.ago. in the meantime, byd hitting another record high in october. with the 66% year over year increase in sales. that stock up 3.5%. when we come back, it is fed week. yeah, on top of election week. you've got the corneentral bank expected to cut interest rates by a quarter point. we will talk to former fed vice chair roger ferguson. that's next. as we head to break, let's look at the price of bitcoin. barely changed. $68,717. "squawk box" will be right back. >> announcer: executive edge is sponsored by at&t business. next level moments need the next level network. that's right craig.

pulling in the perfect team to get the job done. i'm just here for the internets. at&t, it's super-fast! you locked us out?! and when thrown a curveball... arrggghh! ahhhh! [crashing sounds] we had everything we needed. is the internet out? don't worry, we have at&t internet back-up. the next level network for small business. ♪♪ i sold a pillow! carl: believe me, when it comes to investing, you'll love carl's way. take a left here please. driver: but there's a... carl's way is the best way. client: is it? at schwab, how i choose to invest is up to me. driver: exactly! i can invest and trade on my own... client: yes, and let them manage some investments for me too. let's move on, shall we? no can do. client: i'll get out here. where are you going?? schwab. schwab! schwab. a modern approach to wealth management.

good morning. welcome back to "squawk box." we're live at the nasdaq market site in times square.

i'm andrew ross sorkin along with becky quick and joe kernen. the nasdaq up 15. the s&p 500 up 7 points on this election week. last friday's jobs report showed hiring slowed in october. unemployment remained at 4.1%, but u.s. payrolls grew by only 12,000 in part because of hurricanes helene and milton and the strike at boeing. for how the numbers impact the fed as the central bank heads into the two-day meeting, we bring in former vice chair roger ferguson. he is now chair of the business council and cnbc contributor. roger, thank you for being here this morning. the wall street journal had an article over the weekend that suggested the fed would look through the weaker than anticipated jobs numbers on friday. do you think that's the case? >> i think that's the case. i think they should look through

them. as you point out, it was driven by hurricanes and the strike and the underlining economy is stronger than the labor market would suggest. i think they'll look through them and do what the market expects which is a 25-basis point cut. >> if the market is weaker than anticipated or the numbers not as weaker than anticipated, why not hold off? >> a couple of reasons. one is, this is the week where the fed wants to be in and out. this is just do what's expected. secondly, at the last meeting, they suggested they still have a way to go to get toward neutral. i think the best judgment this time and what they follow is to do what the market expect. it may be when they get to the next meeting, depending how the data play in over the next period of time, that meeting may be a more interesting one where

a possibility or ideas on the table. this seems both the data and prudence suggests doing what the market expect. >> if you cut by 50 basis points right before the election, 50 basis points during an election, essentially, and hold off afterwards and say we're going to wait and see at that point when we hopefully will know who the next candidate or the next president is going to be at that point -- i guess the answer is you are always looking at not paying attention to the politics and it doesn't enter the room. from the outside perspective, it seems it opens into criticism. >> look, there is always a risk of that. the reality is the data is on balance with the fact that inflation has come down. there's no one who can deny that. i think everyone says the numbers are in somewhat restrictive territory. now was the time to start

moving. you know, the 50 basis point move at first could have gone o ea e either way. this time, depending how the data play out is just carrying out a plan that had already been put in place. i would say the vast majority of people take it at face value you with inflation coming down and desire to get back to the elusive thing known as neutral. i would say for most people, politics is not what they think about when they think about the fed. it is rather that the data encouraged mandate allow this movement toward less restrictive territory. >> roger, just from everything you see, everything you hear, people you talk to, what's your best estimate of where we are in the economy right now? >> i think the economy is in good shape overall, but there are certainly some pockets where it's not as good as one would

hope. obviously, we still have fundamental supply and demand balances in the housing sector. we are short housing and that made it difficult for people to get into housing. there are parts of manufacturing that are still relatively weak. i've heard that from a few ceos and in that space as well. the flip side, obviously, technology is driving things forward in a positive way. importantly, though there's some stresses at thelower end of the consumer spectrum, most consumers are doing reasonably well partially because wages are picking up and have kept up with inflation and for those fortunate enough to be in equity markets, obviously this thing called the wealth effect has been important. so, on balance, a good solid economy with some pockets of weakness and some unevenness in certain sectors. >> and if you were in the chair, if you were in the fmoc meeting

and had a vote, you would vote to cut 25 basis points this time and you would vote to hold off next time all things being equal if you don't see any new developments in data between now and then? >> i would certainly vote 25 this time and i still think 25 should be the better next time. however you cut it, you are still in restrictive territory. there is no reason to be in restrictive territory. right now, they want to be neutral. i'm fully on board with a total of 100 basis points of cuts and adding 50 the next two meetings and wait and see. subject to no surprises. they are right to be in a somewhat easing mode, though where they end up will be the next big debate. what is neutral? where will they stop?

how many cuts is the next big de de debate? that is the big serious debate next year. >> roger, we appreciate hearing your insights. thank you. >> thank you. coming up -- thank you, roger. when we come back, iran saying it is planning a complex response to the israeli air strikes from last month. reminder, you can follow squawk pod and listen anytime. we're coming right back. direct indexing approachique seeks to help investors achieve better after-tax outcomes. pgim investments. shaping tomorrow, today (intercom) t minus 10... pgim investments. (janet) so much space! that open kitchen! (tanya) ...definitely the one! (ethan) but how can you sell your house when we're stuck on a space station for months???!!! (brian) opendoor gives you the flexibility to sell and buy on your timeline. (janet) nice! (intercom) flightdeck, see you at the house warming.

when it comes to investing, we live in uncertain times. some assets can evaporate at the click of a button. others can deflate with a single policy change. savvy investors know that gold has stood the test of time as a reliable real asset. so how do you invest in gold? sandstorm gold royalties is a publicly traded company offering a diversified portfolio of mining royalties in one simple investment. learn more about a brighter way to invest in gold at sandstormgold.com.

power e*trade's award-winning trading app makes trading easier. with its customizable options chain, easy-to-use tools and paper trading to help sharpen your skills, you can stay on top of the market from wherever you are. e*trade from morgan stanley power e*trade's easy to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans can help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley

welcome back to "squawk box." iran is planning a complex response to the israeli air strike on october 26th. according to a wall street journal report. iran's supreme leader said there would be a tooth breaking

response and whether an attack should come directly or from proxies. to discuss this and so much more ahead of the presidential election, michael froman. good morning to you. >> good morning. >> were youretaliated, and let' clear, it was a retaliation, that they did not go after oil or nuclear. now we are having a new conversation about the retaliation of the retaliation, michael? >> well, there is a tit-for-tat here and israel responded attacking just military targets, but they were things like air defense around oil infrastructure. making clear to the iranians they are pretty much defensive against future israeli attacks if iran chooses to escalate further. in iran, there is a debate going

on, including by the revolutionary guard, as to what defense or deterrence iran has left. and the missiles from iran sent to israel have had difficulty penetrating the israelis defenses. if you don't have proxies or missiles, the question is do you go to the third leg of the deterrence stool, nikuclear, whh they have not do. the question is whether or not that will go forward. >> michael, now i want you to layer the presidential election on top of this which is to say how does the outcome of this election even between wednesday and september -- january, you

know, you could say january 6th or january 20th, matter in this situation? >> you know, both camps will be firm in supporting israel security and sending strong messages to iran. right now, the biden-harris administration deployed military assets in support of israel. they announced more support over the weekend. obviously, former president trump is also rhetorically made very strong comments in support of israel and against iran. i do not expect a major change in the approach from one administration to the other. u.s. interests lie in supporting israel's defense and in ultimately preventing iran from stirring up further -- >> does it change, for example, if israel were to, um, attack almost in advance of iran doing anything? would that matter? >> it doesn't matter who the

u.s. administration is because israel will make that on their own and decide whether to preempt a iran strike. they listen to the u.s. and take its advice. i think in the last round of retaliation, heeded to that advice. they will ultimately make the decision in the best interest from the security point of view. >> do you have a view -- we keep looking at the oil markets and obviously the price of oil has gone back up a little bit. not hugely so, but up this morning 3%. does that make sense to you? >> no, given all of the instability in the region, you would expect more of a reaction in the oil markets. it just shows what kind of f fundamental supply and demand and weakness in china is the fundamental issue. in fact, there is excess in

saudi arabia and united states and elsewhere could fill the gap if iranian oil is off the market. >> ambassador michael froman, i appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. t either side of the race. john paulson and barry diller. "squawk box" is coming right back.

