Podcast appearances and mentions of Alan Greenspan

Peter Schiff analyzes gold's surge, critiques Jamie Dimon's admission on gold's rationality, and discusses the impending dollar crisis.This episode is sponsored by Policygenius. Head to https://policygenius.com/gold to compare free life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you could save.In this episode of The Peter Schiff Show, host Peter Schiff delves into the pressing realities of today's economic landscape, highlighting Jamie Dimon's recent admission regarding gold's significance in investment portfolios. Schiff discusses the meteoric rise of gold and silver, drawing parallels to historical economic shifts reminiscent of the 1970s. He provides critical insights into the dollar's declining status, the implications of global economic changes, and the stark contrast between gold and Bitcoin. As the market dynamics evolve, Schiff emphasizes the urgent need for investors to reconsider their positions, particularly as the risks associated with Bitcoin become increasingly apparent. Tune in for a comprehensive analysis that challenges mainstream narratives and reinforces Schiff's steadfast belief in the enduring value of gold.Chapters:00:00 Introduction and Opening Remarks00:55 Gold's Meteoric Rise and Media Attention01:56 Silver's Performance and Investment Advice03:55 Historical Context: 1970s vs. 2020s05:37 The Dollar Standard and Global Economic Shifts07:21 Jamie Dimon's Admission and Rationality of Gold09:56 Gold's Future and Wall Street's Realization20:31 Current Market Update and Urgent Investment Advice22:33 Comparing Gold and Bitcoin23:46 Fed Policies and Historical Perspectives25:05 China's Trade and Economic Position30:53 Bitcoin's Decline and Market Manipulation37:01 Closing Remarks and Upcoming Events34:27 Alan Greenspan's Perspective on Gold35:27 The Case for Investing in Gold Stocks38:53 China's Trade Dynamics and the US Relationship43:52 Bitcoin's Decline and the Rise of Gold01:00:01 Conclusion and Upcoming EventsFollow @peterschiffX: https://twitter.com/peterschiffInstagram: https://instagram.com/peterschiffTikTok: https://tiktok.com/@peterschiffofficialFacebook: https://facebook.com/peterschiffSign up for Peter's most valuable insights at https://schiffsovereign.comSchiff Gold News: https://www.schiffgold.com/newsFree Reports & Market Updates: https://www.europac.comBook Store: https://schiffradio.com/books#goldinvestment #bitcoincrash #marketupdateOur Sponsors:* Check out Aeropress and use my code GOLD for a great deal: https://aeropress.com* Check out Boll & Branch: https://boilandbranch.com/SCHIFF* Check out Boll & Branch: https://boilandbranch.com/SCHIFF* Check out Justin Wine and use my code SCHIFF20 for a great deal: https://www.justinwine.comPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Featuring Melinda Cooper on Counterrevolution: Extravagance and Austerity in Public Finance. Balanced budget conservatism and supply side populism engineered a politics of austerity and budget deficits. Deep cuts to the social wage like welfare reform disciplined labor so severely that Fed chair Alan Greenspan opened the floodgates of easy money confident it would juice the price of assets alone. Assets like homes, the value of which spiraled ever upward until the global financial crisis. The crash made the politics of revolutionary conservatism that dominate us today with MAGA. But the crisis also revealed powerful monetary tools that we could wield to make socialism—if only we organize the power necessary to seize them. The second in a two-part series. Call in to leave a question for The Dig's mailbag episode: speakpipe.com/ListenerMailbag Support The Dig at Patreon.com/TheDig Get your first month free at OVID.tv using promo code DIG25 Visit dropsitenews.com/DIG20 for 20% off an annual Drop Site subscription The Dig goes deep into politics everywhere, from labor struggles and political economy to imperialism and immigration. Hosted by Daniel Denvir.

En diciembre de 1996, el entonces muy admirado presidente de la Reserva Federal, Alan Greenspan, calificó como una “exuberancia irracional” la subida que estaban teniendo en aquel momento las Bolsas americanas, queriendo así lanzar una señal a los inversores y al mundo económico en general de la posible sobrevaloración de los activos. Cuando Greenspan pronunció esa frase en 1996, el S&P 500 estaba en el entorno de los 750 puntos, y el aviso de Greenspan no impidió que al empezar el año 2000, el S&P hubiese doblado su nivel, alcanzando los 1.500 puntos, bien es verdad que habiendo pasado antes por el “crash” del 19 de octubre de 1987, cuando en pocas horas el Dow Jones cayó a plomo perdiendo nada más y nada menos que un 25%, es decir, un cuarto de su valor. Artículo completo de Juan Carlos Ureta, presidente de Renta 4 Banco, en r4.com ➡️ https://www.r4.com/articulos-y-analisis/opinion-de-expertos/powell-vive-su-momento-greenspan

Markets pulled back Tuesday as Jerome Powell had his “Alan Greenspan moment,” warning that stocks are “richly valued.” While the dip worked off some overbought conditions, futures point higher this morning and the positive trend remains intact. Lance Roberts interprets what Powell's comments mean for investors, the widening gap between stock prices and moving averages, and why compressed volatility could set the stage for a sharper sell-off if something breaks. Stay tuned as we discuss: Why Powell's remarks echo Greenspan's famous caution. The risks of stretched valuations and market gaps. Key technical levels investors should be watching. Why volatility creeping higher may matter more than it seems.

History doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme. In 1996, Alan Greenspan cut rates with unemployment climbing and inflation cooling… and it kicked off the Nasdaq's biggest run in history. From 600 to 4,000 before the dot com bubble burst, wiping out $5 trillion.Today, Jerome Powell is in the exact same position. Rate cuts, deregulation, and a flood of capital into AI, energy, Bitcoin, and crypto. The question is, are we about to see the same mania phase play out all over again?In this episode, Dante Cook breaks down:- Why $1M Bitcoin by 2030 isn't as crazy as it sounds- What the dot com bubble teaches us about today's AI + Bitcoin mania- Why Powell's next move could ignite a parabolic bull run in both Bitcoin and equities- The historical parallels between 1996 and now—and why asset owners win bigSPONSORS✅ Lednhttps://learn.ledn.io/simplySimply Bitcoin clients get 0.25% off their first loanNeed liquidity without selling your Bitcoin? Ledn has been the trusted Bitcoin-backed lending platform for 6+ years. Access your BTC's value while HODLing.

Every year the Kansas City Fed hosts the Jackson Hole symposium. All eyes are on the opening speech from Jerome Powell which was widely covered by the news media. To me, the more interesting talks are the invited speakers who give talks on various elements of the economy. The theme this year at Jackson Hole is demographics and the impact on the labor market. So this week we will be doing a mini series summarizing the most noteworthy talks from Jackson Hole this year. The paper we are examining is by Emi Nakamura from Berkeley University. In this paper the author is examing the Taylor Rule named after John Taylor who came up with the observation after six years at the Fed, specifically examining the Alan Greenspan years. Emi Nakamura shows convincingly that the Taylor Rule rarely if ever applies in the real world, except for those six years. -------------**Real Estate Espresso Podcast:** Spotify: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://open.spotify.com/show/3GvtwRmTq4r3es8cbw8jW0?si=c75ea506a6694ef1)   iTunes: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-real-estate-espresso-podcast/id1340482613)   Website: [www.victorjm.com](http://www.victorjm.com)   LinkedIn: [Victor Menasce](http://www.linkedin.com/in/vmenasce)   YouTube: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](http://www.youtube.com/@victorjmenasce6734)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/realestateespresso](http://www.facebook.com/realestateespresso)   Email: [podcast@victorjm.com](mailto:podcast@victorjm.com)  **Y Street Capital:** Website: [www.ystreetcapital.com](http://www.ystreetcapital.com)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital](https://www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital)   Instagram: [@ystreetcapital](http://www.instagram.com/ystreetcapital)  

BUY GOLD HERE: https://firstnationalbullion.com/schedule-consult/ Avoid CBDCs and work with Mark Gonzales! Get Your SUPER-SUPPLIMENTS HERE: https://vni.life/wam Use Code WAM15 & Save 15%! Life changing formulas you can't find anywhere else! HELP SUPPORT US AS WE DOCUMENT HISTORY HERE: https://gogetfunding.com/help-keep-wam-alive/# Josh Sigurdson talks with Mark Gonzales about the decisions being made to bring in a new chair at the Federal Reserve following the Jacksonhole conference in Wyoming. The Federal Reserve which has printed the United States into oblivion with inflation has been headed up by people like Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Janey Yellen and currently Jerome Powell. What's the difference among them? Absolutely nothing, except Paul Volker headed the central bank for a short period of deflation. Now, Powell is set to be replaced and there are 11 candidates for Fed Chair. 2 of them are the most likely candidates. The names are Kevin Hassett and Kevin Warsh. A small amount of research will tell you that both of these candidates are the typical establishment economists promoting the same old Keynesian Economics of the past with intention to expand into a global cashless currency system. Hassett worked on John McCain 2000 and 2008 campaigns as an economic adviser. He was also an economic adviser to George W Bush and Mitt Romney, or as some people call him "Obama 2.0." Hassett has also been an adviser to President Trump during both terms and was heavily involved in closing businesses in 2020 and pushing for the printing of 25% of currency ever printed in the United States including $3 trillion in 2020 that lead to the massive inflation we see today. Kevin Warsh worked as a fed governor as well as worked for the Group of 20 and the Group of 30, both of which heavily promote a global digital currency system. He has worked under Bush and Obama. He worked on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group. Like we have said, in with the new boss, same as the old boss... Regardless of who is in power as a so-called "president," the economic policies remain technically speaking the same. The same old script will continue to play out as one side or the other sits on their hands for 4 to 8 years as people devolve further into poverty and through weakening of the spirit and demoralization, the people are more easy to control. The coming technocratic system is being put in place as we speak and people are still playing the game of politics, doing nothing to prepare. Perhaps it's time people take this more seriously, throw away the "hopium" and seek real world solutions for themselves. Stay tuned for more from WAM! GET NON-MRNA FREEZE DRIED MEAT HERE: https://wambeef.com/ Use code WAMBEEF to save 20%! GET HEIRLOOM SEEDS & NON GMO SURVIVAL FOOD HERE: https://heavensharvest.com/ USE Code WAM to save 5% plus free shipping! Get local, healthy, pasture raised meat delivered to your door here: https://wildpastures.com/promos/save-20-for-life/bonus15?oid=6&affid=321 USE THE LINK & get 20% off for life and $15 off your first box! DITCH YOUR DOCTOR! https://www.livelongerformula.com/wam Get a natural health practitioner and work with Christian Yordanov! Mention WAM and get a FREE masterclass! You will ALSO get a FREE metabolic function assessment! GET YOUR APRICOT SEEDS at the life-saving Richardson Nutritional Center HERE: https://rncstore.com/r?id=bg8qc1 Use code JOSH to save money! SIGN UP FOR HOMESTEADING COURSES NOW: https://freedomfarmers.com/link/17150/ Get Prepared & Start The Move Towards Real Independence With Curtis Stone's Courses! GET YOUR WAV WATCH HERE: https://buy.wavwatch.com/WAM Use Code WAM to save $100 and purchase amazing healing frequency technology! GET ORGANIC CHAGA MUSHROOMS HERE: https://alaskachaga.com/wam Use code WAM to save money! See shop for a wide range of products! GET AMAZING MEAT STICKS HERE: https://4db671-1e.myshopify.com/discount/WAM?rfsn=8425577.918561&utm_source=refersion&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_campaign=8425577.918561 USE CODE WAM TO SAVE MONEY! GET YOUR FREEDOM KELLY KETTLE KIT HERE: https://patriotprepared.com/shop/freedom-kettle/ Use Code WAM and enjoy many solutions for the outdoors in the face of the impending reset! PayPal: ancientwonderstelevision@gmail.com FIND OUR CoinTree page here: https://cointr.ee/joshsigurdson PURCHASE MERECHANDISE HERE: https://world-alternative-media.creator-spring.com/ JOIN US on SubscribeStar here: https://www.subscribestar.com/world-alternative-media For subscriber only content! Pledge here! Just a dollar a month can help us alive! https://www.patreon.com/user?u=2652072&ty=h&u=2652072 BITCOIN ADDRESS: 18d1WEnYYhBRgZVbeyLr6UfiJhrQygcgNU World Alternative Media 2025

Bottom Fishing for bargains. Consolidation, Digestion - awaiting the next catalyst. Saudi SWF takes a hit. The Jackson Hole confab is around the corner. PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter Warm-Up - Labubus - Beanie Babies ? - US Debt - wretched - Good fishing this weekend - Chip Trackers Markets - Bottom Fishing - Consolidation, Digestion - waiting for the next catalyst -  Saudi SWF takes a hit - Validations - to the MOON - Casual Dining take a hit Weekend Fishing - Marlin, Roosterfish and Yellowfin Tuna - 2 bucket list items The CONFAB - August 21 to August 23 - Theme: Labor Markets in Transition: Demographics, Productivity, and Macroeconomic Policy - Powell to speak Friday at 10am - Historically: ---- 1989: Alan Greenspan became the first Fed Chair to formally participate in the program, establishing a tradition of Fed leadership using the event to signal policy direction (Volker stopped by in 1982) --- 2010: Ben Bernanke used the symposium to signal QE2 --- 2014: Mario Draghi, ECB President, hinted at aggressive stimulus to combat Europe's sluggish growth, influencing currency markets --- 2020: Jerome Powell announced the Fed's new “average inflation targeting” framework, allowing inflation to run above 2% temporarily to support employment growth More Jackson Hole - Many are saying this is the be the defining moment in Powell's Career - Certainly the last one attending that he will be chair - Odds are that he will look to continue the Fed independence and data dependency talk US Debt - The federal government's gross national debt topped $37 trillion for the first time in history last week, and the U.S. has room to add trillions of dollars more to the debt following the enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). - OBBBA included a $5 trillion debt limit increase to avert a potential stand-off over the borrowing limit ($41 trillion limit) - US Debt to GDP = 100% - Every American owes $111,045 (Assuming spread evenly) - 25 years ago it was $19,000 er person LabooooBooo - Labubus, the quirky monster plush dolls made by Pop Mart, have exploded into a global phenomenon, doubling as collectibles and fashion accessories for adults. - In the first half of 2025, Labubu-related products generated a staggering $418 million in global sales for Pop Mart, with nearly 40% of revenue last year coming from outside mainland China. The company says sales in the first six months of this year are on track to more than triple, fueled by what's become a full-blown international craze. - The thrill of the hunt. Labubus are only available through online purchases and in-store pickups, if you can find one in stock. Adding to the scarcity factor is the blind-box packaging – you never know which character you'll get. - Some collectors chase elusive "secret" editions, with odds as low as 1 in 72. Investing - A better Way? - Powerball jackpot grows to estimated $643 million after no one won Monday night's drawing - Next drawing - Wednesday night - The jackpot is a new high for 2025 - he highest Powerball jackpot ever was $2.04 billion, won on November 7, 2022 by a single ticket sold in California. - The winner, Edwin Castro, opted for the lump sum payout of $997.6 million Energy Needed - Google and Kairos Power will deploy an advanced nuclear reactor to help power the tech company's data centers on the Tennessee Valley Authority grid. - The Hermes 2 reactor developed by Kairos will dispatch 50 megawatts of electricity, enough to power about 36,000 homes. - TVA will purchase the electricity from the reactor, making it the first utility in the U.S.

