US Elections: Weighing the Options

U.S. equities markets appear to be betting on an outdated playbook that worked when inflation was benign. But analysis of earnings and macro data suggests an updated playbook may be necessary. What investors should watch now.----- Transcript -----Welcome to thoughts of the market. I'm Mike Wilson, Chief Investment Officer and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist for Morgan Stanley. Along with my colleagues bringing you a variety of perspectives, I'll be talking about the latest trends in the financial marketplace. It's Monday, December 4th at 11 a.m. in New York. So let's get after it. After a very challenging three month stretch for stocks ending in October, the S&P 500 recouped all its losses in November, while the small cap and S&P 500 equal weight indices only regained about half. This left the performance gap between the average stock and the market cap weighted index near its widest level of the year as equity market performance remains historically narrow. In other words, the market accurately reflects today's challenging operating environment for most companies. In many ways, it's a reflection of how most consumers are suffering amid high absolute prices in most spending categories. On Friday, the equity markets took on a different complexion, with small caps and lower quality stocks outperforming significantly. This occurred as rates continued to fall sharply, despite Jay Powell's comments that it was premature for markets to price in rate cuts early next year. With 130 basis points of cuts now priced into the Fed's fund futures market through the year end of 2024, investors have set a high bar for cuts to be delivered. Our analysis on equity returns post prior peaks in the Fed funds rate shows a strong disparity in performance between cycles where inflation was historically elevated versus those where inflation was relatively benign. The equity market appears to be betting on the playbook from the last four cycles when inflation was benign, suggesting we are early to mid-cycle for this particular economic expansion. However, our analysis of the earnings and macro data continue to suggest we are late cycle, which argues for continued outperformance of our defensive growth and late cycle cyclicals barbell strategy. The primary argument supporting our position relates to the labor market, which appears to be short on supply at a price companies can afford. This is why labor demand continues to soften and why consumer spending is slowing. Having said that, we can stay in the late cycle regime for long periods of time with 2023 representing one of those classic late cycle periods. This is why large-cap quality is outperform and why Friday's rally in small caps and lower quality stocks is unlikely to be sustained. Recently, we have received an increasing amount of client questions on the relative performance of industry groups and factors around the Fed's first interest rate cut of the cycle. Value stocks tend to outperform growth into the cut and underperform post the cut. Quality tends to outperform meaningfully into the cut and then sees more volatile performance after. Interestingly, defenses tend to outperform cyclicals and small caps fairly persistently, both before and after the initial cut. This helps to support the notion at the beginning of the Fed cutting cycle is not typically the catalyst for a meaningful broadening out of leadership. Another topic of interest from investors more recently has been industry group performance around presidential elections. On an equal weighted basis, performance shows a modest bias towards value, quality and defensive large caps. Post-election, we do tend to see a broadening out in leadership with small caps and cyclicals generally showing better performance. Value maintains its outperformance. Financials tend to show strong relative performance both before and after elections. And interestingly, health care's relative performance tends to hold up until three months prior to the election. Within the health care sector, equipment and services tends to outperform pharma and biotech post the election. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please take a moment to rate and review us on the Apple podcast app. It helps more people to find the show.

4 Dec 20233min

The market rally of the last few weeks is based on strong economic data, suggesting that the U.S. and Europe remain on track for a “soft landing.” ----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Corporate Credit Research for Morgan Stanley. Along with my colleagues bringing you a variety of perspectives, I'll be talking about trends across the global investment landscape and how we put those ideas together. It's Friday, December 1st at 2 p.m. in London. November 2023 is now in the history books. It was outstanding. US bonds rose 4.5%, the best month since 1985. Global stocks rose 9%, the best month in three years. Spreads on an investment grade and high yield bonds tightened significantly. With the exception of commodities and Chinese stocks, which both struggled, November was an early holiday gift to investors of many stripes. While the size of the rally in November was unusual, the direction didn't just spring from thin air. Generally speaking, economic data in November strongly endorsed the idea of a soft landing. Soft landing, where inflation falls without a sharp drop in economic activity are historically rare. But they are Morgan Stanley's economic forecast for the year ahead. And in November, investors unwrapped data suggesting the story remains on track. In the US, core consumer price inflation declined more than expected. Core PCE inflation, a slightly different measure that the Federal Reserve prefers, has fallen down to an annualized pace of just 2.5% over the last six months. Gas prices are down 16% since the summer, rental inflation has stalled and the U.S. auto production is normalizing, improving the trend in three big drivers of the higher inflation we've seen over the last two years. Go back 12 months and most forecasts, including our own, assume that lower inflation would be the result of higher interest rates driving a slowdown in growth. But the economy has been good. Over the last 12 months, the U.S. economy has grown 3%, .5% better than the average since 1990. The story in Europe is a little different from the one in America, but it still rhymes. In Europe, recent inflation data has also come in lower than expected. While economic data has been somewhat weaker. Still, we see signs that the worst of Europe's economic growth will be confined to 2023 and continue to forecast the weakest growth right now, with somewhat better European growth in 2024. Why does this matter? While the returns of November were unusual and unlikely to repeat, it's a good reminder not to overcomplicate things. Good data, by which we mean lower inflation and reasonable growth, is a good outcome that markets will reward, and remains the Morgan Stanley economic base case. Deviating on either variable is a risk, especially for an asset class like credit. Following the data and keeping an open mind, remains important. Thanks for listening. Subscribe to Thoughts on the Market on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen and leave us a review. We'd love to hear from you.