"the new york times" is facing strike threats from the technology workers union that could interfere with its ability to cover the election. they told the paper's board of directors that they need to avert a strike. the union has been fighting for benefits and higher wages and

job protections. >> the greek media company antenna group is in talks to require time from salesforce ceo, mike benioff. benioff acquired "time" in 2018 for $190 million. the talks have antenna -- with antenna set a price below that of around $150 million. >> so there's a lot of spending, too. i don't know the extent of the losses during the ownership period. >> right. >> it's tough. it's tough. but this has been the issue between jeff bezos buying "the washington post," and mark penny

o -- marc benioff doing this -- >> didn't do it to make money. keep the iconic institutions in business, i think is the goal. >> icons aren't what they used to be. i don't know what the greek company would want with "time" either. >> i might give them 150 million dracma. maybe. when we come back, we will talk about what each scenario would mean for boeing stock. we have that story next. plus, ryanair ceo will talk about boeing, earnings and much more right here on the "squawk" set. we'll be right back.

wall street forecasts over $100 billion in sales for weight loss drugs known as glp-1. even with disliked injections. dehydratech processing of a glp-1 drug demonstrated improved blood sugar reduction and reduced side effects. study results are arriving monthly and lexaria has entered a new relationship within the global pharmaceutical industry. lexaria bioscience, transforming the future of glp-1 drug delivery.

mic more than 30,000 boeing machinists union members will vote today on a contract proposal aimed at ending an ongoing strike. joining us is ron ebstein. he's aerospace and defense analysts at bank of america global research. let's talk this through. first of all, do you think they are likely to vote yes on this? 64% voted yes -- >> i give it a 32% odds -- >> yeah, and this will be money in terms of the pockets. >> they made good gains. there's a third of them that didn't want a pension so one-third woepbtd go for it, so

two-thirds. deer hunting season is over in washington state and thanksgiving is around the corner and christmas is coming -- >> it has been a while since they had a regular paycheck. >> it has been a while. >> let's walk this through on the two scenarios. the idea of it doesn't pass, what happens to the stock? >> it's $50 million, a day, so the strike cost them about a billion and a half per month so it's a problem for boeing. then you have lower-tiered suppliers that will have to start letting people go. they have to hire back people later and that becomes problematic. each month of the strike pushes out the ultimate peak of 737 production by nine months to a year and we are at almost two months of a strike, and if everybody thought the peek 737 production was going to happen

in 2027, now we are at 2029. >> is that a problem for airlines waiting for these? >> it's a problem for everybody. we have gone through three or four summer travel season where the airlines could not get the aircraft they acquired. it's a huge problem. >> what happens if the proposal is approved? >> it's good news for everybody. the stock and everybody. there's a lot of work that has to be done to get things back and turned on. >> in terms of the stock price, how much good news would that be to translate into gains for the stock? how much bad news would it be? >> we have gone back and looked at many previous strikes and what you tend to see in two weeks before the strike resolution, the stock out

performs the s&p on average, and so a nice volatility event around the strike resolution. >> you would be positioned ahead of this or you would wait and see? >> yeah, i would wait and see. we were neutral on the shares because there's so much that has to be done. they are going to burn almost $14 billion this year, and between 3 to $4 billion next year, and they will be cash positive in 2026, so there has to be a lot that goes right. >> do you think this is strategic ahead of the election tomorrow? >> it could be, yeah. you had the mediation, so it makes sense it was but i don't know for a fact. >> but, again, your biggest thing is wait and see because it will be too much to dig through all this? >> yeah. >> do you rate the suppliers or

any of the -- >> yeah, ge, aerospace is a great example. they are a beneficial of older airplanes running for longer so the markets for engine parts has been literally on fire. >> it's literally just 7:00 a.m. right now on the east coast. you are watching "squawk box" on this monday, on cnbc. i am andrew ross sorkin along with joe kernen and becky quick. multiple countdowns for the markets, as we all know election day is tomorrow. the fed meeting now starting on wednesday with a decision coming on thursday afternoon, the central bank expected now to cut interest rates by a quarter point. there has been a shake-up in the dow jones industrial average that we talk about every day. the 30-stock benchmark adding

nvidia and sherwin-williams and booting intel and dow inc. that will have a big shake-up not just on the dow but on the stocks. meanwhile, tesla sold just over 68,000 vehicles made in that country last month, and that's down more than 5% from a year ago. let's check out the markets as we countdown to the election and the fed meeting. you will see this morning the futures are modestly higher. down futures down by 5. if you are watching treasury yields this morning, they are slightly lower. the ten-year at 4.27, and the two-year at 4.15. opec says it would delay a planned output hike set to take

effect next month. you can see wti picked up by just over 3%. finally, take a look at gold prices as well. they have been setting new highs. this morning, you can see year to date up about 30%. the trade is 2,751 now. let's bring in bob diamond, somebody who probably had a pretty good view of the entire financial crisis and what was happening back then, had a pretty good seat, maybe too good of a seat. >> it was a seat. >> let's start with macro and the fed. the markets are at highs, and the economy, friday, i don't know what that was but having

percolating pretty well in terms of gdp and everything else, we are talking about cutting after we worked so hard to get off the schneid at zero and get back up, and the backdrop to all of that is 37 trillion total debt. >> yeah. >> and running up a rdeficit where we don't need to do it, what is happening, $2 trillion. are we on the -- >> i think particularly around the debt levels, and i have been talking about this for a while as i am invited to come on, but the cloud on the horizon, one of the few includes for the economy because frankly it has been a great recovery of the economy over the soft landing.

but the 37 trillion -- if you look at that, when former president trump was inaugurated, it was about half of that. between the trump administration and the biden administration, we have doubled the debt. it's hard to say that was a difficult economy that needed that stimulus -- >> except for the pandemic. >> -- wasn't around covid. i don't think either of the presidential candidates will do anything other than continue to increase the debt level. i would agree with you it's the biggest cloud on the horizon. my view of the impact is its beginning to be talked about a little more. i think when we look at interest rates, wherever that fed funds rate is, i think the steepness of the curve to the tens and the 30s, if you look out over the next few years, will continue to steepen. >> let's break down the banks, the ones that we talk about when they report earnings and we get all breathless about it, you

know, and the big banks and then everybody else, the regional and small banks. the smaller banks and regional banks probably could use a reconsolidation cycle. would you acknowledge it has been more difficult under the biden and harris administration than under the previous trump administration? >> yeah, and i think if you look at the difference of the two candidates, i think under a republican administration, it's going to be more pro consolidation, easier from a regulatory point of view, and i think under a democratic candidate it would be more difficult. i say that, joe, and you know my view on this, i am talking my book, but one of the best investment opportunities and financial services that i have seen in my career is the opportunity to take part in the consolidation of the 4.5 --

>> well, you are a kamala -- >> he signed a letter. >> yeah, he was part of that article that we talked about last week, and we talked to jeff saying we led some of the largest companies and now we vote for trump. >> well, on this, andrew, it's hard not to be clear the attitude towards -- >> oh, 100%. i am just trying to understand your position. >> well, i was specifically relating that to the attitude towards consolidation and regional community -- >> totally. i guess what i am asking is you appear to be willing to either do something almost against your own business interests if you believe consolidation is needed and you can participate in that if, in fact, you want to vote for her, and i am trying to

understand why you are voting for her? >> i am a lifelong democrat, and that's for starters. >> no, i am a lifelong republican, until the first trump administration, and i th think the risks are too high. >> more than the first trump administration? >> probably. well, between this term and the this term -- >> well, we go from the reagan plan to the oprah plan in terms of giveaways and tax breaks and tariffs and all the other things, but then we have -- we always have that argument about -- or at least debate about what is negotiating what is really in the cards. then on the other side, we have what did vice president harris -- which of the previous statements she's made about a lot of different issues does she

still believe in and which does she not believe in, and it's very strange that both sides are -- a lot of time, both sides, proponents are distancing themselves from the actual policies, and say it's not going to happen. >> the biggest challenge for all of us is the vast majority of people are not going this is the best candidate i have ever seen, so this is not -- this is not the situation that we are wanting to be in. >> i think you are voting against the other candidate. it's crazy. >> well, you said all i think is it's too high of a risk and that's my only view, and is there more to it? you wrote this article so i feel like there's more to what you are saying? >> i think the attitude towards tariffs is an example. if you take the middle case of tariffs, we are back to 1935. i think that's a negative. most importantly, i just -- i find it surprising, myself, that

people will be voting based on the fact that he is not really going to do what he says. >> both sides, and she's not going to do all those horrible things either. >> in the balance of things, i am definitely a supporter of the democratic candidate. i think it's somewhat balanced. most of us are having difficulties on the regulatory side, frankly the republicans will be a, you know, much more proactive -- >> you seem -- >> on the democratic side, i want to give both sides, democratic side free trade and international relations, i feel more comfortable about those. >> you must not think -- i guess she's not banning fracking anymore, and privatize health insurance and the gas -- you don't care about a mandatory gun

buy back or how about ending the filibuster? >> you don't necessarily acknowledge either that from the inauguration, just four years ago, the s&p is up -- >> trump had a great run, too. >> listen, we are all facing a difficult choice here. >> she was far left of biden -- at least previously on decriminalizing illegal crossings, and giving health insurance to all illegals -- you have seen the list. >> i have seen the list. >> you are able to ignore that, but you are questioning why voters are able to ignore the tariffs. >> it's different than that. i think on balance i have chosen to vote for the democratic candidate based on a balance. >> are you going -- >> there's an advantage on both sides.

>> she may be the most progressive person that has run for president and you say you are a lifelong republican? >> i am. >> ell, how do you handle -- >> well, for presidential candidates, until the first trump administration, i had always voted republican and i did vote democrat in that election, and i did not change for all democrats. i leaned very much -- well, not very much but i leaned republican for many -- >> you voted for hillary? >> i did. tough choice, again. we have not had a lot of great choices -- >> yeah, and in a country of 300 million people. nobody normal wants to go into that business. >> that's what we face. we could have better candidates.