This can set off cycles of exuberant recursive mentalizing, as investors desperately search for focal points, each one buying an investment not because of its inherent productive value but because they hope to unload it at a profit on future investors, greater fools.这会引发一种亢奋的递归心理博弈循环——投资者拼命寻找“焦点”，他们买入一种投资并不是因为它本身具有生产价值，而是希望将它高价转手卖给未来的投资者，也就是所谓的“更大的傻瓜”。This can set everyone off in search of conspicuous focal points such as Super Bowl ads. Everyone knows that everyone watches the Super Bowl. In 2022, cryptocurrency exchanges ran high-concept ads in which they tried to gin up a common expectation of rising prices not by touting any of the advantages of cryptocurrency but by warning, "Don't be like Larry. Don't miss out."这会让所有人去寻找显眼的焦点，比如“超级碗”的广告。人人都知道人人会看超级碗。2022年，加密货币交易所投放了创意十足的广告，他们试图制造一种价格上涨的共同预期，不是通过宣传加密货币的优势，而是通过警告人们——“别像拉里那样错过机会。”Now, of course, it's only so long that an asset can levitate in midair, suspended by nothing but common expectation. Bubbles pop when the market runs out of greater fools who don't want to miss out on the next best thing or when the doubt itself becomes common knowledge.当然，一项资产只靠共同预期“悬在空中”的时间有限。当市场上再也没有愿意接盘、不想错过下一个机会的“更大的傻瓜”，或者当怀疑本身变成了公共知识时，泡沫就会破裂。This can send investors running for the exits, each desperate to sell a security out of fear that everyone else is desperate to sell it. The result can be a bank run or hyperinflation or a Great Depression.这会导致投资者争相出逃——每个人都急着卖掉手中的证券，因为害怕其他人也急着卖。结果可能就是银行挤兑、恶性通货膨胀，甚至是大萧条。When Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself," it was not a feel-good bromide, but a theorem of common knowledge.当富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福说“我们唯一需要害怕的就是恐惧本身”时，这并不是一句鼓舞人心的鸡汤，而是“公共知识”定理的体现。With investors constantly on the lookout for focal points, financial leaders have to be wordsmiths, mystics and occasionally, comedians. Alan Greenspan once said, "Since I've become a central banker, I've learned to mumble with great incoherence."在投资者不断寻找“焦点”的环境下，金融领袖必须既是语言大师，又是神秘主义者，有时甚至是喜剧演员。艾伦·格林斯潘曾说：“自从我成了央行行长，我就学会了用极度含糊的方式咕哝说话。”"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said."“如果我看起来说得过于清楚，那你一定是误解了我的意思。”After Jimmy Carter told his inflation czar, Alfred Kahn, never to use the self-fulfilling word "depression," he said, "OK, but we're in danger of having the biggest banana in 45 years."当吉米·卡特告诉他的通胀主管阿尔弗雷德·卡恩，绝不能使用那个会自我应验的词——“经济萧条”——时，卡恩说：“好吧，但我们正面临45年来最大的香蕉危机。”My own interest in common knowledge comes from its role in social relationships. A relationship is a coordination game. Two people are friends or lovers or allies, or dominant and subordinate or transaction partners because each one knows the other one knows that they are.我个人对“公共知识”的兴趣，源于它在社会关系中的作用。一段关系本质上是一场协调游戏。两个人之所以是朋友、恋人、盟友，或者是上下级、交易伙伴，是因为他们彼此知道对方知道他们的关系。And this common knowledge can be cemented by a number of common knowledge generating signals. Like eye contact, where you're looking at the part of the person that's looking at the part of you that's looking at that part of them. Or blushing, where you feel the heat of the cheeks, reddening of your cheeks from the inside, knowing that other people can see it from the outside.这种“公共知识”可以通过多种能生成公共知识的信号来巩固。例如，眼神接触——你在看对方看着你的那个部位；又或者是脸红——你从内部感受到脸颊发热变红，同时知道别人从外部能看到这一点。

This Day in Legal History: Nineteenth Amendment RatifiedOn August 18, 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, guaranteeing women the right to vote and marking a major legal milestone in the struggle for gender equality. The amendment states simply: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged… on account of sex.” Its passage capped off more than 70 years of organized activism, dating back to the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848. Suffragists like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth, and Alice Paul played pivotal roles in maintaining momentum across generations, despite fierce opposition.The road to ratification was grueling. Congress passed the amendment in 1919, but it still required approval from three-fourths of the states—36 at the time. Tennessee became the critical 36th state, narrowly approving the amendment in a dramatic vote where a 24-year-old legislator, Harry T. Burn, changed his vote after receiving a letter from his mother urging him to support suffrage. That moment tipped the scales and enshrined the right to vote for women nationwide.Before the amendment, several western states had already extended suffrage to women, but many others actively suppressed it. The legal recognition of women's voting rights through constitutional amendment removed any ambiguity and forced all states to comply. The Nineteenth Amendment not only transformed the electorate but also reshaped American democracy by recognizing women as full political participants.The Trump administration is accusing a federal judge in Boston of undermining the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court by continuing to block the administration from firing staff in the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun had issued an injunction requiring the reinstatement of employees let go in a mass layoff, despite the Supreme Court having recently paused a broader version of that order. The Justice Department has asked the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene, arguing that Joun's refusal to lift the narrower injunction contradicts the Supreme Court's ruling and undermines the rule of law.The judge's decision stems from a lawsuit challenging Secretary of Education Linda McMahon's plan to lay off over 1,300 department employees, part of President Trump's broader goal of eliminating the department—something only Congress can authorize. The plaintiffs, including students and advocacy groups, focused specifically on the Office for Civil Rights, which was set to lose half its staff. They argue that lifting the injunction now would effectively reward the administration's ongoing failure to comply with the court's order, as the terminated employees have not yet been reinstated.Judge Joun, appointed by President Biden, criticized the Supreme Court's ruling as "unreasoned" and pointed to the administration's continued noncompliance. The 1st Circuit has asked the plaintiffs to respond promptly to the Justice Department's request, signaling an expedited review.Trump administration claims judge defied Supreme Court to bar Education Department firings | ReutersFederal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is preparing for what may be his final speech at the annual Jackson Hole conference, facing a complicated economic picture that challenges his data-driven policy approach. In past years, Powell used the conference to pledge aggressive action against inflation and, later, to support the labor market. Now, with inflation still above target and signs of economic slowdown emerging, Powell must decide whether to prioritize price stability or job preservation.The Trump administration and many investors expect interest rate cuts at the Fed's September meeting, but Powell's messaging—how he frames future actions—may matter more than the decision itself. Internally, Fed officials are split: some want to move quickly to protect jobs, while others want to wait for clearer evidence that inflation won't rebound. Powell has previously styled himself after past Fed chairs like Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan, with Volcker's inflation-fighting resolve and Greenspan's forward-looking leniency both offering competing models.Recent economic data has sent mixed signals. Revised job growth numbers were lower than initially reported, supporting arguments for easing monetary policy, but inflation has edged up again. Trump's tariff policies add further uncertainty, though their economic impact has so far been less severe than feared. With the economy growing slowly and inflation still above the Fed's 2% target, Powell must decide whether to stay the course, cut rates cautiously, or begin a broader shift.Powell has used Jackson Hole to battle inflation and buoy jobs; he's now caught between both | ReutersNovo Nordisk's shares rose by up to 5% after receiving accelerated U.S. approval for its weight-loss drug Wegovy to treat MASH (metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis), a progressive liver disease that affects about 5% of U.S. adults. This marks the first GLP-1 drug approved for MASH and offers a significant, if temporary, advantage over competitor Eli Lilly, which is still in clinical trials for its own MASH-targeting drug, tirzepatide.The news was a welcome reversal for Novo, which recently lost over $70 billion in market value following a profit warning and leadership change. The company, once Europe's most valuable publicly traded firm due to Wegovy's success, has seen its share price drop sharply over the past year amid intensifying competition in the obesity drug market and the rise of compounded copycat drugs.Although Novo now holds a short-term lead in the liver disease market, analysts expect that exclusivity will be brief once Eli Lilly gains approval. Novo has also submitted applications in Europe and Japan, signaling its intention to secure broader global use for Wegovy beyond weight loss.Shares in Novo Nordisk rise after Wegovy gets US nod for liver disease treatment | ReutersNorton Rose's ambitious tech partnership with NMBL Technologies has ended in failure and mutual lawsuits, highlighting how difficult it is for Big Law firms to pivot from selling legal services to selling tech products. The firm's Chicago office, launched in 2022 as an “innovation hub,” aimed to introduce 150 clients to Proxy, a legal workflow tool developed by a new partner, Daniel Farris. But three years later, not a single sale was made. NMBL claims Norton Rose didn't uphold its end of the deal and stifled the rollout, while the firm says clients weren't interested and is seeking damages for the investment.The fallout underscores broader challenges law firms face as they increasingly invest in artificial intelligence and legal tech amid growing demand and rising budgets. Unlike traditional legal work, selling products requires different infrastructure and skills—such as dedicated sales teams—that most law firms lack. Despite producing marketing materials and training resources, NMBL alleges that very few Norton Rose lawyers engaged with the product and that the firm failed to meaningfully promote it.NMBL is seeking $15 million in damages, accusing the firm of using the deal merely to recruit talent, while Norton Rose wants $250,000, calling the product commercially nonviable. The firm also allegedly created a shell subsidiary, LX, to meet contract terms but never properly funded or activated it. This case illustrates the steep learning curve law firms face in transitioning to tech-based business models and the internal resistance that can derail innovation.Firm's Failed Tech Venture Foretells Big Law's AI Sales Struggle This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Has the Fed lost its way? Hoover Visiting Fellow Kevin Warsh thinks it has and offers solutions on how to fix it. Kevin Warsh is the Shepard Family Distinguished Visiting Fellow in Economics at the Hoover Institution, a partner at Duquesne Family Office LLC, the investment firm of Stanley Druckenmiller, a former governor at the Federal Reserve, and on the short list of candidates to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.  In this conversation, Warsh offers a candid, in-depth critique of the US central bank's recent performance. Drawing on his firsthand experience during the 2008 financial crisis and his continuing work as a macro investor and Hoover Institution fellow, Warsh argues that the Fed has strayed from its core mandate of price stability. He discusses the dangers of inflation, the legacy of quantitative easing, and the institution's growing entanglement with fiscal policy. Along the way, Warsh revisits the insights of Milton Friedman, Paul Volcker, and Alan Greenspan, warns against institutional complacency, and outlines a vision of reform—not revolution—for the Fed. Despite the turbulence, Warsh remains bullish on America's economic future, driven by innovation, productivity, and the enduring dynamism of its people. Recorded on May 28, 2025.

