Nick Denton's Big Bet Against the United States

Last month, Donald Trump fired the Federal Trade Commission's two Democratic commissioners. They have since filed suit, arguing that the law that created the FTC — as well as a 90-year-old Supreme Court precedent — prevent the president from firing them without cause. And now, what might seem like a niche legal dispute could end up having much bigger consequences for other independent government agencies, including the Federal Reserve. That would be a huge shock for Wall Street, which tends to value central bank independence. In this episode, we speak with Lev Menand, professor at Columbia Law School and author of The Fed Unbound, to talk about the huge stakes involved in this case.Read More:Trump and the Fed Are on a Collision CourseWho Will Protect the Fed’s Independence? The Markets Only Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Legendary media mogul Nick Denton, the founder of Gawker, is done with the US. He’s leaving New York City for good, and moving with his family to the Buda Hills near Budapest. And when it comes to his stock portfolio, he’s done with the US as well. On this episode of the podcast, he tells us why he’s bullish on China, and says that the fall of Elon Musk may be the biggest business story in the entire world. We also talk about the end of the Atlanticist dream, why European elites are turning so sharply against the US, and his investment approach.Read more: BYD Sales Top Tesla as Tech Focus Wins Over Chinese DriversXiaomi Plans to Expand Beijing EV Factory to Meet Surging Demand Only Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

One of the biggest questions hanging over the market right now is whether or not the seemingly unlimited appetite for more AI data center spending is slowing down or not. This type of tech infrastructure has been a massive sectoral winner over the last few years. But of course, this isn't the first time investors have gotten excited about this type of trade. The late 1990s and early 2000s are often remembered as being the time of a "tech bubble" or "dot-com bubble," but one specific aspect was the buildout in broadband infrastructure, or what became known as the telecom bubble. So what was that all about? Why were investors so optimistic? And how did it end? At our recent live episode in Washington DC, we spoke with Blair Levin, policy adviser to New Street Research. He was the chief of staff at the FCC during the telecom deregulation of the 1990s, and in the early 2000s went to work on Wall Street. He tells us about differences and similarities between then and now, plus the signs of when the ride is coming to an end.Read More: What It Felt Like When Everyone Was Hopeful, Happy, and Rich Only Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Brad Jacobs has made a fortune in his career buying and building big logistics companies, like United Rentals, Waste Management, XPO (trucking company), GXO (warehouses), and RXO (freight brokerage). His current venture is QXO, which raised billions of dollars in order to enter the building supply industry. After a long search and a couple months of battling with the executive team, QXO announced last week that it would be acquiring publicly traded roofing supply company Beacon Roofing for $11 billion. So why expand into roofing supply? And why Beacon specifically? We sat down with Brad to talk about the roofing industry, his vision for improving the company, what other opportunities are out there, and what he's seeing in the general economy right now. Read more:QXO Agrees to Acquire Beacon Roofing Supply in $11 Billion DealAffordable Housing Developers Stalled by Blocked Federal Funds Only http://Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox each week, plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at  bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