>> well, thank you, mr. diamond. >> that is all we had about banks? >> well, if we could talk about trump's character, we will talk about trump's character. >> bob, thanks for coming in. >> you are welcome. when we come back, ryanair out with results this morning. the ceo, michael o'leary, will join us live with a breakdown of the reports and his thoughts on the ongoing boeing strike. and then john paulson on his support of former president trump. "squawk box" will be right back.

across global markets, data underpins every decision that is taken. at ice, we provide quality data and analytics across multiple asset classes. from fixed income, energy, commodities and equities, to areas like climate risk and the entire lifecycle of a mortgage. to help inform trade decisions, our pricing and reference data covers millions of instruments. in fixed income, our data can help re-imagine your workflow. in energy, our oil and natural gas data

is used by global traders, while our energy transition data helps navigate the shift to a low carbon economy. in mortgages, our data covers the life of a loan, from origination to secondary markets. we can meet your data need wherever you are. whether it's pre-trade analytics, pricing or post-trade reporting, our data can offer a foundation for sound decision making helping markets participants to manage risk and spot opportunity. (♪♪)

♪ ♪ with so much great entertainment out there... wouldn't it be easier if you could find what you want, all in one place? my favorites. get xfinity streamsaver with netflix, apple tv+, and peacock included, for only $15 a month.

shares of moeerit falling sharply. revenue came in at $1.26 billion, slightly below $1.27 billion. a key metric grew but was below expectations, and marriott also lowering earnings and revenue guide, so for the full year it was a sell off and looks worse than it is at nine points, but doing pretty well, as you can see. low costs european airline, ryanair, the company citing

cheaper summer fares. the company trimming its passenger forecast because of delivery delays from boeing. joining us is ryanair holdings group ceo, michael o'leary. michael, thank you so much for being here. >> good to see you. >> the stock is up by half a percent on the news. the profit was down and that was not expected because of what happened to fares over the summer. where do fares stand? >> fares declined for the summer, and it surprised us. it was weaker than we thought it would be but a lot of it had to do with the dispute of the boycott much boeing, and most of the online travel agents have come back online on our terms.

the price times are moderating four bookings into the december quarter, and the price decline will be less between not and 5%. the frustration we have is still the boeing delivery delays. to trim back the forecast to 215 million passengers to 210. we will be delivering less growth and demands are strong. i would be optimistic, and i think that's where the share prices responded to the call this morning. >> it almost sounds like you think the boeing delays are good news for profits, and you don't have to pay for the planes coming in up front and -- >> in a strange way, yeah, speaking as a shareholder, i think the boeing delays are good for the business and speaking as the ceo who wants to continue to grow and take shares from competitors, the boeing delays,

the costs are higher this summer. we lost by a million passengers this year because of the delays, and i speak weekly with stephanie pope in seattle. she's there and on the ground and somebody that you can lift the phone and talk to, and they are voting for a 30% pay increase. they should take it and run. we want to see boeing back and making aircraft as soon as possible. we think we will get 14 or 15 aircraft, which is why we walk back our growth for 2025, and then the big issue for us, and i think what we were most hardened by, even during the strike, they work on the max certification,

and she thinks they will get both of those certified in 2025. these aircraft burn 20% less fuel and they are going to rocket fuel our growth and our cost advantage over every other airline in the next decade. >> we had another analysts on that covers boeing that said every month they are on strike means a delay of nine to 12 months before you actually get the aircraft not being put together. that's how big the whipsaw is. if this doesn't get passed tonight, would you change your tune about what you are thinking? >> if it doesn't get passed tonight, it will be delayed by two or three weeks. the pressure is on boeing for the administration to get this thing fixed. i am not sure fixing it tonight will make much different than how people are voting tomorrow, and if it doesn't get fixed tonight it will in a couple weeks.

this is not a great time of the year anyway. we decide we are not going to see our nine q4 deliveries until next year. it will delay, however, how many the summer 2025 aircraft we get. if it delays much more in the end of november, i think we won't get 15 for next summer but five or ten. >> you are a tough negotiator, and you have with boeing in the past and you called them out when you thought management was not doing the right things. i hear negotiation in what you are describing right now. how does that impact you. you are not going to be getting what was promised to you. how do you make good on that? >> we don't. we get modest compensation for the delivery delays, and this year we lost 5 million passengers. no amount of compensation make up for the passengers, and next year we will be 10 million passengers down on the original

targets. but we are where we are and we have to work with the new management team. i must say i am impressed by the job she's doing. she's there and on the ground and trying to fix the issues and i promise i will go out to seattle and meet with her and talk with the teams sometime in january and february of next year. we need to get boeing back up and running. boeing, getting off the criticism in a moment, and airbus is disrupted like boeing, and boeing gets all the negative pr, and it's unfortunate. boeing is at a low point but will come back in 2026. >> so you said she's answering the phone, and was that not happening before? >> no, dave calhoun who i dealt

with in boeing before did a remarkable job, and he got the max ungrounded, but his managers were not in seattle but on tour around the world talking to customers, and we need people in seattle and fixing the problems and i am heartened by the job stephanie pope is doing, and she's doing her best to get things resolved. i hope the labor thing gets resolved in november. it will carry 210 million passengers instead of 215, and even though we have grown by 10 million passengers, we are the only airline in europe where costs remained flat. the gap between us and every

other european airline is widening. if we see any upside in pricing next year that will flow straight through to our bottom line and shareholders. >> you mentioned most of the online travel agents have come back in and booking.com has not yet. how much of your travel are they responsible for? >> booking.com, they were tiny in europe. and spanish in ota, they are bigger in spain. i don't think their models can survive. when we have over 90% of otas now distributing ryanair fares at ryanair prices, it's hard to see how they can survive inflating ryanair prices, which the crazy thing for sus we will fight with the otas on every beach and every field and we will not let somebody get between us and our customers and

i started back in the 1980s and 1990s where they were charging 10% for distribution and another 10% for the agents, and now we are taking that 10% back and never giving it away again. >> i don't think i ever want to be on the other side of the negotiation table from you, michael. >> much to say with you, becky. two more big interviews you do not want to miss. plenty to say about the election. john paulson will join us in a couple minutes, and then the senior executive, barry diller, will be our guest. "squawk box" is back after this.

deadline in five! finished and sent. [sending swoosh] we have tight turnarounds. at&t business helps us deliver. okay! client wants his head bigger. wow, fast response. sent! okay, oop! even bigger. sent.

[sending swoosh, notification alert] still bigger. okay, yeah i'm not doing that— [typing noises, sending swoosh] i think it still looks good! [notification alert] oh — even bigger. ♪ ledge young dairy music producer, quincey jones has died. he worked with ray charles,

michael jackson, frank sinatra, and some of the biggest achievements came from jackson's "off the wall" album and also we are the world. he was probably one of the best-selling music producers in the world over all this time and had more influence on the music industry than just about anybody living today. jones was 91 years old. >> he was a musician, too. he played the trump and backed lady day, and lionel hampton. he had to have a scholarship to berkeley college in boston but left to join the tour. >> his impact -- >> 91. all the way to michael jackson from billie holiday to michael

jackson -- >> frank sinatra. yeah. coming up, a shake-up in the dow, nvidia knocking intel off the list. the dow coming out of the dow. weird, symbolic. this chart may explain the move. perfect time to get into nvidia and out of intel. probably no way that red line is going up to the blue line ever. we will have more on that and today's movers next. "squawk box" is coming right back.

ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

welcome back to "squawk box." i am dom chu with a look at the movers. the 30-stock benchmark index is replacing intel with chipmaker nvidia, and the dow is adding sherwin-williams and booting out dow inc., and they said the changes were made to represent.

and intel and dow are lower. shares of viking therapeutics soaring up around 18% and they vowed promising results from the experimental pill. then let's end with a check on apple. those shares are down around half a percent or so due in part to berkshire. berkshire's stake is down 67% since it started selling those shares four quarters ago. back over to you. >> thanks, dom. when we come back, an exclusive interview with mr.

paulson who is backing tmpru. we will talk to him about that and so much more when "squawk box" returns in just a moment. - [narrator] this is my coffee shop. we just moved into a bigger space, brought on another employee, and ordered new branded gear for the team. it was so easy. i just chose my products, added our logo, and placed my order. bring your own team together with custom gear. get started today at customink.com.

discovering innovation today, helps drive growth tomorrow. as a leading global asset manager, pgim has established a track record of helping investors capitalize on growth opportunities. pgim investments. shaping tomorrow, today.