Tom Bodrovics introduces Chris Whalen, author of Inflated: Money, Debt, and the American Dream, which has been re-released in a second edition with significant updates. The conversation focuses on the current state of markets, the impact of President Trump's tariff policies, and the challenges posed by the federal debt and inflation. Chris explains that he removed 20,000 words from his original book to make space for a new chapter analyzing the Federal Reserve's management of the money supply under Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen, and Jerome Powell. He highlights how the U.S. housing market has become heavily government-supported, leading to increased volatility and rising costs for consumers. Discussing inflation, Chris notes that it is driven by the inability of governments to generate sufficient income to meet their people's needs, as seen in countries like Argentina. He argues that borrowing from future income through debt creates distortions, particularly in housing markets, where prices have surged due to low interest rates and government intervention. He also critiques the dysfunctionality of Congress, which he believes is unable to pass budgets or manage spending effectively. Chris emphasizes the importance of gold as a hedge against inflation and expresses skepticism about stablecoins and cryptocurrencies, calling them speculative vehicles rather than reliable alternatives to fiat currency. He suggests that the U.S. dollar's dominance in global markets contributes to inflationary pressures, as other countries benefit from using dollars without bearing the associated costs. The discussion concludes with Chris offering an optimistic outlook, noting that while challenges remain, opportunities exist for investors to navigate inflation through real estate and gold. He encourages listeners to manage investments with a long-term perspective, considering the erosive effects of even low levels of inflation over time. Time Stamp References:0:00 - Introduction1:02 - His Revised Book3:08 - Tariffs & Debt Distortions7:12 - Reserve Currency & Inflation11:03 - Debt Markets & Fed/Banks17:32 - National Debt & Spending21:18 - DOGE Cuts & Old Systems30:17 - Trump's Strategy?34:04 - Gold During Nixon Era39:08 - Book & US Administrations44:13 - MMT Era & Cryptocurrency?50:21 - Silver Supply & 1800s52:06 - Stablecoin Backing55:02 - Concluding Thoughts56:33 - Wrap Up Guest Links:Website: https://www.rcwhalen.com/X: https://x.com/rcwhalenBooks (Amazon): https://tinyurl.com/mv3wctcrLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rcwhalen/ Richard Christopher Whalen is an investment banker and author based in New York. He serves as Chairman of Whalen Global Advisors LLC, focusing on banking, mortgage finance, and fintech sectors. Christopher is a contributing editor at National Mortgage News and a general securities principal and member of FINRA. From 2014 to 2017, he was the Senior Managing Director and Head of Research at Kroll Bond Rating Agency, leading the Financial Institutions and Corporate Ratings Groups. Previously, he was a principal at Institutional Risk Analytics from 2003 to 2013. Over three decades, Chris has worked as an author, financial professional, and journalist in Washington, New York, and London. After graduating, he served under Rep. Jack Kemp (R-NY) at the House Republican Conference Committee. In 1993, he was the first journalist to report on secret FOMC minutes concealed by Alan Greenspan. His career included roles at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Bear Stearns & Co., Prudential Securities, Tangent Capital, and Carrington Mortgage Holdings. Christopher holds a B.A. in History from Villanova University. He is the author of three books: "Ford Men: From Inspiration to Enterprise" (2017), published by Laissez Faire Books; "Inflated: How Money and Debt Built the American Dream" (2010) by John Wiley & Sons; and co-author of "Financial Stability: Fraud, Confidence & the Wealth of Nations,

Economic fallacies are like ghost stories for the financially literate: they persist, despite evidence to the contrary. What fallacies might be influencing your real estate and financial decisions?Join me for this episode of Real Estate Lowdown Coffee with Bill as we unravel some of the most entrenched misconceptions shaping our economic landscape.From the aftermath of what President Trump termed "Liberation Day" and the ripple effects of new tariffs to revisiting Alan Greenspan's pre-2008 housing crisis remarks, we'll explore how influential figures can fall into the trap of faulty reasoning. We'll also scrutinize the zero-sum fallacy that perpetuates the notion that one party's gain has to be another's loss, questioning the assumptions that guide our economic thinking and urging a fresh perspective on growth and transactions.Beyond financial fallacies, we of course examine the real estate market's most stubborn misconceptions. Are we really facing a housing shortage, or is that just a narrative spun by those with something to gain? With data in hand, we uncover how increased housing units are outstripping population growth, pointing to a potential oversupply rather than scarcity - underscoring the fallacies maintained by stakeholders whose livelihoods depend on these narratives.Amidst the allure of low interest rates and an era of "free money," we'll dismantle the narrative of cap rates that seemed lower than they should have been.Tune in for a revealing discussion that cuts through the noise to challenge conventional wisdom.First Lien Capital is your investment and resolutions partner delivering security and strong returns while making real impact, and your Special Assets Group for hire delivering customized solutions to your distressed real estate debt scenarios.Schedule a consultation with Bill to ELEVATE (https://billbymel.com/investor/) or REVIVE (https://billbymel.com/advisor/) your portfolio today.To learn more, visit:https://billbymel.com/Listen to more episodes on Mission Matters:https://missionmatters.com/author/bill-bymel/

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. Episode two of the second series covers the life and crisis-era times of Ben Bernanke, the man who filled Alan Greenspan's big shoes and ran the Fed from 2006 to 2014. A shy but world-renowned monetary economist and historian of the Great Depression, Bernanke was left holding the proverbial bomb when the financial system came close to collapse in 2008. To discuss Bernanke, Tim is joined by David Wessel, author of In FED We Trust: Ben Bernanke's War on the Great Panic (Crown, 2010). “It wasn't obvious when he was appointed to the Fed in 2006 that having somebody who had spent their life studying the Great Depression would be well equipped to be Alan Greenspan's successor,” says Wessel. “I have sometimes said it was a like being a paleontologist. It's very nice that you know a lot about dinosaurs, but what use is that to us today until one day a Stegosaurus appears on the horizon. And it was remarkable good fortune for the country and the world that there was a guy who happened to have studied all the mistakes that the Fed made in the 1920s and the 1930s in a position to do something about it when a situation, not all that dissimilar, appears both to his surprise and to almost everybody else's”. Wessel is two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who now runs the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. For 30 years, he worked at the Wall Street Journal - reporting mostly from Washington and covering economics and the Fed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

More than any other single institution, the US Federal Reserve drives global capital markets with its decisions and communications. While its interest rates are set by a committee, for almost a century, the Fed's philosophy and operational approach have been moulded by one person: the Chair of the Board of Governors. In the first series of The Chair, Tim Gwynn Jones talked to authors of books about the Fed's foundational Chairs – Marriner Eccles, Bill Martin, Arthur Burns, and Paul Volcker. In this second series, he covers the people who chaired the Fed through the post-1990 period of financialisation, globalisation, and – perhaps today – deglobalisation. The first episode of the second series explores Alan Greenspan, the chairman who followed Paul Volcker and ran the Fed from 1987 until 2006. Once bestowed with “Maestro” status, Greenspan – who turns 100 in March 2026 – has seen his reputation deflate in the wake of the post-2008 financial crisis. To discuss the fallen Maestro, Tim is joined by Sebastian Mallaby, author of The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan (Bloomsbury, 2016). “Greenspan was the man who knew,” says Mallaby. “He was the man who knew that bubbles were extremely destructive, and yet he was not the man who acted against those bubbles. So, whilst he was great on inflation and on stabilising the price of eggs, he was not good on asset-price inflation or stabilising the price of nest eggs”. A former journalist at The Economist and the Washington Post, Mallaby is the prize-winning author of The World's Banker – a portrait of the World Bank under James Wolfensohn – and More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite. He is now the Paul A. Volcker senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

La bourse est comme un funambule. Tant qu'elle avance, tout va bien. Mais dès qu'elle vacille, il lui faut un filet de sécurité. Alan Greenspan, l'ancien patron de la banque centrale américaine, avait compris ça mieux que personne dans les années 90-2000. Dès que les marchés boursiers déprimaient il baissait les taux d'intérêt pour relancer la machine. Résultat, les investisseurs savaient qu'en cas de chute boursière, la banque centrale américaine serait là pour les rattraper. On a appelé ça le Greenspan Put. Aujourd'hui, Donald Trump reprend cette recette, mais avec son propre style. Lui ne contrôle pas les taux d'intérêt mais il a trouvé une autre manière de rassurer la Bourse à travers sa politique économique et ses coups de com. Mais au fond, c'est quoi un puts? En bourse, un puts, c'est un contrat qui permet de vendre un actif, une action par exemple, à un prix fixé d'avance, même si sa valeur plonge. En gros, c'est  une assurance contre les crashs boursiers. Avec Trump, les investisseurs savent qu'ils ont un protecteur qui souffle autant le chaud que le froid. Jusqu'ici, tout va bien, la bourse monte, les marchés sont confiants. Mais il y a un détail qui intrigue, c'est l'or. L'or, la valeur refuge, grimpe aussi en flèche en ce moment. Pour quelle raison? Parce que certains sentent que ce petit jeu a ses limites. Entre tensions commerciales, dettes records et incertitudes géopolitiques, la bulle pourrait éclater. En fait, le Trump put marche tant que les marchés boursiers veulent y croire. Mais si un jour Wall Street doute, alors il n'y aura peut être plus personne pour amortir la chute. --- La chronique économique d'Amid Faljaoui, tous les jours à 8h30 et à 17h30. Merci pour votre écoute Pour écouter Classic 21 à tout moment i: https://www.rtbf.be/radio/liveradio/classic21 ou sur l'app Radioplayer Belgique Retrouvez tous les épisodes de La chronique économique sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/802 Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Découvrez nos autres podcasts : Le journal du Rock : https://audmns.com/VCRYfsPComic Street (BD) https://audmns.com/oIcpwibLa chronique économique : https://audmns.com/NXWNCrAHey Teacher : https://audmns.com/CIeSInQHistoires sombres du rock : https://audmns.com/ebcGgvkCollection 21 : https://audmns.com/AUdgDqHMystères et Rock'n Roll : https://audmns.com/pCrZihuLa mauvaise oreille de Freddy Tougaux : https://audmns.com/PlXQOEJRock&Sciences : https://audmns.com/lQLdKWRCook as You Are: https://audmns.com/MrmqALPNobody Knows : https://audmns.com/pnuJUlDPlein Ecran : https://audmns.com/gEmXiKzRadio Caroline : https://audmns.com/WccemSkAinsi que nos séries :Rock Icons : https://audmns.com/pcmKXZHRock'n Roll Heroes: https://audmns.com/bXtHJucFever (Erotique) : https://audmns.com/MEWEOLpEt découvrez nos animateurs dans cette série Close to You : https://audmns.com/QfFankx

The US stock market is in "the mother of all bubbles", with the market capitalization of publicly traded companies at 206% of GDP. This is higher than the dot-com bubble of 2000, and even the peak of the crash of 1929. Meanwhile, just 25 companies make up over half of the weight of the S&P 500, and the Magnificent 7 Big Tech monopolies are 35% of the market cap of the index. However, the US economy was built upon this financial house of cards, and politicians are profiting from it. Ben Norton explains the dangers. VIDEO with charts here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rguHublkxCQ Topics 0:00 American exceptionalism 0:53 US stock market is over 60% of world 1:16 USA is 74% of MSCI World Index 2:10 Top 25 companies in world 3:29 Exorbitant privilege of US dollar 4:59 S&P 500 and Nasdaq indices 6:07 Magnificent 7 6:50 Just 25 companies make up 50.3% of S&P 500 8:26 Tesla is insanely overvalued 12:03 Big US companies are really financial firms 13:11 How to measure a bubble 14:15 Buffett Indicator (market cap to GDP) 15:57 Public & private equities to GDP 17:00 How the US government inflated the bubble 21:10 Richest 10% of Americans own 93% of stocks 22:23 Warren Buffett's warnings 23:56 Berkshire Hathaway dumps stocks 26:32 Jeff Bezos sells Amazon shares 27:22 Mark Zuckerberg sells Meta stocks 27:40 Elon Musk sold Tesla shares 28:08 The "greatest bubble in human history" 30:27 Alan Greenspan and "irrational exuberance" 31:16 Fears of "pent-up exuberance" 32:19 P/E ratios 33:41 Irrational investing 34:54 Donald Trump's tax cuts help the rich 37:54 Trump and Ronald Reagan 39:04 Trickle-down economics 41:16 Wall Street fills Trump's cabinet 42:02 Financialization of US economy 43:44 Will Trump reverse de-industrialization? 45:38 Real estate & homelessness 46:38 US dollar 47:34 Wall Street vs Main Street 49:06 Outro

When testifying to the Senate Banking Committee back in 1987, the newly-appointed Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, provided some insight into his views on communication: “Since becoming a central banker”, he said, “I have learned to mumble with great incoherence. If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said.” His successors have generally tried to be more open with regard to both their opinions and their intentions. However, there are times, when the Fed will want to communicate to financial markets without piquing the interest of either the general public or the administration.

Judy Shelton: "Why Don't We Use Our Gold As Collateral For A New Treasury Debt Instrument" Former Trump economic advisor Judy Shelton has talked a lot about bringing gold back into the monetary system in the US. And while she has not yet been officially brought back aboard Trump's team, it sure is fascinating to imagine what could happen if she is. Because in a recent interview with David Morgan of The Morgan Report, in addition to sharing some fascinating monetary history, including how even Fed officials like Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan agree that 2% inflation is far from the definition of stable, she also proposes the idea of using the nation's gold as collateral for a new treasury debt instrument. Which is fascinating to hear, especially at the same time when the eastern half of the world continues to express a desire to turn to gold in place of treasuries. So whether you're a monetary advocate, historian, or someone who just wants to navigate the changes to our monetary system that are coming, you're really going to enjoy this interview. And to hear David Morgan talk with Judy Shelton, just click to watch the video now! - To get a copy of Judy's new book: https://www.amazon.com/Good-Gold-Unleash-Power-Sound/dp/1598133896/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.GilhQVjnPROPl6focmPkwdiu42Gnk08bS4zXzi14jI2uYTO4yE4rXnsnHKKKiOgtpodlzFs9Vxat6ryKHl_dScQffL3yaBoiXVcqRqcEV8381nl0KCDYBv7ZXIPXt9dQ.G_wRy6cDB9R0bI5oK_y_ZHTvsZT_qDJTZPJDSAA9QNY&dib_tag=se&hvadid=713541207529&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9012034&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=11505215478072804659&hvtargid=kwd-2320378241923&hydadcr=22565_13730680&keywords=judy+shelton+good+as+gold&qid=1732378002&sr=8-1 - To get access to David's research at “The Morgan Report” go to: https://www.themorganreport.com/membersportal/aff/go/ArcadiaEconomics - To get your very own 'Silver Chopper Ben' statue go to: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/chopper-ben-landing-page/ - Join our free email list to be notified when a new video comes out: click here: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/email-signup/ - Follow Arcadia Economics on twitter at: https://x.com/ArcadiaEconomic - To get your paperback or audio copy of The Big Silver Short go to: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/thebigsilvershort/ - Listen to Arcadia Economics on your favorite Podcast platforms: Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/75OH2PpgUpriBA5mYf5kyY Apple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/arcadia-economics/id1505398976 - #silver #silverprice And remember to get outside and have some fun every once in a while!:) (URL0VD)Subscribe to Arcadia Economics on Soundwise

Long before there was Alan Greenspan to turn the Federal Reserve into Casino Central, there was John Law, France's minister of finance.Original article: The Birth of “Irrational Exuberance”