1 Dec 20232min

The growing popularity of medicines that curb appetite is having an impact on consumption of less-healthy foods. Here’s what that could mean for packaged snacks, soda, alcohol and fast food.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Pamela Kaufman, Morgan Stanley's Tobacco and Packaged Food Analyst. Today I'll be talking about how obesity medicines are impacting food spending. It's Thursday, November 30th at 10 a.m. in New York. With Thanksgiving behind us, we've now entered the holiday season when many of us are focused on shopping, travel and, of course, food. The last 12 to 18 months have seen overwhelming growth in popularity for a glucagon-like peptide 1 or GLP-1 anti-obesity medications. These medications were first approved for the treatment of type two diabetes more than 15 years ago and for the treatment of obesity more than 8 years ago. But the inflection point came only recently when the formulation and delivery of GLP-1 drugs improved from once daily injections to once weekly injections, and even an oral formulation. There were also some key FDA approvals that opened the doors for widespread use. How effective are these new and improved GLP-1 drugs? Essentially, they target areas of the brain that regulate appetite and food consumption so that patients feel full longer, have a reduced appetite and consume less food. Studies show that patients taking the injectable GLP-1 medicines can lose approximately 10 to 20% of their body weight. One of the key debates in the market right now is how the growing use of GLP-1 drugs will affect various industries within the larger food ecosystem. The fact that patients on anti-obesity drugs experience a significant reduction in appetite impacts their food habits and consumption. The "Food Meets Pharma" debate is one we've been tracking closely, and our most recent work indicates that shoppers with obesity spend about 1% more on groceries compared to shoppers without obesity. But we see a larger difference across less healthy categories. Over the last year, obese shoppers spent more on candy, frozen meals and beverages, but less on produce, fish and beans and grains. In addition, shoppers with obesity spend more at large fast food chains. Our own survey data and various medical studies point to a drastic 60 to 70% reduction in consumption of less healthy categories in patients taking GLP-1 drugs, driven by the significant changes observed in their food consumption and preferences. As drug use grows, we can see an increasing impact across various food and beverage related industries in the U.S. For example, among our beverages coverage, U.S. shoppers with obesity spend more on carbonated soft drinks and salty snacks. Shoppers with obesity also spend more on fast food and on a relative basis, less at fast casual restaurants and casual diners. But obesity medicines are starting to change these habits. Furthermore, 62% of GLP-1 patients report consuming less alcohol since starting on the medications, with 56% of those consuming less reporting at least a 75% reduction in alcohol consumption. So what's our outlook for drug adoption? Morgan Stanley research estimates that the global obesity prescription market will reach $77 billion in the next decade, with $51 billion in the U.S. By 2035, my colleagues expect 7% of the U.S. population will be on anti-obesity medication. Given these projections, the "Food Meets Pharma" debate will remain relevant and something investors should watch closely. Thanks for listening. If you enjoyed the show, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