welcome back to "squawk box." our next guess is john paulson,

founder and president of paulson & company. great to see you this morning. it appears the race has tightened based on some of the polls and then the betting markets. i know you are very close to the trump campaign and i am curious if there are numbers you have had access that others might have not that you could be share about us about how you are thinking about where things stand now? >> good morning, andrew. i agree that the race is very tight, but i am optimistic the president will win. he's got strong support across all segments of americans, so i think he will win but we will have to see the results after tuesday. >> after an investor, i am curious what you have done with your portfolio and how much you are betting if you will, if he does win? things were out and suggesting that they believe he would win

and was rotating the portfolio to things that would benefit in a trump administration. you have done the same? >> we haven't really adjusted the portfolio yet based on the election outcome, but depending on who is elected, i will adjust the portfolio. under a harris' plan, you know, she wants to raise taxeson capital gains and raise taxes on corporations, and raise the marginal tax rate, and she also had this plan to tax unrealized gain which seems unprobable but it's something to be concerned about. i would be concerned about being long equities if harris wins. on the other hand, trump has a very pro growth agenda, and wants to reduce government spending and reduce the regulations, support domestic

energy and manufacturing and keep taxes stable. i think under trump we would be more beneficial for the economy and stock market. >> i know we have talked and debated the issue of tariffs many a times with you and talked about the inflationary pressures of that, and one of the real questions is if, in fact, those were to go into effect, and be used as a tool whether or not the offset would be either more drilling or things of that sort, would it really actually offset the impact of those tariffs? you look at a lot of economists out there that suggested they won't? >> that's a good question, andrew. i think you have to look at the overall economic plan, and i think under trump's overall economic plan inflation will come down and will have a higher growth and lower inflationary

environment than we would have under harris. the biggest contributor to inflation is high government spending, and spending under biden/harris has been pretty much out of control. the deficit this year increased to almost $2 trillion. it's up 14% over last year. there's no plan from either biden or harris to stem the control of government spending. >> what did you make of -- >> trump is -- >> what did you make of elon musk -- i was going ask you what you made of elon musk's comments that he thought there would be a temporary hardship given the ambitions of the administration to cut spending, potentially some of the pressures that basically may be the transition on the other side might be better but that there would be pain in the middle? >> well, i think that big

transitions are never easy. you are right to bring to bring the modest inflationary impact of tariffs to the more major inflationary impact from cutting spending. so musk at the rally, he estimated there would be as much as $2 trillion in government spending that could be released. if even the number was half that, that reduction in spending would bring down the deficit from $2 trillion to 1 trillion, so that would have an impact on inflation and so if you could bring inflation down and increase wages, real wages would increase that would help american families. >> the voting happens tomorrow, but that doesn't stop both camps from giving little indications of things that they are seeing

internally. you must be following it very closely, and i am wondering if you can give us any color on -- wisconsin, i am told wisconsin is closer than people thought but given what happened with iowa and the des moines register and the poll showing kamala harris up in iowa, and i don't know what that says in wisconsin. i don't know what you do. pennsylvania is the most important state and for a while it looked like it was firmly -- or at least likely that trump might win but there are inroads made in early roading and i heard in virginia and new hampshire, according to sources that the harris camp is concerned about those two states. do you know anything internally from the trump campaign? >> yeah, hi, joe. it's clearly a close race. i have seen some private internal polling that was done over the weekend after the iowa

polling and it shows trump leading in almost all -- either leading or tied in all of the swing states, so i am -- you know, i am cautiously optimistic. >> that's not atlas, but that's internal polling from the organization? because international says it was good in 2020, and he was ahead or tied in those swing states as well. >> yeah, different pollers, but this was private polling. >> okay. >> i wanted to ask about fannie and freddie because it's a big topic of conversation, and i believeyou still own some of fannie and freddie, and there's a report out by couwen, and the say -- suggested that they believe in a trump administration that they didn't believe this was a priority for

trump. you have talked to trump about this? >> i haven't spoke to him specifically about it, but you are right to bring this issue up, andrew. the fannie and freddie have been in a conservativeship since 2009, 15 years. it was supposed to be temporary. after mnuchin left the treasury they retained all earnings and they have pretty well capitalized and combined they have 150 billion in common equity, so it's likely whoever is the next president, these will be released back into private ownership and the government will be the biggest winner because they own 90, 95% of the common, and when they sell that common that will raise in today's terms about 150 billion, which will increase as time goes on. i think both administrations will take the opportunity to access that value for their own programs.

>> you still own some of that, right? >> well, we have not commented on what our ownership stake is, and we report that every quarter, so we haven't since fannie and freddie are preferred stocks, we are not required to file those positions publicly. >> john, what do you think of the job that jay powell is doing at the federal reserve, and if you were treasury secretary in the trump administration, how do you think you would work with him? >> well, you know, right now the treasury position is open, and we're focused on the election right now. there's a lot of good candidates out there. i think powell has done a good job. the only criticism i would have is that he was too late to stop quantitative easing and raise

rates and he has been a little behind the curve in bringing rates down. >> i don't know if you saw but there was a piece in fortune magazine, and we had doug parker formerly of american airlines on, and bob diamond was on early and they said they were voting for harris because they believe trump is too big of a risk to the company. what do you tell those people that say that? >> i would think just the opposite. when you look under trump's four years of presidency, we had no wars around the world, peace, and a secure border, and we had real wage growth of over 7%, and it has declined under biden, and we had less legislation and a boom in energy. we had a pro-growth economy, peace around the world and a

rise in real wages. i wouldn't be concerned about those issues at all. >> i think one of the things they would say is there's a character question, and i would ask if maybe in this way, you hire people, and people come in and do job interviews with you. if somebody walked into your office and as former president trump did was pan thank you miming oral sex, or if somebody sent you ebstein's resume and said he was a good friend, would you hire this person? >> i can't speak on that issue, but i find trump a very caring person and he cares about the american people, and he's a warm and kind individual personally. i can see why he is angry. he has had to spend over $200 million a year against government lawsuits and almost

all of them totally spearious. there's a sense of anger in him about the weaponization in the justice department at the state and federal level pursuing him as a political opponent, and i can understand his anger about that. >> we are going to have barry diller on in a bit, and one thing he's concerned and a lot of business people voting the other way is concerned about the possibility of retaliation if they were to speak out, and that was the undercurrent of the fortune article, and these were a lot of ceos, they were speaking on behalf of current ceos that felt they couldn't speak out. what do you say to those people? >> i am surprised to hear that. it's been the opposite. when president trump was president, he didn't go after

anybody. he could have went after hillary clinton, and he couldn't. he tried and his own department of justice wouldn't. >> i don't think so. hillary was not sued by the justice department or by any states. trump's by the justice department. he wasn't sued by any states. you know, trump's allies, bannonwent to prison. other people have been prosecuted. so, i think the opposite is true. if you're -- the republicans in general are not weaponizing the legal system to go after political opponent. it's been the opposite that has been occurring. >> john paulson. we look forward to talking to you again. we'll see what happens with this election, and we do hope to have an opportunity to continue to discuss where we are and hopefully we'll know a lot more later this week. normally i hope we know by wednesday. i don't know if that's realistic or not. >> you definitely don't hope

that. we have a quick programming note. as we mentioned earlier, we'll speak with media titan barry diller about the election as well on the other side of this break. "squawk box" coming right back. your shipping manager left to "find themself." leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. sponsored jobs on indeed are two and a half times faster to first hire. visit indeed.com/hire

your business needs a network it can count on... even during the unexpected. power's out! -power's out! comcast business has you covered, with wifi backup to help keep you up and running. wifi's up. let's power on! let's power on! -let's power on! it's from the company with 99.9% network reliability. let's power on! power on with the leader in connectivity. stay connected with comcast business internet and wifi back-up or get started for $49.99 a month. plus ask how to get up to a $500 prepaid card. call today!

♪ still to come this morning, don't forget about the fed. chairman powell and company meeting after election day with a decision on thursday. steve liesman is going to find out the fed's potential rate path next. "squawk box" will be right back.

ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

at betmgm, everyone gets a welcome offer. so whether you're courtside trying to hit the over... or up here trying to hit the under. whew! or, hitting that win with your crew. ohhh! yes, see defense! or way up here with a same game parlay. yaw! betmgm's got your back. get your welcome offer. and play with the sportsbook born in vegas. all these seats. really? get up to a $1500 new customer offer in bonus bets when you sign up now. betmgm. download and bet today. >> university of maryland global campus is a school for real life, one that values the successes you've already achieved. earn up to 90 undergraduate credits for relevant experience and get the support you need from your first day to graduation day and beyond. what will your next success be? (vo) this season, try opendoor's turducken of offers. at the center is our all-cash offer.duation day and beyond. then comes the option to list for more. all wrapped in the certainty

of a simple sale. this holiday, sell your home your way with opendoor. there's the election this week, but also a small matter for investors of a fed meeting. senior economic's reporter steve liesman looks at the debate on whether the fed should cut rates after what we've seen as far as a surge in bond yields. >> yeah. joe, this is interesting here. some have looked at the recent surge in those bond yields and concluded the fed shouldn't cut rates this week,but that might miss the real debate going on in market. it's really a debate over your

favorite topic, joe, the terminal rate, or that is where the fed ultimately stops. since the fed cut 50 bips in september, the 10 year yield moved 80 bases point. while that's been going on, take a look, the probability of a 25 basis cut this week has remained remarkably steady, now at 98. chance of december is now at 80% or north of 80%. it's january and beyond. that's where the debate is about where rates are going. and that's part of a longer term debate that's been going on about the fed. if you take the october 25 contract, take it as a proxy for the terminal rate. that's where the fed stops. it's up more than 80 bases points from 282 to 363. notice, it's still 100 bases points lower than the current rate. the market still has lots of cuts built in, just a lot less than it did before. behind the yield surge, we had some better growth numbers, somewhat firmer inflation and