Long before there was Alan Greenspan to turn the Federal Reserve into Casino Central, there was John Law, France's minister of finance.Original article: The Birth of “Irrational Exuberance”

President of the Mises Institute and author of “How Capitalism Saved America”, Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo joins us to uncover the current state of capitalism and if it still exists in America. Earlier in the episode, Keith discusses the inaccuracy of economic predictions, citing examples like the 2023 recession that never happened, the negative impact of misinformed predictions on investment decisions and business growth.  Persistent housing price crash predictions have been consistently wrong despite global pandemics and higher mortgage rates. Dr. DiLorenzo advocates for #EndTheFed to reduce inflation and restore free market principles. Learn how voluntary exchange between buyer and seller through market prices communicates information and influences production. Resources: Learn more about Austrian economics and Ludwig von Mises through visiting mises.org  Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/521 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREmarketplace.com/Coach Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai     Keith Weinhold  00:00 Keith, welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, reviewing some terrible economic predictions and why it matters to you. Then the President of the Mises Institute joins us. Does capitalism still exist in the US and what would happen if we ended the Fed, today on get rich education.   00:24 Since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors, who delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show. Guess who? Top Selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast, or visit getricheducation.com   Corey Coates  01:09 You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  01:25 welcome to GRE from Syracuse, Sicily to Syracuse, New York, and across 188 nations worldwide, you're listening to one of the longest running and most listened to shows on real estate investing. This is Get Rich Education. I'm your host, Keith Weinhold, now a lot of media companies and pundits and influencers like to make predictions. Listeners like learning about predictions and by engaging just a little of that each of the past few years on one of the last episodes of the year. Here, I forecast the national home price appreciation rate for the following year, many media outlets, pundits and influencers have made terrible, just absolutely terrible, predictions about interest rates and other financial forecasts. Last year, a majority of Pro prognosticators firmly forecast six or eight Fed rate cuts this year, for example, well, we're going to have far fewer, and that's because high inflation kept hanging around. Then there's the 2023 recession that never happened, yet both Bloomberg and the economist actually published some rather ignominious headlines, as it turned out, they published these in the fall of 2022 Bloomberg, big headline was forecast for us, recession within year hits 100% in blow to Biden, well, That was false. That didn't come true. I mean, 100% that doesn't leave you any room for an out. And then also published in the fall of 2022 The Economist ran this headline why a global recession is inevitable in 2023 All right, well, they both believed in a recession, and they believed in it so deeply that it got fossilized. Well, an economic archeologist like me dug it up.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  03:31 We are going to die   Keith Weinhold  03:35 well, but I didn't risk my life like Indiana Jones did there. This archeology, it only involves some Google searches. Well, here's the thing. What's remarkable about America staving off a mammoth recession and leaving all the other g7 nations in the economic dust is the fact that merely predicting a recession often makes it come true. Just predicting one often turns a recession into a self fulfilling prophecy. Yeah, recession forecast headlines alone, they can spook employers from making new hires and slow down manufacturing, and it can also disillusion real estate investors from expanding their portfolios. Well, the US economy grew anyway, besides the farcical prognostications about myriad interest rate cuts in a quote, unquote definite 2023 recession that never happened. You know, there's also a third forecast that so many got wrong. And you probably know what I'm gonna say. I've brought it up before, because this hits our world, those erstwhile and well still ever present housing price crash predictions. I mean this facet of the gloom boom really ramped up from 2020 One until today, even a global pandemic, new wars and a triplicate mortgage rates couldn't stop the housing price surge and the rent surge. A lot of doomsdayers just couldn't see, or they didn't even want to see that a housing shortage would keep prices afloat. They didn't want to see it because they get more clicks when they talk about the gloom government stimulus programs also buoyed prices, and deep homeowner equity cushions will still keep prices afloat. Ever since 2021 here on the show, I've used that rationale and more to explain that home prices would keep appreciating, but that the rate of appreciation would slow down, and it has slowed down since 2021 see YouTubers tick tockers. They notoriously use woe begone housing crash headlines, because that gets more clicks and then some of the rationale behind this. The reasoning is just dreadful, like, what goes up must come down, all right? Well, this is like, why does it matter? Who cares about wrong predictions anyway? What's the point? Well, people become misinformed. People waste their time on these things and see no one loses money on dismal economic predictions. But the damage is done, because when investors don't act well, then they didn't get the gain that they should have had. Businesses didn't get the gain that they should have had when they could have made new investment and hired new employees sooner. And of course, a recession is going to happen sometime. They occur, on average, every five to six years. It is just a normal part of the business cycle will collectively these three faulty economic predictions, rate cuts, a recession and a housing price crash. I think if you bundle them all up combined, it could be as bad as one doomsday prediction about worldwide starvation or the Mayan apocalypse. Remember that the wide to K bug, the acid rain, even that the internet is just a fad that ran a buck 30 years ago. World War Three is eminent, robots overtaking humans, or how about running out of crude oil. I mean, we're definitely all supposed to have jet packs in flying cars by now, right? But yet, did anyone have the clairvoyance to predict the stock market crash of 1929 or September 11 terrorist attacks, or Trump's surprise, 2016 presidency or Bitcoin hitting 70k A while back, or the coronavirus. So really, overall, the bottom line here with predictions is that no one knows the future. Control what you can maintain equanimity, add good properties, gradually raise rent, reduce expenses, create leverage and expect inflation truly the best way to predict the future is to create it in just that way. Well is the USA capitalistic nation today. That's what we'll discuss later with this week's guest. When Chuck Todd hosted the show Meet the Press, he interviewed AOC about this. Yes, I'm talking about us. House Rep from New York, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, what she say? You   08:34 have said you are democratic socialist. Can you be a Democratic socialist and a capitalist? Well, I think it depends on your interpretation. So there are some Democratic socialists that would say, Absolutely not. There are other people that are democratic socialists that would say, I think it's possible. What are you? I think it's possible. I think you say to yourself, I'm a capitalist, but I don't say that. You know, if anything, I would say, I'm I believe in a democratic economy, but.   Keith Weinhold  09:03 okay, well, I'm not sure if that clears it up at all. And I've listened to more of that clip, and it just makes things more confusing. But I think that most people have trouble drawing a line between capitalism and neighboring economic systems. Where exactly do you draw that line? I don't know exactly where to draw it. When I think of capitalism, I think of things though, like removal of interventionist central planning and allowing the free market to run with few guardrails. And then there's an issue like labor unionization. I don't really know about something like that. This is a real estate show. I'm still forming an opinion on a topic like that. In you know, some of this gets political, and that's beyond the scope of get rich education. The Fed was created in 1913 that central planning, its central banking from 1987 to. 2006 Alan Greenspan reigned as Fed chair. Those were his years, and he became even more interventionist. And then his successor, Ben Bernanke, maybe even more so with quantitative easing and such. Let's talk about, should they end the Fed and capitalism with this week's expert guest. You very well may have heard of the late, famed Austrian American economist Ludwig von Mises today, the Mises Institute carries on his legacy, and this week's guest is none other than the President of the Mises Institute. He's also the number one best selling author of how capitalism saved America and his newer book with a title that I love, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Economics. Hey, it's great to have you here. It is. Dr Thomas DiLorenzo.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  11:00 pleased to be with you. Thanks for having me.Th   Keith Weinhold  11:02 Well, Dr DiLorenzo, for those that don't know, just tell us a bit in an overview about Austrian economics and what Ludwig von Mises stood for.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  11:02 Well, Ludwig von Mises was the preeminent critic of socialism and fascism in Europe, and in his day, he fled the Nazis literally hours before the Gestapo broke into his apartment in Geneva, because he was the preeminent critic of fascism and socialism, and he was also Jewish, and so he had to get out of town. And he miraculously ended up after wandering through Europe with his wife in New York City, and he taught at New York University for many years, until he died in 1973 and but the Austrian School of Economics is a school of thought. It has nothing to do with, necessarily, with the Government of Austria, the country of Austria, just this the founder of a man named Carl Menger happened to be from Austria, but probably the most famous or well known among Americans would be Friedrich Hayek, who won the Nobel Prize in 1970s he was a student of Ludwig von Mises and critics of interventionism, critics of socialism. We teach about free markets, of how markets actually work and how governments don't work. And that's in a nutshell, that's what it's about. And you could check out our website, mises.org, M, I, S, E, S.org, you can get a great economic education. We have a lot of free books to download. Some of them are downloaded 30 or 40,000 times a month. Still, it's even Mises old books like human action, first published in the 1960s and so you can get a great education just by reading our website.   Keith Weinhold  12:42 Well, congratulations, that's proof that you're doing an excellent job of carrying on the Mises legacy into the present day, a lot of which is championing capitalism. Do we have capitalism in the United States today?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  12:59 I was an economics professor from 40 years before I got this job as President of the Mises Institute. And I used to say we had islands of socialism in a sea of capitalism at the beginning of my career. But now I'd say it's the opposite, that we have islands of capitalism in a sea of socialism. And socialism, this data is not defined anymore as government ownership. That was, you know, about 100 years ago, the socialism. It's basically government control of industry and in addition to government ownership. So the instruments of the welfare state, the income tax and the regulatory state, is our version of socialism, or central planning, if you will. And it's the Federal Reserve the Fed, which is a government agency that orchestrates the whole thing, really, it's a big, massive central planning industry that controls, regulates basically every aspect of any kind of financial transaction imaginable. They list in their publications over 100 different functions of the Federal Reserve. It's not just monetary policy. It's a big regulatory behemoth, and so that's that's what the Fed is. That's what I think we have today. A friend of mine, Robert Higgs, a well known economic historian, says our system is what he calls participatory fascism. And fascism was a system where private enterprise was permitted, but it was so heavily regulated and regimented by the government that industry had to do what government wanted to do, not what its customers wanted it to do, so much, and a large part of our economic system is just like that, and we get to vote still, so that's where the participatory and comes in, and the pin of Robert Hinz.   Keith Weinhold  14:41 yeah, maybe at best, I can think of today's system as capitalism with guardrails on but the guardrails keep getting taller. And I think of guardrails as being, for example, regulatory agencies like the Fed in FINRA. In the FDA.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  15:01 It is the beginning of my career. You know, I studied economics and a PhD in economics, and there was a big literature on what's called regulatory capture. And it was sort of a big secret among US economic academics. There was all this research going on and how the big regulatory agencies created by the federal government in the late 19th, early 20th centuries, were captured by the industries that they were supposed to be regulating. Right? The theory was they would regulate these industries in the public's best interests. But what has happened from the very beginning is they were captured by the industries, and they benefit the industry at the expense of the public. But today, that's caught on thanks to people like Robert Kennedy Jr, frankly, has been a very popular author. He sold a gazillion copies of his book on Anthony Fauci, and in it, he explains in tremendous detail how the Food and Drug Administration was long ago captured by the pharmaceutical companies. And he's not the only one. I think that that is being more and more recognized by people outside of academic economics, like me, and that's a good thing, and that's sort of the worst example of crony capitalism. It's not real capitalism, but crony capitalism making money through government connections, rather than producing better products, cheaper products and so forth.   Keith Weinhold  16:21 I watched RFK Jr speak in person recently, and I was actually disappointed when he effectively dropped out of the upcoming presidential race. And I do want to talk more with you about the Fed shortly, but with all these regulatory agencies and how I liken them to guard rails. You know, I sort of think of it as a watchdog system that's failing. You mentioned the FDA. I know RFK Jr brought them up an awful lot, the Food and Drug Administration that are supposed to help regulate what we put inside our own bodies in our diet. But these systems are failing. We have regulatory agencies in industry, industry in regulatory agencies. I mean, look at the obesity rate. Look at all the ultra processed food that's allowed. Look at all the seed oils that are allowed in food that people actually think are healthy for them. So this system of capitalism with guardrails is failing almost everywhere you look.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  16:22 I wouldn't call it capitalism. I wouldn't use the word capitalism at all, other than crony capitalism, people can relate to that. You know, a lot of these regulatory agencies were lobbied for in the first place by industry. That while the very first one was the Interstate Commerce Commission, it was in the 1880s it was meant to regulate the railroad companies. The first president was the president of a Railroad Corporation, the head of the Interstate Commerce Commission. So talk about the fox guarding the hen house. That was from the very beginning. And so in a sense, this word capture theory of regulation, which Kennedy has used, they weren't really captured. They always were created by the government. The same is true of all the so called Public Utilities. It was the corporations, the electric power companies, the water supply companies, that lobbied for governments to give them a monopoly, a legal monopoly, in electricity, water supply and all these things that were called natural monopolies, but there was nothing natural about them. There was vigorous competition in the early 20th century in telephone, electricity, water supply, and that was all set aside by government regulation, creating monopolies. For example, in electric power, there's an economist named Walter primo who wrote a book some years ago showing that always have been several dozen cities in America that never went this way, that always allowed direct competition between electric power companies. And what do you know, better service and lower prices. As a result, they did dozens of statistical studies to demonstrate this in his book.   Keith Weinhold  18:58 Okay, well, that's a great case study. Why don't we talk about what things would look like if we took down one of these agencies? We're a real estate investing in finance show. Sometimes it's a popular meme or hashtag to say, end the Fed. What would it look like if we ended the Fed?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  19:18 Well, the Fed was created in 1913 in the same era, with all these other regulatory captured agencies were created, right? And it was created basically to cartelize and create a cartel for the banking industry to make it almost impossible to go bankrupt. They've been bailing out foolish bankers for 111 years. And of course, the biggest example was that as the crash of 08 after they they handed Goldman Sachs and other big investment banks billions of dollars. That was a direct assault on capitalism itself, because capitalism, as you know, is a profit and loss system. It's not a I keep the profits. You pay for my losses system. You're the taxpayer. But that's what happened with that. So the Fed would. Fall into that the Fed is actually the fourth central bank in America. We had three other ones. First one was called Bank of North America. Its currency was so unreliable, nobody trusted it went out of business in a year and a half. And then we created something called the Bank of the United States in 1791 same thing. It created boom and bust cycles, high unemployment, price inflation, corrupted politics. It was defunded after 20 years, and then it was brought back to fund the debt from the war of 1812 and so we had a Second Bank of the United States. It did the same thing, boom and bust cycles, price inflation, corrupted politics. Benefited special interest, but not the general interest, and President Andrew Jackson defunded it, and so we went without a central bank from roughly 1840 until 1913 so we've had experience of that. And what we had been was competing currencies, and that would be sort of a stepping stone. If we got rid of the fed, we wouldn't have to abolish the Fed altogether. We could amend the charter to the Fed to say you're no longer permitted to buy bonds. Can't buy government bonds anymore. That's how they inflate the money supply, right? By buying bonds. That's totally unnecessary. And we could just just that would be a great step forward, and we would sort of whittle away our $80 trillion debt, if you count again upon count the unfunded liabilities of the federal government,   Keith Weinhold  21:26 if we did end the Fed, what would the price of money? Which are interest rates really look like? Would a new market rate be sent by individuals and companies on the free market like Bank of America, with a customer or borrower settling on an interest rate that they both agree to.