30 Nov 20234min

With a strong holiday season expected, and a rise in U.S. passport issuance, there’s good reason to believe the travel industry will see durable growth in the year ahead.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ravi Shanker, Morgan Stanley's Freight Transportation and Airlines Analyst. Along with my colleagues bringing you a variety of perspectives, today I'll discuss our view on airline travel in 2024. It's Wednesday, November 29th at 10 a.m. in New York. Travel plans are in most people's minds over the holiday season, and many of us just experienced firsthand the hectic Thanksgiving holiday weekend. On the Sunday after Thanksgiving, the US Transportation Security Administration, or TSA, screened more than 2.9 million passengers, which was the most ever for a single day. Overall, the TSA's reported number of travelers last week was up 4.2% versus 2019 and has been tracking up nearly 6% versus 2019 for the month of November. This is impressive given that November is typically a slower leisure travel month. Furthermore, despite record travel over the last several weeks, airlines achieved record low cancellations over the Thanksgiving weekend as well. This all bodes well for the upcoming holidays. We continue to expect a strong holiday season ahead, as demand for air travel is showing no signs of slowing. And despite concerns around choppy macro conditions, we continue to see no signs of a cliff in demand. Meanwhile, our survey work indicates that holiday travel intentions remain robust among all consumers and not just high income households. At the same time, corporate travel budgets in 2024 are trending in line with expectations, and business travel is likely to mirror domestic leisure travel just on a delayed basis. Smaller enterprises continue to lead the way for corporate travel demand. Among companies with less than $1 billion in revenue, 41% are already back to pre 2020 travel volumes. Right now, the primary barriers to corporate travel appear to be cost concerns as well as the economic and market outlook. This suggests that constraints on corporate travel may be cyclical rather than structural. One final observation which relates to both international business and leisure travel is that US passport issuance is also up. According to US government data, as of early November, 2023 had already seen the issuance of over 24 million passports. That's 9% higher compared to 2022. This is a new record which demonstrates that people want to travel now more than ever, particularly internationally. Over the past 25 years, the number of US passports issued per year has noticeably increased after major economic events such as the dot-com bubble in the early 2000s, the global financial crisis in 2008-2009, with the latest being post-Covid in 2022. We continue to believe that this is not a one and done travel spike, but a durable growth trend. All told, it looks like we may be entering a new golden age of travel in the 2020s. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and shared Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

29 Nov 20233min

Investors in the education sector have focused on threats from generative AI, but may be missing the potential for greater efficiency and new opportunities in workforce reskilling.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Brenda Duverce from the Morgan Stanley Sustainability Research Team. Along with my colleagues bringing you a variety of perspectives. Today I'll discuss the potential impact of generative AI on the global education market. It's Tuesday, November 28th at 10 a.m. in New York. When ChatGPT was first introduced, it disrupted the education system with the threat of plagiarism and misinformation, and some school systems have banned it. Some companies in the educational technology space were initially affected by this, but have since recovered as the risks have become clearer. Still, investors appear to be overly focused on the risks GenAI poses to education companies, missing the potential upside GenAI can unlock. From a sustainability perspective, we view GenAI as an opportunity to drive improvements to society in general, with education being one core use case. We would highlight two areas where GenAI will be key. One, in improving the overall education experience and two, in helping to reskill or upskill an evolving workforce. Starting with the quality of the education experience, GenAI has the potential to transform learning and teaching, from automating tasks with chatbots to creating adaptive learning solutions. Applications such as auto grading, large language model based tutors and retention management can drive efficiencies and increase productivity. We see efficiencies driving $200 billion of value creation and education over the next three years. In the fragmented education market, we expect lower costs to flow through to prices as companies pass along cost savings to maximize volumes. The second key area that we highlight from a sustainability angle is the reskilling and upskilling of the workforce. We think the market may be under appreciating the role education companies can have in this respect. Many fear that GenAI would lead to substantial job losses in various areas of the economy, and the market sometimes assumes that job loss leads to permanent displacement of workers long term. But we argue this isn't necessarily true. Workers typically re-enter the labor force with an updated skill set. Take, for instance, the introduction of ATMs and the concerns that ATMs would replace bank tellers and lead to significant job loss. This didn't prove to be the case. Over time, there were fewer tellers per bank branch, but the overall number of tellers continued to rise. Furthermore, the bank teller role evolved as customers sought a better experience and bank tellers responded by reskilling. Another example of this type of disruption was the introduction of the spreadsheet in the accounting industry. Many argued that spreadsheets would replace accounting jobs. However, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates the opposite, the number of accountants and financial managers rose significantly. When it comes to reskilling or upskilling workers impacted by GenAI, we think this could cost somewhere around $16 billion within the next three years. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please take a moment to rate and review us on the Apple Podcasts app. It helps more people find the show.