policy uncertainty with yields rising with tim proved chance of former president trump to be re-elected. in fact, wells fargo among others this chart is making its way around wall street, it could be expectations for higher growth. could be expectations for higher deficits or both. assessments, of course, of vice president harris' plan show less new additions to the fiscal deficit but continued high levels of red ink. the election uncertainty and markets uncertainty over what is that terminal rate? it's hard to predict monetary policy if you don't know fiscal po policy. the direction of rates remains lower regardless whoof the 10 year has done. i had a nice chat on friday jp morgan. he says the market now is much more aligned with the fed, which is once you get through november and december, it's like an every other meeting kind of thing for

next year until you get down -- >> that's what roger ferguson said. >> i heard roger steal my entire line of thinking at 6:00 a.m. i wonder about turning around in the traffic and coming back home because what roger said -- >> if we talk about jim grant and what he said when he was on, did you see that? >> i did. which part of it? >> the part where you have a 40-year biggest bull market -- >> and now the bond goes away. >> does it end in just a little whimper where -- inflation is definitely put to bed. >> i don't know if i want to make huge conclusions over -- i feel like the bond market -- and rick has always been very good about this. finding the new range. right? you were down at 360. now you're back up at 425. that seems or feels like the top of a new range here. and maybe it comes down. a lot of talk about selling down at maybe 4. >> you know, i've got a bunch of questions about whether the fed can ever reign in some of -- and

reimpose fiscal austerity at some point. >> well, that's a big debate. are you on joe's side on this? the fed should control congress. >> no. i have a huge question about whether -- if you think the federal reserve's actions, that were taken in time -- in a time of emergency -- >> right. >> -- if that nables fiscal us a austerity to get thrown out the window, is there a way to wrap that in when we're no longer in crisis. >> if the fed keeps rates at a place what is neutral, balancing the supply of credit and the demand for credit, and the government borrows a lot, that neutral rate should be higher, at least long-term and medium term rate. so in that sense what the fed is saying to the federal government is if you want to borrow more, all things being equal, those rates will be higher. >> is that what the move in treasury yields, what we're seeing? >> i think that's part of it.

look, the growth numbers have come in better. 2.83%. the weekly jobless claims have been pretty strong. i saw a little softness on friday in those jobs reports. so did some other folks. i thought that even if you added back the strikes and the hurricanes you still were in the 100,000 range which is definitely lower than it had been before. so, yes. the market has been adjusting. and it's adjusting to the possibility of higher deficits no matter who came in. the numbers for trump are quite a bit higher. then you get into the paulson explanations, which are all these guys coming on and saying trump has said this. but he's only going to do that. and that's really part of the calculus of what he can accomplish. the thing i've been most interested in and concerned about, too, is the tariff stuff. he does not need congress for. the tax stuff, both harris and trump, they have to go through congress for that stuff. the tarry stuff, because of national security provisions in the tariff law, he can do on his

own. >> just we're at 23% spending and -- it's just got to come down. that's why -- it's just got to. >> the argument -- look, i'm hearing we have to go, but here is the deal, the argument is the fed are the only adults left in the room so they ought to impose some form of austerity on the government. >> no. i should not be paying credit cards for everyone i know in my family. but, there are still some things that are out there. now, once they spend it, i am good for it. but i am allowed to say, can you please -- >> but joe, under your construction, you have your kids regulating your spending. >> yes. >> that's the construction you're talking about. >> true. >> if you have the fed imposing austerity on congress. >> can i influence them to not spend as much. >> yes, you can influence them. that's a really good point. i think powell can and should speak up a littlebit more. >> okay. there you go. you never said that before.

>> i've said that. >> okay. i didn't think so, but i don't sit here and write down everything you say, like you do with me. >> i don't write everything you say. i barely listen to it. >> that was your thing on me, right. it's 8:00 a.m., 8:03, almost 8:04. you're watching "squawk box" right here on cnbc. i'm becky quick along with joe kernen and andrew ross sorkin. futures this morning are mixed. dow looking like it's down by about 13 points right now. s&p futures up by 6.5. the nasdaq up by 12. let's get right other to mike santoli. he's been watching the markets. hey, mike. >> kind of a quiet open, but obviously the market entered its cautious wait and see moat mode ahead of election and earnings season just fine in thing a rat numbers but not dazzling. a chart of the s&p 500, we're at levels in the s&p that we first reached around six weeks ago, although still up 20% year to date. the trend is still solid below

the surface, the average stock is corrected a little bit more than the headline index. so you're in this mode where you've been sort of just consolidating for a little while. you guys are talking about what's been going on in treasury yields. very interesting interplay of the s&p 500 and the 10 year treasury yield. year to date, there's no specific relationship between these two at all times. the beginning of this year, both were going up at the same time. yields up, stocks up because economic growth was strong. then you entered that real vertical move in the spring in 10. year treasury yields, it was an overheating scare and the stock market backed off, then yields came in a bit. market gets relief. then recently, stocks and bonds going up together until this point where we're at this level where it seems as if the sensitivity of stocks further fast rise in yields might be a little bit more negative. we'll see how it goes from here after that little pullback in yields on that somewhat soft noisy jobs report the other day.

finally, the changes to the dow jones industrial average, you've been talking about it, to the extent any bump in nvidia and sherwood williams, doesn't make sense based on history. this is salesforce.com relative to exxonmobil since salesforce replaced exxon august 31, 2020 in the dow. and you see that the company that was kicked out, exxon, has fastly outperformed salesforce. that's somewhat consistent with what's gone on historically out. doesn't mean it's the kiss of death. does mean there's not a lot of money that flows into these stocks just because they're in the dow, guys. >> that was the point joe was making earlier, nvidia, after seeing all these incredible gains, has it seen the gains in are there more gains to continue? >> in fact, i took a look, salesforce was up 300% in the five years before it went into the dow and exxon had been cut in half in those five years before. so clearly there's a little bit of momentum chasing that goes on in these decisions. doesn't mean nvidia doesn't

belong in the dow. it's a massive company. >> better representation of the overall chip market for sure and the importance. >> intel is not going to 3 trillion any time soon. >> nope. that's exactly right. it could be the right decision in terms of representation of the market and the economy. >> or 8 trillion even. >> would like to get to 100 billion. >> right. >> it might be there. it's close. >> i think it is. >> mike, thank you very much. we'll see you just a little later. right now for more on the markets we want to bring in the head of u.s. equity strategy at rbc capital markets. la we would be really focussed on the fed, but because it's an election week, maybe we have other things we're focussed on. what are you watching? >> so, look, we're still plowing through earning season. i read so much about the election and earnings calls the last two weeks. i'm looking forward to get past the event to see if the company tone changes a bit. like all this anxiety, all this

angst weighing on investors, is weighing on companies as well. i'm seeing that loud and clear in the transcripts. i'll be very interested to see if that does change later this week. >> what are they waiting on? what do they want to see? and what might they do as a result of whatever? >> i've asked that at certain conferences that we've held and haven't gotten straight answers. but the best i can understand -- i have one company tell me this a few weeks back, they're waiting to get past the event to see what they're dealing with. and we've had some companies come out and say, look, we can handle either administration. you are seeing commentary on tariffs and little bit on taxes. obviously the stimulus packages that have been passed by the current administration, those are coming up in conversation a bit. but it doesn't really seem to be any one issue when i tried to poke and prod on this. it really does seem to be just getting past the uncertainty. >> does that mean companies aren't doing things that they might otherwise -- they're waiting to see what happens before they decide longer-term plans? >> i think probably so. i am seeing some companies say

that that's what their customers are doing, both corporate customers and consumers. more so on the former than the latter. it's taking longer to get deals through. taking decisions longer to get made. i'm seeing that more in recent weeks. >> do you think there's some watershed moment that comes wednesday or thursday of this week if we know who the next president is going to be or is it more complex than that? >> it's more complex that be that. i share your concern. i think whoever wins, right, it's going to take some time to see what policies they've been talking about are a priority. i mean, we've gotten this enormous menu from both candidates. they're not going to be able to do everything. one of the earlier conversations commentary about tax, right? that does have to go through congress. so both candidates can say i want to do this, i want to do this, i want to do that. but the reality is it is going to have to go through congress, so the corporate tax rate on the harris side comes up quite a bit, 21 to 28.

we have modelled that out. it would be a significant hit to s&p 500 earnings. do you think we're going to get the 28%? it will take some time to figure that out. >> okay. so we're talking about maybe more than three months even. inauguration isn't until january. and then -- or do you think this all gets gamed out in the next couple of months? >> i think you'll have some short-term reactions to the event and then i think markets are probably going to put some of this stuff on the back burner. we know that tax policy has to be dealt with either way. it's going to take quite some time to figure out. you know, i do think that at the end of the day markets, again, stocks can really sort of navigate different environments. we do know when we talk about issues with our analysts, they're a good proxy for investors, good proxy for companies, they're the funnel by all of this getting pulled into one place. when we've done some survey work, it's regulation, it's taxes, it's trade and tariffs. those are the big issues. >> very quickly, if companies

are waiting to see what happens do you think investors should take the approach? >> i'm interested whether we have big gaps up and down and come and try to take advantage of some of those opportunities. >> if the market sells down, you would buy, if it trades up, you sell. >> when we model out next year, we come up with 6,200 on the s&p, 6,500 depending on what the earnings environment look likes. we need to see the starting point, of course. you put politics aside, the economy is pretty sound, valuations should stay pretty elevated if we get those fed cuts. >> thank you. coming up, we're going to speak withorr fmenational economic council director gary cohn and former s.e.c. chairman jay clayton. don't go anywhere, "squawk box" will be right back.

we're just one day away from the election. joining us now are two people we spoken with regularly through the campaign, former national economic council director under president trump, gary cohn, he is now ibm vice chairman and former s.e.c. chairman under president trump, jay clayton, also a cnbc contributor. and these guys are smart. and jay clayton, just basically told us who is going to win the election. whoever wins pennsylvania.