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  21:44 You know, the Fed uses sort of Soviet style economics, price control. The economists and are all getting all over Kamala Harris for recommendations for price controls on rent and other things. Well, the Fed price control. They control the price of money. That's what they do. And so there's a big, kind of a comical thing that here you have all these economists, if they were to teach economics in the week one, they would teach about the bad effects of price controls, and then they get a job at the Fed, and they spend their whole career enforcing price controls on money, and the interest rate would be determined by supply and demand for credit and inflationary expectations. That's what the market does. And you wouldn't have these bureaucrats at the Fed tinkering around with interest rates, creating tremendous arbitrage opportunities for Wall Street investors. With all the movements and interest rates, you'd have much more stable interest rates, and and you wouldn't have this ridiculous system where the Fed says we need to always have forever at least 2% inflation. And of course, they never meet that, and they lie about it. I don't believe for one minute that the price inflation right now is 3% or under 3% that's ridiculous, right? And so things should be getting cheaper. Everything should be getting cheaper because of all the technology we have. My first PC I bought in the early 80s for $4,000 and it was a piece of prehistoric junk compared to my cell phone today, that almost for free. Almost everything should be like that agriculture, but the reason it isn't is the Fed keeps pumping so much money in circulation, that it pumps up the demand for goods and services, and that's what creates price inflation. And by its own admission, that's what it does, even though it's charter, it's original charter said they're supposed to fight inflation. All of a sudden, about 10 years ago or so, they announced, south of blue, we always have to have at least 2% inflation. Congress had nothing to do with that. President had nothing to do with that, and the people of America had nothing to do with that. It was dictators like Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke that just make these announcements. And where does that come from when we live under the dictatorship of the Fed? And of course, the people who are hurt the most by the Fed are elderly people are living on relatively fixed incomes and are forced to become Wall Street speculators they want to make any more money other than their fixed income, where, you know, during the days of Greenspan, when they're pursuing zero interest rates, maybe the mortgage industry like that, but the people on retirement income were starving as a result of that. So it's been sort of an economic war on the retired population.   Keith Weinhold  24:24 Things should get faster and cheaper to produce, like you said. However, there's definitely one thing that's not getting faster to produce, that's housing build times. Housing build times have actually gone up, which is sort of another discussion unto itself. But we talk about the Fed and then setting prices. People wouldn't stand for setting the price or having price controls on oil or lumber or bananas, but yet we set the price of money itself. People have just become accustomed to that. Yet it's that money itself that we use to buy oil and lumber and bananas the fed with that dual mandate of stable prices and maximum employment. If we did abolish the Fed, what would happen to the rate of inflation?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  25:12 Well, we would have less inflation. It's supposed to what we replace it with. There's some system would be a replacement, but we wouldn't have the boom and bust cycles that we have now. There's been research in the past 100 years or so of the Fed, and what the academic researchers have concluded is that the Fed has made the economy in general more unstable than it was before we had the Fed and price inflation. That's a joke. The dollar is worth maybe three cents of what it was in the year 1913 right when the Fed was created. So it has failed on all accounts. And so if we got rid of it, we would reverse that. The idea would be to start out with a competing money system. And I'll tell you a quick story is, you know the word Dixie from the south, you know land of Dixie that was named after a currency by a New Orleans bank called the Dix D, I x 10 in French, and it was 100% gold reserve. It was backed by something real and valuable, and it was so popular as even used in Minnesota. But that's why the whole south, the states in the South, were using this currency, because it was so reliable. But during the Civil War, the national currency acts imposed taxes on the competing currencies and taxed them out of business and established the greenback dollar, as it was called, as the Monopoly money of the country. We didn't get a central bank during the Civil War, but we got that. And so that's the kind of system that we would have. Friedrich Hayek wrote a whole book about this, about competing currencies, called the denationalization of money. He poses that as a good stepping stone to a freer market in money. And like you said, Money is the most important thing. Is most more important than bananas or shoes or any of these other things that we might have price controls on.   Keith Weinhold  27:01 All right, so we're talking about the case for ending the Fed. What is the counter argument? I mean, other than the government wanting control, is there a valid, or any academic counter argument for keeping the Fed in place?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  27:16 The Fed has an army. I call it the Fed's Praetorian Guard of academics. There was a research article published by an economist named Larry White at George Mason University several years ago, and he found that 75% of all the articles in the academic journals regarding money, monetary policy and so forth, are by people who are basically paid by the Fed, one way or the other. Either they're fed economists, or they've been invited to a conference by the Fed, or they're an intern some relationship with the Fed. The late Milton Friedman once said, If you want a career as a monetary economist, it's not a good idea to criticize the biggest employer in your field. So there's a lot of nonsense about that. And so yes, you'll have all sorts of rationales, but it basically comes down to this, that we think we can do central planning better than the Russians did under communism, because the Fed is basically an economic central planning agency, and there's no reason to believe Americans are better at it than the Russians or anybody else. And it basically comes down to that, you know, studying the past 111 years that's showing Well, yeah, they've been trying that for 111 years. They've made the economy more unstable, and they have failed miserably to control inflation. And why should we give them another chance? Why should we continue along this road? We shouldn't So, yeah, there'll be all kind of excuses the late Murray Rothbard, who was one of the founders of the Mises, who once answered this question by saying, It's as though people said, Well, say the government always made shoes. 100 years ago they took over the shoe industry. People would be saying, who will make shoes if the government doesn't make shoes? The government has always made shoes, right? But the government has not always monopolized the money supply. It's only like I said, we abolished three Feds in our history. In American history, they weren't called the Fed, but they were central banks. And the Fed is called a central bank, and we've done that three times. We've abolished more central banks than we have kept in American history.   Keith Weinhold  29:17  We're talking with Dr Thomas D Lorenzo. He is the president of the Mises Institute. About, is there really any capitalism left more when we come back, this is Get Rich Education. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold,  hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine, at Ridge lending group and MLS 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation, because they specialize in income properties, they help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President Caeli Ridge personally. Start now while it's on your mind at RidgeLendingGroup.com, that's Ridgelendinggroup.com. Your bank is getting rich off of you. The national average bank account pays less than 1% on your savings. If your money isn't making 4% you're losing your hard earned cash to inflation. Let the liquidity fund help you put your money to work with minimum risk, your cash generates up to an 8% return with compound interest year in and year out. Instead of earning less than 1% sitting in your bank account, the minimum investment is just 25k you keep getting paid until you decide you want your money back. Their decade plus track record proves they've always paid their investors 100% in full and on time. And I would know, because I'm an investor too. Earn 8% hundreds of others are text family to 66866, learn more about freedom. Family investments, liquidity fund on your journey to financial freedom through passive income. Text, family to 66866.   Kristen Tate  31:11 This is author Kristen Tate. Listen to Get Rich Education with Keith Weinhold, and Don't quit Your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  31:27 welcome back to get rich education. We're talking with Dr Thomas DiLorenzo. He is the president of the Mises Institute. You can learn more about them @mises.org and Dr DiLorenzo. Frederick Hayek, an economist that you mentioned very well known and a student of Ludwig von Mises, he believed that prices are a communication mechanism between a buyer and a seller. Say, for example, there's a new style of single family rental home that everyone wants to rent. So therefore the rent price goes up when other builders see that the rent price goes up, that brings in more builder competition, and with more competition, that brings rent prices down, and then the world is filled with abundant housing, rather than a scarcity of housing. So that's how I think of a free market system within capitalism as working, as defined through Hayek.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  32:22 You know, the consumer is king. Von Mises once wrote about the same point where he said that people mistakenly believe that it's the bankers and the CEOs and the businesses that control what gets produced and so forth, but it's really the consumer. You build a housing development then people don't want those houses. You'll find out real fast who's in charge. It's not the mortgage brokers. It's not the bankers. It's not you, it's the consumer. That's the free market system, and if you do without it, and not using the free market system, whether it's for money or anything else, is kind of like trying to find your way around a strange city with no street signs, and the prices are the street signs that tell us what to do, exactly like you said, if there's strong demand for a certain type of housing, that'll drive the price up, and that'll tell the home builders, we can make money building more of these. And they will do that. Nobody tells them. The Chairman of the Fed doesn't have to tell them that the President doesn't have to tell them that Congress doesn't have to issue a declaration telling them to do that. That was the Soviet Union where they tried that. And that's the great thing about the market, is that the consumer can tell the richest man in the world like Elon Musk, go play in the traffic. Elon Musk, if they don't like his cars or whatever he's producing, even though he's the richest man in the world. And he understands that he's a pretty successful businessman, I would say, and so so he understands that the consumer is his boss.   Keith Weinhold  33:53 Well, what else do we need to know? You have published a lot of celebrated books, from how capitalism saved America to the politically incorrect guide to economics. What else might a real estate investor or an economic enthusiast need to know today? Oh,   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  34:10 well, I think everybody needs to be their own economist. You can listen to the talking heads on TV and on podcasts and all that, but educate yourself and become your own economist. Because a lot of the people on TV, as you might see on the news, they have an ax to grind, or they have a sort of a hidden financial interest beyond what they're saying, Be your own economist. And that's why I'm selling my website, which is everything on it, it's for free, mises.org, and there are quite a few others too. You don't have to go to school, you don't have to get a degree. You can get a good economic education, for example, on money. We're in the middle of giving away 100,000 copies of a book called What has government done to our money. I'm Murray rothbar. You go to our website, scroll down to the bottom, and you can fill out a form online, and we'll send you free books and. You can educate yourself that way. And so just in general, I think that's what people need to do. I taught MBA students for many years who are people in their 30s or maybe even early 40s, who didn't have economics degrees, but they were really into it, and for the first time in their careers, they decided maybe I should understand how the economic world that I live in and work in every day operates rather than going through your life and your career without you. Might know all about real estate sales, but it's also useful to know about the economy in general and how things work.   Keith Weinhold  35:35 And when one becomes their own economic student and they take that on, I think it's important for them, like you touched on to not just consume the economic news that's on CNBC or other major media, because that doesn't really tell you how to create wealth. It might inform you, but it doesn't necessarily tell you how to take action. For example, on this show an educational channel, you might learn about a story about rising inflation like we had starting three or four years ago. And here we talk about how, okay, if inflation is going to be a long term economic force, you may or may not like what the Fed is doing, but rather than save money, borrow money, outsource that debt service to the tenant on a cash flowing asset like a single family home or an apartment building. And that inflation that you're learning about on CNBC will actually benefit you and debase your debt with prudent leverage on a property, for example, so not just consuming the news, but learning and educating yourself and acting.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  36:34 Oh, sure, well It just so happens that last night, I was talking to a friend of mine who's a real estate professional. They're all talking about, Oh, are we going to have a slight drop in interest rates? And I reminded them that there will be a part of the market if they see it, if we do have a slight drop in interest rates, we'll look at that and say, well, maybe this is a new trend. And so I'll sit back and I'll wait. I'm not going to buy now, because I think the interest rates are going to go down even further in the next six months there were, there would be some segment of the market that thinks that way. And so that's just one little thing. Another thing I would mention is that one of the basic tenets of free market economics is that voluntary trade is mutually beneficial. People buy and sell from each other, because both sides benefit. And that's very important for any business person to keep in mind as you structure business deals, because you know about business deal that is successful is basically, I will give you what you want, and you give me what I want, and we're both happy. And that's that's one of the main tenets of how the market works. Voluntary exchange is mutually beneficial. So think about how to make it mutually beneficial, and you'll succeed in making a deal.   Keith Weinhold  37:45 Well, it's been an excellent discussion on Is there any capitalism left, and how would it look like if we turned the course and created more capitalism here in the United States? It's been great having you on the show.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  37:58 Thank you.   Keith Weinhold  38:05 Yeah , again, Learn more @mises.org or look up books by Dr Thomas DiLorenzo. His viewpoint is that there are now merely islands of capitalism in a sea of socialism where those conditions were inverted last century. We've got to end the complex between the government and corporations that these watchdogs are basically powerless when the fox is guarding the henhouse. Dr dilorezzo says we could change the Fed charter so that they couldn't buy bonds, which should reduce inflation. So he does offer a way forward there, a solution.  In capitalism, he consumer is king. This is a good thing. You yourself are empowered because you get to vote with your dollars. So therefore what you buy more of society will see and make more of but a prosperous, progressive economy that should be able to produce goods and services that are constantly cheaper because they get more and more efficient to make with innovation, but centrally planned inflation makes them more expensive, at least in dollar denominated terms. So progress should make things cheaper? Well, then everything should take fewer dollars to buy, homes, oil, bananas, grapes, but it doesn't, and it won't anytime soon, like I mentioned in the interview, there single family build times are taking even longer. That's not more efficient, and they're sure not getting cheaper. In fact, the National Association of Home Builders tells us that from permit to completion in 2015 it took 7.2 months to build a single family home. By 2019 it was up to 8.1 months and then. Last year, the time required to build a single family home from permit to completion was 10.1 months. That's not the side of an efficient economy. So basically, therefore, in the last eight, nine years, the time to build a home has gone from 7.2 months up to 10.1 months. That is a drastic increase in a short period of time. Just amazing. And we now have data after covid as well, broken down by region. The longest build time, by the way, is in New England, where it is 13.9 months to build a home from permit to completion. Gosh, such inefficiency. But despite all that stuff that you might find discouraging like that, I want to go out on a good news note here some encouraging sentiment for you, if you champion free markets, then invest in us rental property down the road, there is no centrally controlled ceiling on what you can sell your property for. Most places don't have rent control. In fact, there's been no federal rent control on private property since World War Two. And somewhat ironically, you benefit. You actually benefit from government backed loans at these low fixed rates, and now they're moderate fixed rates. You often get these through Fannie Freddie or the FHA. See you benefit from that particular government backing as a savvy borrower for rental property. And on top of this, you use the GRE inflation triple crown to flip over that not so capitalistic inflationary force. You flip it upside down and use it to your benefit, profiting fantastically from inflation. So you know how to take the situation you're given and use it to your advantage rather than your detriment. Big thanks to Dr Thomas DiLorenzo today, longtime econ professor and current Mises Institute president, more ways to build Real Estate Wealth coming up here for you on the show in future weeks, as always, with the dash of economics and wealth mindset. Until then, I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, Don't Quit Your Daydream.   42:28 Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC, exclusively,   Keith Weinhold  42:56 The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, getricheducation.com.  