28 Nov 20233min

Morgan Stanley published its 2024 macroeconomic and investment outlooks last week after spirited debates among our economists and strategists. Three topics animated much of this year’s discussion: lingering concerns about recession; China; and the challenging real estate market in the U.S.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I am Vishy Tirupattur, Morgan Stanley's Chief Fixed Income Strategist. Along with my colleagues, bringing you a variety of perspectives, I'll be talking about some of the key debates we engaged in during our year ahead outlook process. It's Monday, November 27th at 10 a.m. in New York. We published our Year Ahead Global Economics and Strategy Outlook last Sunday and more detailed asset class and country specific outlooks have been streaming out since. At Morgan Stanley Research the outlooks are the culmination of a process involving much deliberation and spirited debate among economists and strategists across all regions and asset classes we cover. While we strive for cohesion and consistency in our outlook across economies and markets, we are convinced that in a highly interconnected world, facing numerous uncertainties, challenging each other's views makes the final product much stronger. In that spirit, here are some of the key debates we engaged in along the way. Slowdown but not recession? In their baseline scenario, our economists expect a significant slowdown in developed market economies while inflation is tamed and outright recession is avoided. Unsurprisingly, the prospect of a substantial slowdown that does not devolve into a recession was debated at length. Our economists maintain that while recessions remain a risk everywhere, they expect any recession, such as the one in the United Kingdom, to be shallow. Since inflation is falling with full employment, real incomes should hold up, leaving consumption resilient despite more volatile investment spending. Our economists call for policy easing to start across several DM economies in the middle of 2024 was also much discussed. For the U.S., our economists call for 100 basis points of rate cuts starting around the second half of the year and the cuts begin even before inflation target has been achieved and without a spike in the unemployment rate. The motivation here is not that the Fed will cut to stimulate the economy, but the cuts are a move towards a more normalized monetary policy. As the economy begins to slow and net new jobs created fall below replacement levels, we think that the Fed sees the need to normalize policy instead of maintaining policy at very restrictive levels. The China question. Relative to the expectations in our mid-year outlook, China growth surprised to the downside. We clearly overestimated the ability and willingness of China policymakers to restore vigor to the economy. Thus, as we debated China, we spent time on the policy measures needed to offset the drag from the looming 3D trap of debt, deflation and demographics. We look for subpar improvement in both growth and inflation in 2024, with real GDP growth reaching a below consensus 4.2%. More central government led stimulus will only cushion the economy against continued deleveraging in the housing sector and local government financial vehicles.Real estate challenges. U.S. residential and commercial real estate markets diverged dramatically over the course of 2023, and their trajectory in the year ahead was an important debate. The dramatic affordability challenges posed by higher mortgage rates caused a significant pullback in existing home sales, renewing decreases in inventory that provided near-term support for home prices. On the other hand, the combination of challenges for key lenders such as regional banks and secular challenges to select property types such as offers coupled with an imminent and persistent wall of maturities that need to be refinanced, drove commercial real estate prices and sales meaningfully lower. Looking ahead, as rates come down, we expect affordability to improve and for sale inventory of homes to increase. U.S. home prices should see modest declines, about 3% as the growth in inventory offsets the increased demand, with fundamental stressors still largely unresolved, we expect the outlook for commercial real estate to remain challenging. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