>> it's hard to win the election without winning pennsylvania. >> who is going to win pennsylvania? that you have no idea. but you do know it's an important -- >> given it's my home state, i think, look, middle of the state turnout is high, trump wins. >> gary, you've been in this business so long with goldman sachs and everything else, did you see a trump trade and then did you see the reversal of a trump trade last week and what the hell was that? or is it all just on the margin. >> yeah, i think it's all on the margin. i think people are trying to attribute certain things that i think are going to naturally happen in the market to a trump trade. so, a lot of people are talking about what's going on in the yield curve as a trump trade. i don't think what's going on in the yield curve or the steepening of u.s. treasury markets as a trump trade. i think it's a normalization trade. i always say we all forgot what normal looks like in a yield curve. we historically have a positively shaped yield curve. over the last 20 years, we forgot what a normal yield curve

looks like. flat or inverted yield kufb for the last 20 or so years. we're now getting a yield curve back to what it looks like, and i think we're going to put a bigger risk premium in because of the deficit we have. and i think what's going on now is people may be thinking that the fed is not going to end up at a terminal feds fund rate at 3%, 3.25, 3.5, if we need 125 or 150 bases points of steepness fed funds and 10 years, 10 years have to go up. 3.5, 10 year is too low and you're seeing that repriced right before our eyes in realtime. i don't think it's really a trump trade. i think it's a realization of where the real economy is. >> is it a good thing, bad thing or reimposition of some sort of forced fiscal austerity when it comes to what's expected from government? >> that's something we've been discussing. the balance sheets different. right? our balance sheet is not in as

good of shape. super smart people on here, tutor jones tell you this refinancing wall that we have coming up and what we've got to do in terms of refinancing our debt, is vastly different than things we faced in the past. 60% of the debt has to -- comes due within five years. >> when you put more stake in the betting markets or in the polls? here is what i was saying. so if it's 58% someone will win the election, would you get on the plane if it was a 58% chance it wouldn't crash. >> no. >> neither would i. >> no. >> betting market. they used to underestimate trump because people wouldn't admit they were voting for trump. that's been the way it was in 2020, 2016. now they could overcorrected for that because they put in different models. do you think either polls or betting -- >> 22 overcorrected, right? >> are either one of them -- do you have any idea what's going to happen tomorrow? either one of you. >> let's recognize what i think

a couple of your guests have already said, which is the trump voter is a different voter today than the republican voter of 20 years ago. in fact the trump voter of today was a democratic voter of 20 years ago. >> many of them. >> going back to pennsylvania, if you get those people the middle of the state, blue collar jobs, middle class people to turn out. >> right. >> then trump win. it's very hard, it's very hard for pollsters to do that because it's new. it's not patterns that you've seen in the past. >> can i ask about the trump trade for a second. >> sure. >> it goes back to the musk comment we were talking about earlier, temporary hardship idea with sort of glorious future on the other side of that, if you were actually playing that trade that i thought actually was a very honest moment for elon musk to allow for, what does that actually mean in the marketplace? if you really are going to slash and burn government, which by the way, we may very well need to do and given the bond market

may help on the other side of that, too. all of those things are true. but as an investment -- theory of the case on investment, if you were to take out millions of government employees basically in one shot, for example, or there was going to be some kind of inflationary period for two or three years as we try to bring manufacturing back to the u.s. for certain types of products and those products cost more, what does that do to the stock market? >> so look, it's a good question. and i think the reality of this is this is an evolution. you can't necessarily go in and skinny the government overnight. and if you understand the government policies and procedures, the budget process starts with omb. omb sends a budget to the house. the house takes the budget. usually they throw it in the trash can. if mick mulvaney is there, he calls for a vote. he always forces a vote. then the process starts.

and so the house works through a budget. congress decides where they want to spend money and where they don't want to spend money. once it gets through the house, it ends up going to the senate. the problem we have here -- and this is a fundamental problem, is that each and every one of those house members is running for re-election again starting wednesday. because they have a two-year cycle. >> right. >> so the idea that they're going to come in and they're going to start cutting massive amount of jobs, especially in their state or their district, who are voters for them, i think the possibility of that happening rounds up this year. >> what can you with executive order? what could be done with executived orrer? >> i think this is a pretty noble cause that we got here. it's a great to do this. i also thought to andrew's question, musk recognized something when he laid this out. he said, you know what, we're not going to let them go. we'll give them two-year severance. this is about reinvesting the government but not about hurting government employees. >> if you don't do it quickly,

you lose momentum. >> it doesn't work otherwise. >> you can slash and burn but you can slash and burn humanely with large severance package. >> i'm willing to pay for a severance package to reinvent government. i think everybody should be. >> what's to stop the next administration from saying we don't like that. we're going to ramp it back up. we don't think you have the proper protections because you slashed this agency or this group, you offer a two-year severance package and then they get rehired. >> what metrics are we using to measure the effectiveness of agencies. we do a really, really bad job on that. in addition to looking at what needs to be automated, you need to look at how you measure government effectiveness. by amount of fines is really not a good way to do it. >> unfortunately all in the eye of the beholder, right? and depending on the party that you're talking about, they have a very different view of what these agencies are doing or should be doing. >> well -- go ahead. >> look, i was going to say the other thing that jay and i wrote

about recently, let's say we want to move manufacturing back, let's say we do, the process to do that, the federal government can mandate it. the state and city and local governments have to issue the building permits. and historically we've seen the propensity for them wanting or able to do that to not be very high. the process to go get a building permit, for a house is really hard. think of what it is for a manufacturing facility in your county. a lot of the places in america don't want manufacturing. now, there are certain states that are going to want it, but these manufacturing facilities will not be as easy to build. they're going to need energy. we know we're a power-starved country already. we're continuously drawing on the power grid day by day with our electric vehicles, with our data centers and now we're going to put manufacturing in there. something is going to break. you have to build the infrastructure to support everything you're trying to achieve first. >> to gary's point f you don't

have permitting reform as part of this, you're not going to deal with housing and you're not going to deal with energy. those are two of the biggest drivers of the economy. >> can i ask you just because it's in the headlines and you're in this world, we were talking about manufacturing, we had a big conversation earlier this morning about intel. and what's going on there, government picking winners and losers. you're an ibm guy. maybe you have a sense of how to think about what's happening at ibm, this article that suggests that maybe the government will have to give even more support -- >> intel -- >> he's an ibm guy. he lives in this universe and is very aware of these issues. just how you think about -- how you think about this this morning? >> well, i think we need to think of it as citizens of the country. i think this is a universal issue. if we learn nothing else from covid, we learn that we have a supply chain that when it shuts down certain vital components of that supply chain really shut

down the country. we learn that chips are super important, most important things in there. not only for our everyday living because we now decides that everything we own has to have a chip in it from a toaster on up, you can't have a toaster that doesn't have a chip in it, to our industrial complex to our military. you know, you launch a smart missile, it's got 300 plus chips in it. so we know there's a vulnerability to the chip market. we know that we're dependent upon foreign countries to import chip. i actually do not like the government getting involved in industrial policy. i supported the chips act because we cannot be in a position where we are dependent on other countries to send us chips so we can defend ourselves so we can supply products to our citizens. >> was it your brilliant idea to give it to intel? >> i have nothing to do with this. it's the commerce department. but the whole idea -- let me finish -- the whole idea was to create public/private

partnerships. which to me is the right thing to do. the government was handing over 5, 6, 7, $8 billion checks to stimulate the production of chip foundries that cost 30 or $40 billion. it still meant that the private side of industry was going to have to put in sort of 70 to 80% of the money to get these foundries built. >> do you think they picked the wrong company? intel just kicked out of the dow. this is how this conversation began. >> i saw that. >> and trying to understand whether there should have been another company picked as this sort of main winner of this. >> intel is an american chip manufacturer. >> right. we don't have many others. >> we don't have a lot. >> let me make a point here, that's a great advantage america has had for 50, 60, 70 years. we've taken a lot of of people from the private sector and put them into government. >> right. >> this idea that you shouldn't have private sector people in the government is totally belied by this issue. if you're going to allocate that capitol correctly, not everybody has to be from the private

sector, you better have people that understand what gary just said in order to make -- to make sure those issues are thought through as you allocate capital. >> they say we need to go so this is a rhetorical question, do you think you can humanely -- >> that mean we have to answer -- >> don't answer. >> if you can humanely send 10 million people back to where they came from if they're here illegally. >> we were talking about this earlier. the answer to that is -- it's an incredibly difficult challenge. >> how much does that cost and what will it do to the labor market. >> why did you let them in the first place. if you know -- >> you could try to stop them here, but what do you with the people -- >> how many are actually working now? >> probably a lot of them. >> i don't know. do we know? do we know? the people who advocate for it say they're working. do we know? >> it was rhetorical. >> sounds like the answer is we need to find out if their working and if they're working, that will impact the answer. >> that will impact the answer. >> thanks to -- it says here,

thanks to gary and jay. >> thanks, guys. coming up another big interview, big interview after big interview, iac chairman barry diller will join us on his take to election day. programming note, here is the plan, cnbc will be live all night long. we're going to have the results as they come in. we'll have lionel richie playing -- no. reaction from the biggest names in business. it all starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern time tomorrow. and then, wake up early with us because we're going to be joining the broadcast at 5 -- we'll be starting the broadcast at 5:00 a.m. maybe, maybe, maybe, with some results if we find out about maybe pennsylvania, right? the places we cheer. trust. hang out. and check in. they all choose the advanced network solutions and round the clock partnership from comcast business. powering more businesses than anyone.