In this week's episode of Retire in Texas, Darryl Lyons, CEO and Co-Founder of PAX Financial Group, dives into the often misunderstood yet vital topic of the Federal Reserve and its profound influence on the economy and your investments. Darryl breaks down the complex functions of the Federal Reserve, from setting monetary policy to banking supervision, and explains how decisions made by the Fed impact everything from inflation to employment. Through personal anecdotes, historical examples, and even a few dad jokes, Darryl demystifies the Fed's role in the market and answers key questions such as whether the Fed is truly independent from the presidency, and how its decisions affect your investment journey. Whether you're a seasoned investor or someone just beginning to explore the financial world, this episode provides a clear and engaging roadmap to better understand the central bank's crucial influence. Key show highlights include: An introduction to the Federal Reserve and its key functions in the U.S. financial system. The Fed's dual mandate: controlling inflation and maximizing employment. How the Fed's interest rate decisions impact everyday investors and the broader economy. Historical moments in the Fed's history, from the Panic of 1907 to the 2008 financial crisis. Insights into past and present Fed Chairs, including Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, and Jerome Powell. Practical takeaways on how understanding the Fed can help you make smarter, long-term investment decisions. Tune in to learn how the Federal Reserve shapes your financial future and gain a better understanding of its influence on both the stock market and the economy. For more resources, visit www.paxfinancialgroup.com. If you enjoyed today's episode, don't forget to share it with a friend! Disclaimer: Clicking the Like button does not constitute a testimonial for, recommendation or endorsement of our advisory firm, any associated person, or our services. Clicking the Like button is merely a mechanism to circulate our social media page. “Like” is not meant in the traditional sense. In addition, postings must refrain from recommending us or providing testimonials for our firm.

Ci sono tutti i grandi marchi della nautica, e anche volti nuovi, a presentare gli ultimi modelli dei più innovativi, performanti, eleganti e anche sostenibili yacht, barche a vela e imbarcazioni di ogni taglia e tipologia. Il Salone Nautico internazionale di Genova, arrivato alla 64 esima edizione ha aperto i battenti oggi e durerà fino al 24 settembre, con più spazi rispetto all'edizione precedente e un "contenitore" più completo, grazie all'avanzamento dei lavori del Waterfront di levante di Genova, progettato dall'architetto Renzo Piano, anche se resta ancora un pezzo di cantiere: il nuovo ingresso nel "vecchio" Palasport ristrutturato, le barche esposte anche nel canale che circonda per intero l'isola del Padiglione Blu.Il dato annunciato oggi dal presidente di Confindustria Nautica Saverio Cecchi subito dopo la cerimonia di inaugurazione del Salone Nautico e contenuto nel report dell'ufficio studi "La nautica in cifre Log" è storico: il fatturato della nautica italiana nel 2023 è arrivato a quota 8,33 miliardi, un nuovo massimo per l'industria. Un miliardo di euro in più, pari al 13,6% di crescita sul 2022 per un fatturato quasi triplicato negli ultimi otto anni. Lo stesso presidente Cecchi, lo scorso 2 settembre in occasione della presentazione dell'evento, ha ricordato che il settore è ormai stabilmente il quarto pilastro del made in Italy (insieme a moda, arredo, alimentare).Sono intervenuti ai microfoni di Sebastiano Barisoni: Marco Fortis, docente di Economia industriale e Commercio estero presso la Facoltà di Scienze politiche dell'Università Cattolica di Milano, è anche direttore e vicepresidente della Fondazione Edison, Carla Demaria consigliere delegato di Sanlorenzo, CEO di Blugame brand del gruppo Sanlorenzo e Past President di Confindustria Nautica, Piero Formenti vice presidente di Confindustria Nautica da due mandati e dal 1979 proprietario e A.D. di Zar Formenti e Pietro Lucchese, CEO di Mr.Blu Yacht Dealers. La Fed taglia i tassi di mezzo punto e lo farà ancoraLa Fed apre una nuova era e taglia i tassi di interesse di mezzo punto, in quella che è la prima riduzione dal 2020. La decisione di portare il costo del denaro ad una forchetta compresa fra il 4,75% e il 5% punta a prevenire che il graduale raffreddamento del mercato del lavoro si trasformi in un completo stop. E mostra la determinazione della banca a centrare l'obiettivo di un atterraggio morbido per l'economia, evitando una tanto temuta recessione. E, sicuramente, i tassi scenderanno di altro mezzo punto entro la fine dell'anno, decidendo riunione per riunione. "L'economia è forte e siamo impegnati a mantenerla così forte", ha detto il presidente Jerome Powell osservando come la crescita media del Pil è stimata restare "solida" al +2% con un tasso di disoccupazione al 4,4% alla fine di quest'anno e un'inflazione al 2,1% nel 2025. "I rischi al rialzo per l'inflazione sono calati", ha aggiunto Powell che, mentre Wall Street ha ingranato la marcia positiva e l'oro ha toccato nuovi record, ha osservato come l'approccio paziente adottato dalla Fed nell'ultimo anno ha dato i suoi frutti sul fronte dei prezzi.Nell'annunciare la sua storica decisione, la banca centrale americana ha ribadito il suo "impegno alla massima occupazione e a un'inflazione al 2%", ovvero gli obiettivi stabiliti nel suo mandato. "Abbiamo guadagnato una maggiore fiducia in merito a un calo sostenibile dell'inflazione verso il 2%, e riteniamo che i rischi per centrare i nostri obiettivi sull'occupazione e l'inflazione siano più bilanciati. Le prospettive economiche sono incerte, e saremo attenti ai rischi", ha assicurato la Fed nel comunicato diffuso al termine della riunione, dal quale emerge che la decisone non è stata unanime. Il taglio aiuterà l'economia a due mesi dalle elezioni americane, esponendo la Fed a critiche. Con al decisione odierna infatti la banca centrale scontenta quei democratici che chiedevano un taglio di 75 punti base e tutti i repubblicani che premevano invece per rimandare ogni decisione a dopo il voto. "Questo taglio dimostra che Powell ha atteso troppo per tagliare i tassi", ha commentato la senatrice liberal Elizabeth Warren, chiedendo ulteriori riduzioni del costo del denaro. La prossima riunione della Fed cade proprio il giorno dopo le elezioni, liberando le mani alla Fed anche se i risultati - secondo gli osservatori - non saranno ancora noti. Per la Fed il taglio in un contesto di economia solida ma in rallentamento. Mai in passato si è trovata infatti in un simile situazione. L'obiettivo di Powell è quello di un atterraggio morbido, che sarebbe una vittoria per la Fed. Negli ultimi sei cicli di allentamento monetario dal 1989, solo in due casi - nel 1995 e nel 1998 - la banca centrale americana è riuscita a evitare una recessione. In ambedue i casi alla guida c'era Alan Greenspan mentre Jerome Powell spera di centrare il suo successo. Il mercato azionario e quello dei bond anticipano che la Fed centrerà un soft landing stile 1995, e il taglio da mezzo punto sembra puntare - secondo gli osservatori - proprio in questa direzione.Il commento di Riccardo Sorrentino, Il Sole 24 Ore a Focus Economia.

Is the Federal Reserve inadvertently widening the wealth gap? Tune in as we tackle this provocative question and dissect the proposed tax changes that are shaking up the political and market landscapes. Our special guest, Chris Martsenson of Peak Prosperity, joins us to shed light on these critical issues. We explore the potential increase in capital gains tax to 44.6%, the elimination of the 1031 transfer, and the reduction of allowances in oil and gas. Chris also shares his journey from corporate finance to becoming a public educator on economic realities, discussing his influential "Crash Course" and growing community engagement.Ever wondered how algorithmic trading and Federal Reserve policies are transforming financial markets? We delve into the challenges faced by day traders in the era of automated systems and the mysterious overnight gains in the S&P 500 linked to futures trading. Our conversation spans the evolving role of the Federal Reserve, from Alan Greenspan's era to the present, and scrutinizes interventions like the sweeps program and quantitative easing. With upcoming elections on the horizon, we speculate on the future implications of these market dynamics and the broader consequences for financial stability.Lastly, we confront rising economic inequality and the Federal Reserve's role in it. From taxing unrealized capital gains to the controversial influence of pharmaceutical advertisements on media narratives, we leave no stone unturned. We discuss the erosion of public trust in official narratives and highlight the importance of navigating today's unreliable information landscape. Wrapping up, we touch on societal issues such as student debt and the addictive nature of modern foods, offering insights on how to break free from these cycles. Join us for an eye-opening conversation that challenges conventional wisdom and provides invaluable perspectives on today's most pressing economic and political issues.The content in this program is for informational purposes only. You should not construe any information or other material as investment, financial, tax, or other advice. The views expressed by the participants are solely their own. A participant may have taken or recommended any investment position discussed, but may close such position or alter its recommendation at any time without notice. Nothing contained in this program constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial instruments in any jurisdiction. Please consult your own investment or financial advisor for advice related to all investment decisions. Sign up to The Lead-Lag Report on Substack and get 30% off the annual subscription today by visiting http://theleadlag.report/leadlaglive. Foodies unite…with HowUdish!It's social media with a secret sauce: FOOD! The world's first network for food enthusiasts. HowUdish connects foodies across the world!Share kitchen tips and recipe hacks. Discover hidden gem food joints and street food. Find foodies like you, connect, chat and organize meet-ups!HowUdish makes it simple to connect through food anywhere in the world.So, how do YOU dish? Download HowUdish on the Apple App Store today:

This week we're doing more listener requests, and this one is a doozy. We are talking about Rush and their almost concept album 2112, released in Jan. 1976. In this episode we discuss Ayn Rand, Alan Greenspan, cultural insensitivity, diabetes, Cobra Commander, Equilibrium, ransoms, tears, Germans, Equilibrium again (thanks Tim), elders, copycats, professors and so much more! Hatepod.com | TW: @AlbumHatePod | IG: @hatePod | hatePodMail@gmail.com  Episode Outline: Top of the show "Do you hate it?" Personal History History of Artist  General Thoughts  Song by Song - What do they mean!?! How Did it Do Reviews Post Episode "Do you hate it?"