27 Nov 20234min

Original Release on November, 7th 2023: AI could help video game companies boost engagement and consumer spending, but could also introduce competition by making it easier for new companies to enter the industry.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Matt Cost from the Morgan Stanley US Internet Team. Along with my colleagues, bringing you a variety of perspectives, today I'll discuss how A.I could change the video game industry. It's Tuesday, November 7th at 10 a.m. in New York. New A.I tools are starting to transform multiple industries, and it's hardly a surprise that the game industry could see a major impact as well. As manual tasks become more automated and the user experience becomes increasingly personalized, A.I. tools are starting to change the way that games are made and operated. Building video games involves many different disciplines, including software development, art and writing, among others. Many of these processes could become more automated over time, reducing the cost and complexity of making games and likely reducing barriers to entry. And since we expect the industry to spend over $100 billion this year building and operating games, there's a significant profit opportunity for the industry to become more efficient. Automated content creation could also offer more tailored experiences and purchase options to consumers in real time, potentially boosting engagement and consumer spending. Consider, for example, a game that not only makes offers when a consumer is most likely to spend money, but also generates in-game items designed to appeal to that specific person's preferences in real time. Beyond A.I generated content, we also need to consider the impact of user generated content. Some popular titles already depend on the users to shape the game around them, and this is another core area that could be transformed by A.I.. Faster and easier to use content creation tools could make it easier for games to tap into the creativity of their users. And as we've seen with major social platforms, relying on users to create content can be a big opportunity. With all that said, these transformational opportunities create downside risk as well. Today's large game publishers rely on their scale and domain expertise to differentiate their products from competitors. But while new A.I. tools could make game development more efficient, they could also lower barriers to entry for new competitors to jump into the fray and put pressure on the incumbents. Another risk is that A.I. tools could fail to drive the hope for efficiencies and cost savings in the first place. Not all technology breakthroughs in the past have helped the industry become more profitable. In some cases, industry leaders have decided to reinvest cost savings back into their products to make sure that they deliver bigger and better games to stay ahead of the competition. With that in mind, the biggest challenge for today's industry leaders could be making sure that they find ways to differentiate their products as A.I. tools make it easier for new firms to compete. Where does all of that leave us? Although a number of A.I. tools are already being used in the game industry today, adoption is just beginning to tick up and there's a lot of room for the tools to improve. With that in mind, we think we're just on the cusp of this A.I. driven revolution, and we may have to get through a few more castles to find the princess. Thanks for listening. If you enjoyed the show, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