powering possibilities.

what is cirkul? cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul is your frosted treat with a sweet kick of confidence. cirkul is the effortless energy that gets you in the zone. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

♪ coming up in just a moment a

n'mi icat-ssnterview, iac and expedia chairman barry diller is in the house at the table. stay tuned. you do not want to go anywhere. we will talk elections and so much more.

you know coach prime, it's nice to finally have some free time. uh huh! gives you a chance to reflect on the important things. aflac! like how aflac pays people money for the expenses health insurance doesn't cover. aflac! health insurance does leave a gap. but aflac gives people money to help close that gap. aflac! oh! coach prime got one on the line too baby! uh huh! see that's how you hold up a trophy. trust me. get help with expenses health insurance doesn't cover. find an agent. get a quote at aflac.com. i hope you're hungry. i'm glad i brought my own dinner. uh huh.

welcome back to "squawk

box." another big guest joins us right now on set to talk business and tomorrow's election, barry diller, iac chairman and senior executive. you've been quite outspoken about this election throughout. >> yes. >> we spoke to a lot of different folks on all different sides of the aisle. >> yeah. >> i'm curious where you think things stand. >> sure if i know. i am incredibly optimistic. i'm optimistic for '28. >> for '28. >> yep. that is where my optimism lies because if trump prevails, it will reform the democratic party. and i think that would be extraordinarily healthy. and on the other side, it will send him to the dust heap of history, which is what i would prefer, but that's a personal characterization, which is not befitting the level of this discussion. >> your willingness to speak out the way you have as publicly

against former president trump. >> going fairly way back. >> no, no. i asked because we were talking with jeffrey sonnenfeld last week who has this piece about dimon, and a lot said that fortune 500 ceos may be voting for kamala harris but do not want to say anything publicly out of fear and whether that's a distinction or difference from the way the world worked a decade, two or three decades ago. >> yeah. i think, look, there's reason -- there's rational behind being somewhat afraid because of the retaliation comments that have been made by the previous president trump. so, i can totally understand why people are worried about that. >> but ceos don't want to speak out about anything. >> of course they don't. by the way, in a way, why should they? >> that's what i mean. >> i think that they can

sometimes make distinctions when there are great events at work that they ought to speak on, but generally those ceos represent their companies. and their companies should be apolitical. >> is this a great event? >> yeah. >> that should require it. >> this is a great event. >> it is. >> i'm afraid so. not i'm afraid so, i'm glad so. i actually -- the one thing i really want, really badly, is for it to be decisive. i want it to be over tomorrow night. i want it to be over and i want a five-point spread. >> for whoever wins. >> yes. now i know that that's probably unlikely. but oh my god, for all of us, wouldn't that be the best possible thing to happen, absolute decisiveness. >> a great event but still it's such a close election. if you're running a public company, half your customers -- >> it's going to be, what, 70/30 on some issues, 30/70, if you're

in charm of a public company that sells to consumers, you've got no business taking positions. >> that's what i mean. >> again, unless it's some -- >> maybe less this time, but there are also very few ceos that would speak out for trump four years ago, very few that would speak out for him because -- >> certainly a lot of them are piling on now. >> a few. >> what was your reaction? i know you're friends with him, to "the washington post" and jeff bezos decision not to endorse a candidate. >> i think it was principled. i know jeff very well. and i talked with him about it. the mistake they made -- and it was a mistake admitted by him, was timing. and the reasons underlying that timing were mechanical. they weren't determinative. they made a blunder. it should have happened months before. >> right. >> and it didn't. and that's the issue with it. but i absolutely -- first of all, i thought for those who wonder about why he did it, whatever, whatever, he did write

a really extensive piece, op-ed, in the "post" that i think explained it. >> do you think he wishes he didn't buy "the post". >> that i don't know. >> when you think about the economic side of this, we had a conversation i think in paris where i asked you about the regulatory environment, lena khan, you made comments that i think you took back to some degree -- >> because it was stupid -- it was like i said she's a dope just because my flip brain went out on it. and i certainly shouldn't have said that. for one reason is -- >> almost got arrested for trying to come on the set. >> she's not -- >> by the french police, right? trying to get to where we were. >> yes. this is true. but she also did something quite extraordinary. during the shutdown of mgm resorts, which we own a big position in, she happened to come through the doors of mgm in

las vegas to register. and this was when everything was shut down. and they were doing everything by hand. and she comes up to the desk. and they say, we want your identification, please. and she said, well, i don't have to do that. and they said, well, you really -- you have to do that. and she went through this registration process. and three days later mgm got whatever the official thing is an inquiry about them taking terrible advantage of people who were coming to their -- and the ftc caused an action against mgm because she didn't personally like that these people, who were frantically trying to help people asked her for something. >> you have to show your identification every hotel you ever -- >> i don't know. i'm just telling you what -- >> that's crazy. >> the reason i raise lina khan --

>> that's just a little anecdote for the tastiness of the moment. >> barry, there's a whole bunch of folks including john paulson, supporting former president trump, disregarding the characters, which is the main issue for you, and they're saying from a policy perspective, regulatory perspective, taxes, go through the list, that they believe that he will be a greater benefit to the country than her. what do you think about that? >> i listened to mr. paulson. who listen, i certainly understand what he's doing. he's running for treasury secretary. he's running for office. he's not like a dispassionate person. he's running for office. but, i'm amazed that when the character issue is brought up that it is not responded to. i mean, when ever you ask this question or press it, there's basically no answer other than that he's a kind and emotionally

available person. but every statement he makes is not one of those. so i don't know how you just discount it. >> and therefore -- >> joe? >> well, you know, i always have this argument with -- there's what aboutism. and i can point to character issues in -- i don't want to even get into that game. i don't want to get into that game with joe biden, with kamala harris -- >> but don't you in a way at least have to -- to this extent, which is i'm not extolling candidate harris. and i'm not saying anything about her, quote, exemplary character -- >> or joe biden. >> or joe biden. but they are and have always been decent people who went into public service. that was what they did. >> i don't agrow. >> you don't think that -- >> no, i don't agree. i don't agree how they got to where they are. i don't agree in terms of joe

biden, i looked at his entire career, it's littered with character problems all the way back to plagiarism, to cheating -- >> wait a minute. isn't there a difference? >>. >> being a porn star? i mean, i don't care about that. i don't care about -- >> i don't know care about the porn star either. what i do care about is the statements that he has made that -- >> half of those have been taken out of context half the time. >> oh, oh. >> the one about liz cheney, the blood bath, the media does it constantly. >> forget the media. let's not do what the media -- >> did you vote for bill clinton twice? >> oh, yes. yes. and by the way -- >> no problems with character issues there. >> as far as his decency -- >> yeah. as far as janita broadrick or paula jones. i can name -- >> why? >> because those are character issues. you have no problem with bill clinton's character issues. >> wait a minute.