Andrew For America finishes talking about the Olympics, and then pivots to talking about the "big club," the central banking system, the history of inflation, money printing, government spending, how taxation is theft, the gold standard, treasury bonds, debt slavery, how capitalism empowers the individual, how communism works, secret societies, the importance of bravery and courage, willful ignorance, the birth of religions, and how BRICs is a threat to our reserve currency. Andrew plays clips from Joe Rogan, Gerard DGAF, Dave Smith, Andrew Tate, Simon King, Andy Frisella, David Graeber, Bill Cooper, Alan Greenspan, Ray Dalio, RFK on the Shaun Ryan podcast, Bek Lover on the Julian Dorey podcast, even Skeletor and Sonic the Hedgehog! The song selection is the song, "Call of the Void" by the band Deny. Visit allegedlyrecords.com and check out all of the amazing punk rock artists! Visit soundcloud.com/andrewforamerica1984 to check out Andrew's music! Like and Follow The Politics & Punk Rock Podcast PLAYLIST on Spotify!!! Check it out here: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1Y4rumioeqvHfaUgRnRxsy... politicsandpunkrockpodcast.com https://linktr.ee/andrewforamerica Watch and learn about these awesome offers for your survival needs from former Afghanistan war veteran, police officer, and citizen journalist, Mr. Teddy Daniels: Operation Blackout Survival Guide: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://internalblackout.com/?a=683&c=434&s1=⁠⁠⁠⁠ Famine Fighter Survival Food Supply: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://foodforthesoul.co/?a=683&c=407&s1=⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Final Famine Survival Food Growing Book: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://finalfoodprepper.com/?a=683&c=433&s1=⁠⁠⁠⁠ Devils Dollar Currency Survival Book: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dbhtrkg.com/?a=683&c=468&s1=⁠ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/andrew-foramerica/support

India Slashes Gold, Silver Import Tax From 15% To 6% India has a long history of gold and silver, and is known to be a price sensitive buyer. Which is one of the reasons why the news this week that they slashed the gold and silver import taxes from 15% to 6% is so significant. India has already repatriated its gold from London this year, and has continued adding gold to its reserves. And the change in policy facilitates even more gold and silver investment in the 2nd half of 2024. So in today's show I'm joined by Steve Cope of Silver Viper minerals, who talks about the news from India, and also gives an update on the silver short position, the Mexican mining laws, and a shocking admission from Alan Greenspan. To find out more, click to watch the video now! - To find out more about Silver Viper Minerals go to: https://silverviperminerals.com/ - To join our free email list and never miss a video click here: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/email-signup/ - To get on the waiting list for your very own ´Silver Chopper Ben´ sterling silver figurine click here: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/get-a-chopper-ben/ - To get your paperback or audio copy of The Big Silver Short go to: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/thebigsilvershort/ Find Arcadia Economics content on these sites: YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/ArcadiaEconomics Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ArcadiaEconomics Bitchute - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/kgpeiwO1dhxX/ LBRY/Odysee - https://odysee.com/@ArcadiaEconomics:5 Listen to Arcadia Economics on your favorite Podcast platforms: Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/75OH2PpgUpriBA5mYf5kyY Apple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/arcadia-economics/id1505398976 Google-https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9teXNvdW5kd2lzZS5jb20vcnNzLzE2MTg5NTk1MjMzNDVz Anchor - https://anchor.fm/arcadiaeconomics Amazon - https://podcasters.amazon.com/podcasts Follow Arcadia Economics on these social platforms Twitter - https://twitter.com/ArcadiaEconomic Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/arcadiaeconomics/ #silver #silverprice And remember to get outside and have some fun every once in a while!:) (URL0VD) This video was sponsored by Silver Viper Minerals, and Arcadia Economics does receive compensation. For our full disclaimer go to: https://arcadiaeconomics.com/disclaimer-silver-viper-minerals/Subscribe to Arcadia Economics on Soundwise

Hey, kids--what day is it? Lance reorients himself and shares foreigners' perspectives of the U.S. Advice: Avoid the negativity and don't feed the fear. Looking at astronomical rotation from Large- to Small-cap stocks over the past five days: Russell 2000 is elevated by 4.4 standard deviations from its moving average. Markets needed a healthy rotation, and this is actually bullish in creating more breadth in markets. Bad Coffee & YouTube audio; What are the odds for a Fed rate cut in September? Michael Lebowitz joins the conversation: Is inflation "back in the range?" Markets are giving the Fed a green light to cut rates. Are we back to a pre-Covid economy with 5% rates? It's important to separate our personal views from what the markets pay attention to (Government numbers). Is sentiment shifting? Markets are very reflexive. Is the Small-cap chase sustainable? Markets are not responding to Trump/Vance: it's about excess liquidity looking for someplace to go. Michael review's Alan Greenspan's "Irrational Exuberance" thesis then vs now. The internet DID change the world and affected economic growth. What will AI outcomes be? Lance intones the importance of credit spreads as leading indicators; their pick up is worth paying attention to. SEG-1: Others' Perspectives of the US, Markets' Perspective of Astronomical Rotation? SEG-2: Are We Back to a Pre-COVID Economy? SEG-3: Is the Small-cap Chase Sustainable? SEG-4: Are Markets Re-experiencing Irrational Exuberance? Hosted by RIA Advisors Chief Investment Strategist Lance Roberts, CIO, w Senior Financial Advisor, Danny Ratliff, CFP Produced by Brent Clanton, Executive Producer ------- Watch today's show video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUbIu4YZlO0&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=4s ------- Articles mentioned in this report: "Irrational Exuberance Then And Now" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/irrational-exuberance-then-and-now/ "Fed Rate Cuts – A Signal To Sell Stocks And Buy Bonds?" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/fed-rate-cuts-a-signal-to-sell-stocks-and-buy-bonds/ "The “Broken Clock” Fallacy & The Art Of Contrarianism" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/the-broken-clock-fallacy-the-art-of-contrarianism/ "Put Options – Nobody Wants Them" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ ------- The latest installment of our new feature, Before the Bell, "Astronomical Rotation from Large to Small Cap" is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFSeF0LxIk&list=PLwNgo56zE4RAbkqxgdj-8GOvjZTp9_Zlz&index=1 ------- Our previous show is here: "Avoiding the Sexy Stock Plays" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBh7AGlIQsY&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=9s ------- Get more info & commentary: https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ -------- SUBSCRIBE to The Real Investment Show here: http://www.youtube.com/c/TheRealInvestmentShow -------- Visit our Site: https://www.realinvestmentadvice.com Contact Us: 1-855-RIA-PLAN -------- Subscribe to SimpleVisor: https://www.simplevisor.com/register-new -------- Connect with us on social: https://twitter.com/RealInvAdvice https://twitter.com/LanceRoberts https://www.facebook.com/RealInvestmentAdvice/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/realinvestmentadvice/ #AlanGreenspan #IrrationaExuberance #MarketRotation #AI #CreditSpreads #PortfolioBalance #SexyStocks #MagnificentSeven #2024Election #MonetaryPolicy #JeromePowell #JamieDimon #RateCuts #Bonds #TenYearTreasury #FedFundsRate #TreasuryYields #FallingYields #HighCorrelation #RateCuttingEnvironment #FederalReserve #EconomicPolicy #MarketTiming #InvestingStrategies #PortfolioManagement #BuyingTheDip #StockMarket #InvestmentTiming #CashManagement #MarketMoves #StrategicInvesting #FinancialTips #InvestmentDecisions #StockPortfolio #FinancialMarkets #MaximizingCash #Buying shares #BetterPrice #Market#Entry #MarketExit #InvestmentAdvice #Markets #Money #Investing

ey, kids--what day is it? Lance reorients himself and shares foreigners' perspectives of the U.S. Advice: Avoid the negativity and don't feed the fear. Looking at astronomical rotation from Large- to Small-cap stocks over the past five days: Russell 2000 is elevated by 4.4 standard deviations from its moving average. Markets needed a healthty rotation, and this is actually bullish in creating more breadth in markets. Bad Coffee & YouTube audio; What are the odds for a Fed rate cut in September? Michael Lebowitz joins the conversation: Is inflation "back in the range?" Markets are giving the Fed a green light to cut rates. Are we back to a pre-Covid economy with 5% rates? It's important to separate our personal views from what the markets pay attention to (Government numbers). Is sentiment shifting? Markets are very reflexive. Is the Small-cap chase sustainable? Markets are not responding to Trump/Vance: it's about excess liquidity looking for someplace to go. Michael review's Alan Greenspan's "Irrational Exuberance" thesis then vs now. The internet DID change the world and affected economic growth. What will AI outcomes be? Lance intones the importance of credit spreads as leading indicators; their pick up is worth paying attention to. SEG-1: Others' Perspectives of the US, Markets' Perspective of Astronomical Rotation? SEG-2: Are We Back to a Pre-COVID Economy? SEG-3: Is the Small-cap Chase Sustainable? SEG-4: Are Markets Re-experiencing Irrational Exuberance? Hosted by RIA Advisors Chief Investment Strategist Lance Roberts, CIO, w Senior Financial Advisor, Danny Ratliff, CFP Produced by Brent Clanton, Executive Producer ------- Watch today's show video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUbIu4YZlO0&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=4s ------- Articles mentioned in this report: "Irrational Exuberance Then And Now" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/irrational-exuberance-then-and-now/ "Fed Rate Cuts – A Signal To Sell Stocks And Buy Bonds?" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/fed-rate-cuts-a-signal-to-sell-stocks-and-buy-bonds/ "The “Broken Clock” Fallacy & The Art Of Contrarianism" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/the-broken-clock-fallacy-the-art-of-contrarianism/ "Put Options – Nobody Wants Them" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ ------- The latest installment of our new feature, Before the Bell, "Astronomical Rotation from Large to Small Cap" is here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFSeF0LxIk&list=PLwNgo56zE4RAbkqxgdj-8GOvjZTp9_Zlz&index=1 ------- Our previous show is here: "Avoiding the Sexy Stock Plays" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBh7AGlIQsY&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=9s ------- Get more info & commentary:  https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ -------- SUBSCRIBE to The Real Investment Show here: http://www.youtube.com/c/TheRealInvestmentShow -------- Visit our Site: https://www.realinvestmentadvice.com Contact Us: 1-855-RIA-PLAN -------- Subscribe to SimpleVisor: https://www.simplevisor.com/register-new -------- Connect with us on social: https://twitter.com/RealInvAdvice https://twitter.com/LanceRoberts https://www.facebook.com/RealInvestmentAdvice/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/realinvestmentadvice/ #AlanGreenspan #IrrationaExuberance #MarketRotation #AI #CreditSpreads #PortfolioBalance #SexyStocks #MagnificentSeven #2024Election #MonetaryPolicy #JeromePowell #JamieDimon #RateCuts #Bonds #TenYearTreasury #FedFundsRate #TreasuryYields #FallingYields #HighCorrelation #RateCuttingEnvironment #FederalReserve #EconomicPolicy #MarketTiming #InvestingStrategies #PortfolioManagement #BuyingTheDip #StockMarket #InvestmentTiming #CashManagement #MarketMoves #StrategicInvesting #FinancialTips #InvestmentDecisions #StockPortfolio #FinancialMarkets #MaximizingCash #Buying shares #BetterPrice #Market#Entry #MarketExit #InvestmentAdvice #Markets #Money #Investing

This month's newsletter is dedicated to the memory of Gerry Corrigan, the sixth president of the New York Fed from 1985 to 1993, known as the Fed's plumber, the go-to guy Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan turned to in a financial crisis. Subscribe to The Bank Treasury Newsletter and Podcast at thebanktreasurynewsletter.com for professional Insights and commentary on bank treasury issues, investment portfolio strategy, and more. Listen on Apple Podcasts,Spotify, and Amazon. Follow us on LinkedIn.Music by Phantom Sun.