24 Nov 20233min

Original Release on November, 2nd 2023: Generative AI could transform the nature of work and boost productivity, but companies and governments will need to invest in reskilling.----- Transcript -----Stephen Byrd: Welcome to Thoughts in the Market. I'm Stephen Byrd, Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Sustainability Research. Seth Carpenter: And I'm Seth Carpenter, the Global Chief Economist. Stephen Byrd: And on the special episode of the podcast, we'll discuss how generative A.I. could reshape the US economy and the labor market. It's Thursday, November 2nd at 10 a.m. in New York. Stephen Byrd: If we think back to the early 90's, few could have predicted just how revolutionary the Internet would become. Creating entirely new professions and industries with a wide ranging impact on labor and global economies. And yet with generative A.I. here we are again on the cusp of a revolution. So, Seth, as our global chief economist, you've been assessing the overarching macro implications of the Gen A.I. phenomenon. And while it's still early days, I know you've been thinking about the range of impacts Gen A.I could have on the global economy. I wondered if you could walk us through the broad parameters of your thinking around macro impacts and maybe starting with the productivity and the labor market side of things? Seth Carpenter: Absolutely, Stephen. And I agree with you, the possibilities here are immense. The hardest part of all of this is trying to gauge just how big the effects might be, when they might happen and how soon anyone is going to be able to pick up on the true changes and things. But let's talk a little bit about those two components, productivity and the labor market. They are very closely connected to each other. So one of the key things about generative A.I is it could make lots of types of processes, lots of types of jobs, things that are very knowledge base intensive. You could do the same amount of work with fewer people or, and I think this is an important thing to keep in mind, you could do lots more work with the same number of people. And I think that distinction is really critical, lots of people and I'm sure you've heard this before, lots of people have a fear that generative A.I is going to come in and destroy lots of jobs and so we'll just have lots of people who are out of work. And I guess I'm at the margin a lot more optimistic than that. I really do think what we're going to end up seeing is more output with the same amount of workers, and indeed, as you alluded to before, more types of jobs than we've seen before. That doesn't exactly answer your question so let's jump into those broad parameters. If productivity goes up, what that means is we should see faster growth in the economy than we're used to seeing and I think that means things like GDP should be growing faster and that should have implications for equities. In addition, because more can get done with the same inputs, we should see some of the inflationary pressures that we're seeing now dissipate even more quickly. And what does that mean? Well, that means that at least in the short run, the central bank, the Fed in the U.S., can allow the economy to run a little bit hotter than you would have thought otherwise, because the inflationary pressures aren't there after all. Those are the two for me, the key things one, faster growth in the economy with the same amount of inputs and some lower inflationary pressures, which makes the central bank's job a little bit easier. Stephen Byrd: And Seth, as you think about specific sectors and regions of the global economy that might be most impacted by the adoption of Gen A.I., does anything stand out to you? Seth Carpenter: I mean, I really do think if we're focusing just on generative A.I, it really comes down, I think a lot to what can generative A.I do better. It's a lot of these large language models, a lot of that sort of knowledge based side of things. So the services sector of the economy seems more ripe for turnover than, say, the plain old fashion manufacturing sector. Now, I don't want to push that too far because there are clearly going to be lots of ways that people in all sectors will learn how to apply these technology. But I think the first place we see adoption is in some of the knowledge based sectors. So some of the prime candidates people like to point to are things like the legal profession where review of documents can be done much more quickly and efficiently with Gen A.I. In our industry, Stephen in the financial services industry, I have spoken with clients who are working to find ways to consume lots more information on lots of different types of firms so that as they're assessing equity market investments, they have better information, faster information and can invest in a broader set of firms than they had before. I really look to the knowledge based sectors of the economy as the first target. You know, so that Stephen is mostly how I'm thinking about it, but one of the things I love about these conversations with you is that I get to start asking questions and so here it is right back at you. I said that I thought generative A.I is not going to leave large swaths of the population unemployed, but I've heard you say that generative A.I is really going to set the stage for an unprecedented demand in reskilling workers. What kind of private sector support from corporations and what sort of public sector support from governments do you expect to see? Stephen Byrd: Yeah Seth, I mean, that point about reskilling, I think, is one of the most important elements of the work that we've been doing together. This could be the biggest reskilling initiative that we'll ever see, given how broad generative A.I really is and how many different professions generative A.I could impact. Now, when we think about the job impacts, we do see potential benefits from private public partnerships. They would be really focused on reskilling and upskilling workers and respond to the changes to the very nature of work that's going to be driven by Gen A.I. And an example of some real promising efforts in that regard was the White House industry joint efforts in this regard to think about ways to reskill the workforce. That said, there really are multiple unknowns with respect to the pace and the depth of the employment impacts from A.I. So it's very challenging to really scope out the magnitude and cadence a nd that makes joint planning for reskilling and upskilling highly challenging. Seth Carpenter: I hear what you're saying, Stephen, and it is always hard looking into the future to try to suss out what's going on but when we think about the future of work, you talked about the possibility that Gen A.I could change the nature of work. Speculate here a little bit for me. What do you think? What could be those changes in terms of the actual nature of work? Stephen Byrd: Yeah, you know, that's what's really fascinating about Gen A.I and also potentially in terms of the nature of work and the need to be flexible. You know, I think job gains and losses will heavily depend on whether skills can be really transferred, whether new skills can be picked up. For those with skills that are easy to transfer to other tasks in occupations, you know, disruptions could be short lived. To this point the tech sector recently experienced heavy layoffs, but employees were quickly absorbed by the rest of the economy because of overall tight labor market, something you've written a lot about Seth. And in fact, the number of tech layoffs was around 170,000 in the first quarter of 2023. That's a 17 fold increase over the previous year. While most of these folks did find a new job within three months of being laid off, so we do see this potential for movements, reskilling, etc., to be significant. But it certainly depends a lot on the skill set and how transferable that skill set really is. Seth Carpenter: How do you start to hire people at the beginning of this sort of revolution? And so when you think about those changes in the labor market, do you think there are going to be changes in the way people hire folks? Once Gen A.I becomes more widespread. Do you think workers end up getting hired based on the skill set that they can demonstrate on some sort of credentials? Are we going to see somehow in either diplomas or other sorts of certificates, things that are labeled A.I? Stephen Byrd: You know, I think there is going to be a big shift away from credentials and more heavily towards skills, specific skill sets. Especially skills that involve creativity and also skills involving just complex human interactions, human negotiations as well. And it's going to be critical to prioritize skills over credentials going forward as, especially as we think about reskilling and retraining a number of workers, that's going to be such a broad effort. I think the future work will require hiring managers to prioritize these skills, especially these soft skills that I think are going to be more difficult for A.I models to replace. We highlight a number of skills that really will be more challenging to automate versus those that are less challenging. And I think that essentially is a guidepost to think about where reskilling should really be focused. Seth Carpenter: Well, Stephen, I have to say I'd be able to talk with you about these sorts of things all day long, but I think we've run out of time. So let me just say, thank you for taking some time to talk to me today. Stephen Byrd: It was great speaking with you, Seth.Seth Carpenter: And thanks to the listeners for listening. If you enjoyed Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

22 Nov 20238min