with regards to sexual escapades. >> that's what we talk about with trump all the time. >> with the sin of man. with what guys do. i'm not justifying -- >> let's move on to the other -- you talking about january 6th now, which character issue are we talking about. usually we talk about e. jean carroll or stormy daniels. >> i think all of that is huey. i think most of those lawsuits are i don't think. but i think there's just simply no question. how can you even actually argue it? you can say actually i don't care because as president his record as president is that none of those terrible things happened last time. but they may happen this time. so you have to deal with that. >> you mean in terms of not leaving office or -- >> well, in terms of anything. in terms of all -- stack up the statements. >> the people jay clayton, gary cohn, john paulson, maybe you have a one-off for each one of

those. but it's a very close election. then we're back to where you either are judging half the country as either being stupid or being nonvirtues you or amoral. >> i judge them as progressism and elitism gone wrong for a long period of time. >> no, people who are able -- everything you know about trump, everything you know about trump, many people know everything you know about trump and still choose to support it. >> yeah. >> how? >> because i think they're bitter about the way this government the last 20 or 30 years has actually -- i think misappropriated progressism in many different ways i think that's valid. >> you don't think they're bad people for supporting someone so amoral or flawed? >> fno, i don't. actually what i would like to happen, and i have no ability to change anybody's anything, but for people who are worried -- because i think most people who

are voting for trump are going to vote it on economic -- for economic reasons and worries about -- >> because it's binary. >> and worried about this administration. please split your ticket. vote democratic, and split your ticket so that the economic part of this can be protected. then we get the best of a fairly poor period, meaning we get -- we don't get him, because i do think that's a bad thing, and we'll live through four years. and what will happen out of that -- by the way, i'm kind of okay either way. i'm really not but i say it. but i think that if, in fact, trump wins, the democratic party will redo itself and put up a solid candidate in '28. >> do you think the flip side is true, if the democrats win that the republican party changes

materially? or that the -- >> yeah. >> you do? >> he's 78. >> yo, i don't think that trump would run again. i wonder whatever you think the remnants of the maga movement are, whether that becomes the central tenant of the party -- >> i don't think it's a movement. i think it's him. so i think if he disappears there is no movement. >> it's not just economic issues. i look at the way we have handled iran and the middle east for the past four years has been a pig whatever you want to call it. it's been an absolute disaster. that's why we're in this mess right now. when trump was -- it ended with the abraham accords, moving jerusalem, the embassy. >> a lot of silliness with the north korean leader. >> okay. now you're back to the superficial things. the world was a much safer place. >> by the way, the world was a much safer place because ukraine and the middle east blew. and who would have predicted

that? and who would have prevented that? >> you can't say it's definitely not linked. you can't. the withdrawal from afghanistan. the withdrawal from afghanistan. how about the border. >> i would like two things. >> how about the border? >> i would hope for two things. >> which are? >> one is that she has a republican for sure as -- and somebody with real foreign policy chops as defense. and i would like elon musk to be asked, given that he is an american patriot, to come into this administration and cut costs because the one thing he is really good at is that. >> do you think either of those are likely to happen? have you been given any -- >> well, i do think she has said she will appoint a republican to the cabinet. now, i hope it's not for commerce secretary. >> and you would like to see her appoint -- if she wins, appoint elon musk? >> absolutely. call him and say, you know what, mr. musk, you are truly a great

cutting executive. look at what he did with twitter. >> right. >> come in, help our government. you have absolute authority. cut everywhere that makes sense. >> what do you think about his role in this election? >> well, i've said before, i think he is a deserved maglomaniac because of what he is able -- what he has accomplished and able to be accomplished. enabled. and i think that his therefore coming on center stage and jumping up is like weird but okay. because he's a magalomaniac but deserves to be. >> what do you think about the elites and this divide. what do you think about this perception now that there is frankly billionaires on each side of this campaign that are -- you know, that the

candidates are sort of mare nar owe nets. >> anybody with real heavy wealth how they could do anything that benefits their sole economic interest as a means of judging anything is beyond me. >> do you think that's true? >> to make another dollar for a rich person? >> so, a lot of times you hear democrats or folks on the left say, you know what, the folks who are supporting trump are doing it for their wallet? it's all about the money. that's all it really. is that what you think? when i had conversations with these folks, unless you think i'm completely pollyannaish about this, there are so many other issues not only that they point -- >> they're voting their economic issues. >> that can't be right in a blue state, barry. can't be right in a blue state. >> i don't think that's all it is, but i think it's the vast majority of it.

it can't -- these are people who do understand the differences, the issues of character and other issues. >> i could argue it's about power. proximity to power is power so some those folks who aligned themselves -- >> they're all delusion nar. anybody who thinks because theyt invited to a state dinner. >> many are voting for what they see as everybody's wallet. real income rose much more quickly during the first trump administration. real income is still down from when joe biden took office. people feel like they have less money. real income was surging. >> look at this economy. >> for me, barry, i had to pay -- you can't be talking about me, because i had to pay much more after the -- after 2017. much more. much more, because of not being able to -- everything else. it has nothing to do with -- but i do believe, just maybe you don't think trump is a republican -- >> excuse me, joe. >> in general, i would like free

markets more than socialism. i would like less government intervention, less regulation, lower taxes, lower corporate taxes, lower capital -- all those things. not about my wallet. because i think it's better for everybody's wallet. it's not personal. i think -- so, i don't think you should discount. >> i understand but i was using this argument as a class of billionaire, which i don't think -- a class of billionaire, which i don't think you've risen to yet. >> no, but you have, but we're not allowed to say it. >> barry, does expedia and uber, does a tie-up make sense for uber? >> i could -- as an industrial combination, sure. but it's not going to happen. >> that's -- >> full stop. it's not going to happen. >> you're saying it aloud. we talked to dara on the broadcast last week, and he didn't go full-on that it was not happening. he just said -- >> it's not going to happen. >> if it makes sense, why is it not going to happen? >> it's just not going to happen. >> let me ask you a different question. >> okay.

>> yes, ma'am. sir. >> do you think there's a sense that this company will get acquired or merge with somebody else? >> expedia? no, i don't think so. >> because? >> well, one -- first of all, i don't think it's in expaedia's interest. expedia is beginning a period of real growth and is now, i think, for the first time in some time, has now got a great leader who's doing every right thing with the company. so, i think if ever there's a wrong time for expedia to exchange chairs, it is now. that is the big reason. a small reason, which is whatever, is i don't want to do it. and it's not i don't want to do it, like, because i don't want to do it. i don't think that expedia should be sold, and i have enough shares, voting shares,

that i could -- i probably can't get anything done, but i can certainly stop something from being done. >> would you be interested in a beautiful basket of shiny cable companies all put in one little entity? to be able to -- no nimbly -- >> i hope they don't do it, because i don't think comcast -- i think comcast is better with them, but if they do spin all these off, that would be a really solid enterprise. >> why do you say you hope they don't do it? >> because i think that they're so well hedged. this is a company that is -- that has got really the best hand because they've not only got the great -- this is my -- >> call coming through. >> -- my wife, i guarantee you. >> it's brian roberts. >> you want to take it? >> no, i think you should say hello to deion. hi, i'm on camera. >> we're on tv right now. we'll call you back. >> oh, you are? >> we are. >> you're on tv? >> cnbc right now.

>> she's in venice. >> i'm in athens. >> oh, in athens. you were in venice four hours ago. >> i know. i just -- i just arrived. so, what is going on? >> the question of the world. >> so, you were saying you hope they don't do it because? this is comcast spinning off. >> because i think they're so well hedged in so many areas of media that i think those balances are really good for each other, and i do not believe -- listen, cable is going to continue to decline. it ain't going to decline to nothing. we are in the process of rebundling. we've gone from bundling over here with full cable to the -- to this period, which is about probably a ten-year arc, of going to direct connect for individual services, which, let

me just make the -- sorry -- which we will watch this. we will get right back to total rebundling, so when that happens, all of these -- not all of them. the key ones, your -- your cnbc, the other key cable properties will be part of a reconnected bundle, so i would never get rid of them, but whatever. it's not my company. >> i think advocates would say they're thinking that the spinoff could be the bundler of those things, but that's a longer conversation for another day. barry diller, thank you so much for being here. ad'll see where the election hes. >> thank you all. >> thank you. >> thank you, barry.

all right, before we go this morning, a few top stories. striking boeing union workers voting today on an improved contract offer. it includes a 38% pay increase over 4 years. that's up from 35% in the last contract offer that was rejected just a little less than 2 weeks ago. there are other sweeteners involved in this as well, including a higher immediate cash payout to all of the workers. warren buffett's berkshire hathaway unloading about a quarter of its remaining stake in apple in the third quarter,

that news coming in berkshire's latest earnings report. you're talking about $300 billion in cash on hand right now for berkshire hathaway. and tgi friday's filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. the restaurant's executive chairman blaming covid-19 and the company's capital structure for its financial challenges. the bankruptcy process only affects 39 corporate-owned restaurants. hundreds of franchisee-owned friday's are not affected by this news. very quick final check on the markets this morning. the dow and the nasdaq have both turned lower at this point. you've got the dow off by close to 60 points. nasdaq looks like it's down by about 15. s&p is hanging on but just barely. it's up by one point. we do have not just the election this week. you've also got a federal reserve meeting and a lot of earnings that are still going to be coming in, affecting, potentially, all of these prices. the ten-year right now is sitting below 4.30%. the two-year is at 4.13%, and if you take a look at oil prices,

we are seeing higher oil prices this morning on the idea that opec is not going to be increasing supply any time soon. wti is up 3% this morning to $71.53 a barrel. well, here we go. it is election eve today. we hope you go out and vote, but we appreciate your being with us today, and we will see you back here tomorrow morning. >> vote. >> right now, it's time for "squawk on the street." ♪ good monday morning, welcome to "squawk on the street," i'm carl quintanilla with jim cramer, david faber at post nine of the new york stock exchange. coming off a couple weeks lower on the s&p heading into an historically eventful week with an election, a fed meeting, plenty of travel and media earnings, yields are lower across the board. ten-year, 4.28%. our road map begins with the big week ahead for investors as we go into the final hours of the 2024 presidential campaign, and the potential for another fed rate cut this week. plus, ge