President Trump wants higher tariffs, and he also wants more industrial production in the United States. This we know. In the meantime, a coterie of economists and pundits have tried to assemble a larger intellectual architecture to explain that strategy in a coherent way. The story they tell is one where America gets paid by its allies for national security and access to American markets, while the US brings down its debt and deficits, and weakens the dollar, so as to make US manufacturing more globally competitive. Whether Trump sees things this way himself, and whether it will actually work is an entirely separate question. On this episode of the podcast, we speak with Jim Millstein, co-chair of Guggenheim Securities, about what he sees as the massive risks underway with this line of thinking. During his time in government, he was closely involved with the conservatorship arrangement of the GSEs, so we also talk about the possibility of re-privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Read more: Dalio Warns of US Debt Crisis ‘Heart Attack’ Within Three YearsWishful Thinking Won’t Solve the US Debt CrisisOnly Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last week, the US market sold off sharply. The S&P 500 fell as much as 3.6% on Monday alone, entering technical correction territory. Momentum trades were hit particularly hard and stocks that had been winners for years suddenly became losers, while ones that had been losers suddenly outperformed. Perhaps the strangest thing though, is that volatility didn't really surge as things sold off. The VIX — sometimes called Wall Street's "Fear Gauge" — went up, but it didn't even reach levels that we saw in 2024 or 2022. So what happened? And why was the selloff so short and kind of strange with the lack of vol? On this episode, we speak with Charlie McElligott, Nomura strategist, about what exactly has been happening.Read only: Hedge-Fund Momentum Bets Crater All at Once in Volatile MarketsThe S&P 500’s Meltdown Into a Correction Only Took 16 DaysOnly Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We finally did it. We finally did an episode on the Jones Act. For years on the podcast, we've been referencing this controversial law from 1920, which places restrictions on domestic port-to-port transport in the United States. But we had never actually done an episode on what it is, why it was created, and why people feel so fervently about either keeping or maintaining it. There are plenty of people who feel that this law is an inhibitor of US growth, because domestic water-based shipment of goods requires a US-flagged, US-crewed, and US-built vessel. And yet the law persists — for over a century now. At our live show in Washington DC, we spoked with the Cato Institute's Colin Grabow (who took the anti side) and the Transportation Institute's Sara Fuentes (who took the pro side). They explained their respective positions on questions of the economics and national security in a lively, heated (but polite) debate. Read more:Jones Act Descended From Centuries of Lazy ProtectionismEast Coast Gas Would Only Drop a Dime If Jones Act Lifted, Says JPMorganJones Act Ships Competitive for US Fuel Exports as Freight Soars Only Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox each week, plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at  bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When Donald Trump won in November, one of the things that Wall Street was excited about was an expected liberalization of merger rules. There was a popular view that under Chair Lina Khan, the Biden FTC was overly stringent about what deals it would let go through, and that the new administration would give the greenlight more often. But at least so far, reality hasn't proven to be so simple. There hasn't been a big merger wave yet. And, in fact, the FTC under new Chair Andrew Ferguson has decided to keep the merger guidelines that Khan put in place. So does this mean continuity? At a live episode of the podcast taped in Washington DC, we spoke with Ferguson about the Trump administration's vision for antitrust. He talked about his philosophy of keeping corporate power in check and the tests he's using to preserve a competitive environment. He also walked us through the long history of the FTC and the notion of consumer welfare, plus why he thinks a more expansive interpretation of the term (beyond just lower prices) is in keeping with the history of conservative legal thought. Read More: New DOJ Antitrust Chief Builds Team From Prior AdministrationsTrump’s FTC Moves Ahead With Broad Microsoft Antitrust ProbeOnly Bloomberg.com subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox — now delivered every weekday — plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Prediction markets are everywhere nowadays. You can go online and bet on political outcomes, or the weather, or how long Taylor Swift will stay together with Travis Kelce. But prediction markets have a long history, and one of the earliest involved betting on who would be the next pope. In fact, Renaissance Romans gambled on everything from papal elections to whether a particular noblewoman would give birth to a boy or girl. So why was betting such a big thing in 1500s Italy? How did the papal prediction market actually work? And what can it tell us about prediction markets today? We speak to Ryan Isakow, the author of the No Dumb Ideas substack.Read More: A Live Experiment in Prediction MarketsPrediction Markets Are a Thing NowOnly Bloomberg - Business News, Stock Markets, Finance, Breaking & World News subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox each week, plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at  bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Housing affordability remains one of the single greatest sources of economic stress. Even if inflation measures were to come down, the simple cost of shelter is a huge burden on a wide swathe of the population. Hardly anyone disagrees with the idea of increasing supply, but this is easier said than done. There isn't a lot of spare construction capacity and the political fights over liberalizing zoning are tedious and slow. On this episode, we speak with Kevin Erdmann, a senior affiliated scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, who proposes a simple idea. He argues that after the Great Financial Crisis, regulators over-tightened lending standards, and in so doing, took out the entire "starter home" segment of the new housing market. He says that if Fannie and Freddie were to liberalize their lending standards, homebuilders would be incentivized to build more homes that cater to people with lower incomes and lower FICO scores, essentially re-creating a whole slice of the new home market that's disappeared over the last 15 years. Read More:US Homebuilders Face a Supply Chain Snarl From Tariff BattlesUS Mortgage Rates Decline to 6.88%, Lowest Level This Year Only Bloomberg - Business News, Stock Markets, Finance, Breaking & World News subscribers can get the Odd Lots newsletter in their inbox each week, plus unlimited access to the site and app. Subscribe at  bloomberg.com/subscriptions/oddlotsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.