As I often remind subscribers to Faster, Please!, predictions are hard, especially about the future. The economic boom of the 1990s came as a surprise to most economists. Equally surprising was that it ended so soon. Neither of these events caught Ed Yardeni off-guard. Some forecasters, Yardeni included, anticipated a new Roaring '20s for this century… only to be interrupted by the pandemic. But is it too late for this prediction to become a reality? According to Yardeni, not at all.Ed Yardeni is president of Yardeni Research, and he previously served as chief investment strategist at a number of investment companies, including Deutche Bank.  He has additionally held positions at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Federal Reserve Board of Governors, and US Treasury Department. For more economic insights and investment guidance, visit yardeni.com.In This Episode* The '90s Internet boom (1:25)* The Digital Revolution (5:01)* The new Roaring '20s (9:00)* A cautious Federal Reserve (14:24)* Speedbumps to progress (18:18)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationThe '90s Internet boom (1:25)Pethokoukis: Statistically speaking, the PC Internet boom that you first started writing about back in the early '90s ended in 2004, 2005. How surprising was that to economists, investors, policy makers? I, to this day, have a report, a 2000 report, from Lehman Brothers that predicted, as far as the eye could see, we would have rapid growth, rapid productivity growth for at least another decade. Now, of course, Lehman didn't make it another decade. Was that a surprise to people that we didn't have an endless productivity boom coming out of the '90s?Yardeni: I think it definitely was a surprise. I mean, it was surprising both ways. Not too many people expected to see a productivity boom in the second half of the 1990s, which is what we had. I did, as an economist on Wall Street. More importantly, Alan Greenspan was a big promoter of the idea that the technology revolution would in fact lead to better productivity growth and that that might mean better economic growth and lower inflation. And it didn't look that way for a while; then suddenly the Bureau of Economic Analysis went back and revised the data for the late 1990s and, lo and behold, it turned out that there was a productivity boom. And then it all kind of fizzled out, and it raises the question, why did that happen? Why was it such a short lived productivity boom? And the answer is—well, let me give you a personal anecdote.I worked at Deutsche Bank in New York in the late 1990s, and I had to be very careful walking down the corridors of Deutsche Bank in midtown Manhattan not to trip over Dell boxes. Everybody was getting a Dell box, everybody was getting the Dell boxes loaded up with the Windows Office. And when you think back on what that was able to do in terms of productivity, if you had a lot of secretaries on Selectric typewriters, Word could obviously increase productivity. If you had a lot of bookkeepers doing spreadsheets, Excel could obviously increase productivity. But other than that, there wasn't really that much productivity to be had from the technology at the time. So again, where did that productivity boom come from? It couldn't have been just secretaries and bookkeepers. Now the answer is that the boxes themselves were measured as output, and so output per man hour increased dramatically. It doesn't take that many workers to produce Dell boxes and Windows Office and Windows software. So as a result of that, we had this big boom in the technology output that created its own productivity boom, but it didn't really have the widespread application to all sorts of business model the way today's evolution of the technology boom is, in fact, capable of doing.What you've just described, I think, is the explanation by, for instance, Robert Gordon, Northwestern University, that we saw a revolution, but it was a narrow revolution.It was the beginning! It was the beginning of a revolution. It was the Technology Revolution. It started in the 1990s and it's evolved, it's not over, it's ongoing. I think a big development in that revolution was the cloud. What the cloud allowed you to do was really increase productivity in technology itself, because you didn't need to have several hundred people in the IT department. Now, with the cloud, one person can upgrade the software on hundreds of computers, and now we're renting software so that it automatically upgrades, so that's been a big contribution to productivity.The Digital Revolution (5:01)So perhaps I spoke too soon. I talked about that boom—that '90s boom—ending. Perhaps I should have said it was more of a pause, because it seems what we're seeing now, as you've described it, is a new phase of the Digital Revolution—perhaps a broader phase—and, to be clear, if I understand what you've been speaking about and writing about, this isn't an AI story, this predates what we're seeing in the data now, it predates ChatGPT, when do you date this new phase beginning—and you mentioned one catalyst perhaps being the cloud, so—when did it begin and, again, what are the data markers that you've been looking at?I don't remember the exact date, but I think it was 2011 where my little investment advisory got ourselves on the Amazon cloud, and that's been a tremendous source of productivity for us, it saves us a lot of money. We used to have a couple of servers on a server farm in the old days, and every now and then it would go down and we'd have to reach somebody on the server farm and say, “Would you mind turning it on and off?” Remember the word “reboot?” I don't remember the word “reboot” being used in quite some time. Amazon's never gone down, as far as I can recall. I think they've always had their systems in Virginia, and they had a backup somewhere overseas, but it's always worked quite well for us.But now we're finding with some of the other software that's available now, we can actually cut back on our Amazon costs and use some of these other technologies. There's lots of technologies that are very user-friendly, very powerful, and they apply themselves to all sorts of different businesses, and, as you said, it's not just AI. I think the cloud—let's put it around 2011 or so—was a huge development because it did allow companies to do information processing in a much more efficient way, and the software gets automatically updated, and with what it used to take hundreds of people in an IT department to do, now you can do it with just one, which is what we, in fact, have, just one person doing it all for us. But I would say that's as good a point as any. But along the way here, what's really changed is the power of the software that's available, and how cheap it is, and how you can rent it now instead of having to own it.That's a fantastic example, and, of course, we want to see these sort of examples at some point reflected in the data. And going through some of your writings, one period that you were very focused on was, we may have seen a bottom, maybe at the end of 2015, before the pandemic, where we saw the slowest, I think 20-quarter average… annual average growth rate of productivity.0.5 annual rate.But by 2019, leading into the pandemic, it tripled. Is the story of that tripling, is it the cloud? And that certainly has to be one reason why you, among other people, thought that we might see a new Roaring '20s, right into the teeth of the pandemic, unfortunately.Well, it's not so unfortunate, I mean, clearly nobody saw the pandemic coming, but we weathered the storm very, very well, and I don't think we can come to any conclusion about productivity during the pandemic, it was all over the place. At first, when we were on lockdown, it actually soared because we were still producing a lot with fewer workers, and then it took a dive, but we're now back up to two percent. We had a really, really good year last year in productivity. The final three quarters of last year, we saw above-trend growth in productivity. And so we're already now back up to two percent, which, again, compared to 0.5, is certainly moving in the right direction, and I don't see any particular reason why that number couldn't go to three-and-a-half, four-and-a-half percent per year kind of growth—which sounds delusional unless you look back at the chart of productivity and see that that's actually what productivity booms do: They get up to something like three-and-a-half to four-and-a-half percent growth, not just on a one-quarter basis, but on a 20-quarter trailing basis at an annual rate.The new Roaring '20s (9:00)This forecast predates the word “generative AI,” predates ChatGPT, and, in fact, if I understand your view, it's even broader than information technology. So tell me a bit about your broader Roaring '20s thesis and the technological underpinnings of that.One of the developments we've seen here, which has been somewhat disconcerting, is the challenge to globalization. I'm a big believer in free trade, and the free trade creates more economic growth, but, on the other hand, we have to be realistic and realize that China hasn't been playing by the rules of the game. And so now, as a result, we're seeing a lot of production moving out of China to other countries, and we're seeing a lot of on-shoring in the United States, so we're building state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities that are full of robots and automation that I think are going to bring manufacturing productivity back quite significantly.Everybody seems to be of the opinion that the reason productivity is weak is because of services. It's actually manufacturing. What happened is, when China joined the World Trade Organization back at the end of 2001—December 11th, 2001, to be exact—manufacturers said hasta la vista to the United States, and we've had absolutely no increase in industrial production capacity since that time, since 2001. And so companies basically gave up on trying to do anything, either expand capacity or improve productivity of manufacturing here, when they could do it so much more cheaply over in China.I think what's really the most important thing that's changed here is, demographically, we've run out of workers. Certainly even in China, we don't have a growth in the working-age population. We don't have a growth in the working-age population here. And when it comes to skilled labor, that's even more the case, so there's tremendous incentive and pressure on companies to figure out, well, how do we deal with an environment where our business is pretty good, but we can't find the workers to meet all the demand? And the answer has to be productivity. Technology is part of the solution. Managing for productivity is another part of the solution. Giving workers more skills to be more productive is a very good use of money, and it makes workers sticky, it makes them want to stay with you because you're going to have to pay them more because they're more knowledgeable, and you want to pay them more because you want to keep them.I think a big part of the productivity story really has to do with the demographic story. China, of course, accelerated all that with the One Child Policy that, as a result, I kind of view China as the world's largest nursing home. They just don't have the workforce that they used to have. Japan doesn't have the workforce. Korea, Taiwan, all these countries… If you want to find cheap, young labor, it's still in Africa and in India, but there are all sorts of issues with how you do business in these countries. It's not that easy. It's not as simple as just saying, “Well, let's just go there.” And so I think we are seeing a tremendous push to increase productivity to deal with the worldwide labor shortage.We have three really good quarters of productivity growth and, as you mentioned, economists are always very cautious about those productivity numbers because of revisions, they're volatile. But if this is something real and sustainable, it should also reflect in other parts of the economy. We should see good capital investment numbers for here on out if this is a real thing.I think not only capital investment, but also real wages. Productivity is fairy dust. I mean it's a win-win-win situation. With better-than-expected productivity, you get better-than-expected, real GDP, you get lower-than-expected unit labor costs, which, by the way, unit labor costs, which reflect hourly wages offset by productivity, they're under two percent—or they're around two percent, I should say more accurately—and that's highly correlated with the CPI, so the underlying inflation rate has already come down to where the Fed wants it to be. This is not a forecast, this is where we are right now with unit labor costs. So there's a very strong correlation between productivity growth and the growth of inflation-adjusted compensation. So you can take average hourly earnings, you can take hourly compensation…There are a bunch of measures of wages, and divide them by the consumption deflator, and you'll see on a year-over-year basis that the correlation is extremely high. And, theoretically—it's the only thing I learned when I went to college in economics that ever made any sense to me, and that is—people in a competitive marketplace—it doesn't have to be perfectly competitive, but in a relatively competitive marketplace—people get paid their real wage. The productivity the workers have, they get paid in their real wages, and we've seen, for all the talk about how “standards of living have stagnated for decades,” if you look at average hourly earnings divided by the consumption deflator, it's been going up 1.4 percent since 1995. That's a doubling of the standard of living every 40 years. That's pretty good progress. And if productivity grows faster than that, you'll get even a better increase in real wages.If we don't have workers, if there's a shortage of workers—though, obviously, immigration puts a whole different spin on these things—but for what we know now in terms of the workers that are available that are allowed to work, they are getting paid higher real wages. I know that prices have gone up, but people sometimes forget that wages have also gone up quite a bit. But again, it's fairy dust: You get better real growth, you get lower inflation, you get real wages going up, and you get better profit margins. Everybody wins.A cautious Federal Reserve (14:24)In the '90s, we had a Fed chairman who was super cautious about assuming a productivity boom, but eventually saw the reality of it and acted accordingly. It seems to me that we have a very similar such situation where we have a Federal Reserve chairman who is certainly aware of these numbers, but seems to me, at this point, certainly reluctant to make decisions based on those numbers, but you would expect that to change.Yeah, well, I mean if you just look at the summary of economic projections that the Federal Open Market Committee… that comes out on a quarterly basis reflecting the consensus of Fed Chair Powell's committee that determines monetary policy, they're looking for real GDP growth of less than two percent per year for the next couple of years, and they're obviously not anticipating any improvement in productivity. So I think you're right, I think Fed Chair Powell is very much aware that productivity can change everything; and, in fact, he's talked about productivity, he knows the equation. He says, “Look, it's okay to have wages growing three percent if inflation's two percent.” Then he implied, therefore, that productivity is growing one percent. So he's basically in the one percent camp, recognizing that, if productivity is more than that, then four percent wage growth is perfectly fine and acceptable and non-inflationary. But at this point he's, in terms of his pronouncements, he's sticking to the kind of standard line of economists, which is, maybe we'll get one percent, and if we get one percent and the Fed gets inflation down, let's say to only two-and-a-half percent, then wages can grow three-and-a-half percent, and right now wages are growing at a little bit above. I think we're growing more like four percent, so the wage numbers aren't there yet, but they could be the right numbers if, in fact, productivity is making a comeback.If we hit productivity gains of the sort you've talked about—three percent, four percent by the end of the decade—that is a radically different-looking economy than what the Fed, or the CBO, or even a lot of Wall Street firms are talking about. So it's not just this statistic will be different; we're looking at really something very different. I would assume a much higher stock market; I'm not sure what interest rates look like, but what does that world look like in 2030?These are all good questions, they're the ones I'm grappling with. I mean, should interest rates be lower or should they be higher? It's the so-called real interest rates, so if the economy can live with a Fed funds rate of, let's say five and a half percent—five and a quarter, five and a half percent, which is what it is now—and the bond yield at four and a half percent and the economy is doing perfectly fine and inflation's coming down, and it's all because productivity is making comeback, then those rates are fine. They're doing their job, they're allocating capital in a reasonable fashion, and capital is going to get allocated to where capital should go. You mentioned before that, in order to increase productivity, we are going to need more capital investments.Here the Fed has raised interest rates dramatically, and most of the economists said, “Oh, that's going to lead to a big drop in capital,” because capital spending is dependent on interest rates, and that hasn't happened at all, really, because the technology capital spending—which now, in current dollars, technology capital spending accounts for about 50 percent of capital spending in nominal terms. You can't do it in real terms because there's an indexing problem. But in nominal terms, half of capital spending is technology. And by the way, that's an understatement because that's information technology, hardware, it's software and R&D. It doesn't even include industrial machinery, which is mostly technology, hardware and software these days. And even the trucking industry, the truck is sort of the device, and then there's a software that runs the device logistics. There's so many areas of the economy that have become very high-tech that people still think of as a low-tech industry.Speedbumps to progress (18:18)If this doesn't happen. Well, I suppose one thing we could say may have happened is that we've really overestimated these technologies and they're not as transformative. But let me give you two other things that people might point to as being—and you've written a bit about these—that could be speed bumps or barriers. One: debt, possible debt crisis. And two: this energy revolution, climate change transition, which we really have a lot of government involvement and a lot of government making decisions about allocating resources. So what is the risk that those two things could be a slow things down, speed bump, or what have you?There's three issues that you're raising. One is sort of the private sector issue of whether a lot of this artificial intelligence and technology stuff is hype, and it's not going to have the impact on productivity. The other one, as you mentioned, is the two government issues, government's meddling in the climate change policies, and then the government having this irresponsible fiscal excesses.With regards to artificial intelligence, even though I should be a cheerleader on this, because I should say, “See, I told you so…” I have been telling people I told you so because I said, I'll tell you when the stock market started to discount the Roaring '20s was November 30th, 2022 when Open AI introduced ChatGPT, and that's when these AI stocks went crazy. A week later I signed up for the $20 a month version of ChatGPT, figuring, “This is great! I'm not going to have to work anymore. This is going to do all my writing for me. I'll just ask it the question and say, ‘What do you think we should be writing about this? Go ahead and write about it.'” Well, it took me more time to correct all the errors for what it produced than it would've taken me just to write the damn thing.So I kind of cooled off to chat GPT, and I come to the conclusion that, from what I see right now in terms of what is available to the public and what's tied to the internet, it's really autofill on speed and the steroids. You know when you type Word and sometimes it guesses what you're going to say next? That's what this thing does at the speed of light. But, you know, “haste makes waste,” as Benjamin Franklin used to say, and it makes a lot of mistakes. And, by the way, garbage in, garbage out. It could create even more garbage on the internet because I've seen situations where it starts quoting its own sources that would never have existed in the first place. So there's some really funky stuff when you have it in the public domain.But I think that when you have it sort of segmented off and it only has the data that you need for your specific industry, and it's not polluted by other the open source ability to take any data, I think it may very well work very well. But it's basically just a really fast, lightning-speed calculations. So I think it has lots of potential in that regard, but I think there is a certain amount of hype. But look, so much money is being spent in this area. I can't believe it's all going to go for naught. I mean, we saw a lot of money spent in the late 1990s on internet and dotcoms and all that. The internet's still here, but the dotcoms are gone.With regards to the government policies, I have this very simplistic view that it's amazing how well this country has done despite Washington. Washington just keeps meddling and meddling, it just keeps picking our pockets, keeps interfering, comes up with industrial policies that, to a large extent, don't work. And yet, the economy continues to do well because working stiffs like you and me and people listening in, that's what we do for a living: we work. We don't have time for politics. So the politicians have plenty of time to figure out how to pick our pockets. Well, we have to just figure out, “Okay, given their meddling, how do we make our businesses better, notwithstanding these challenges.” Maybe it's really more my hope that we somehow in the private sector figure out how to keep doing what we're doing so well, including increasing productivity, in the face of the challenges that the government poses with its policies.But then, if we are successful in the private sector at creating good productivity growth that gives you better real GDP growth, that real growth is one way to reduce the debt burden. It doesn't make it go away and it would be a lot better if we didn't have it, but some of these projections of how this debt is going to eat us all up may be too pessimistic about their assumptions for economic growth. But look… I guess I had a happy childhood, so I tend to be an optimist, but I can't say anything good at all about this deficit problem. And we did get a little glimpse in August, September, October, of what happens when the bond market starts to worry about something like supply. It worried about it for three months, and then lower inflation and less supply of long-term bonds helped to rally the bond market. But here we are back at four and a half percent, and if we do have some more fears about inflation coming back, then we could very well have a debt crisis more imminently. People like Ray Dalio has been saying that we're under verge of getting it. I think it's an issue, but I don't think it's an issue that's going to be calamitous at this time.The problems people talk about, you have the skepticism about free enterprise, or the skepticism about trade, and immigration. I would like to see what this country looks like in 2030 with the economic scenario you've just outlined: Strong real wage growth. Maybe it's too simplistic, but I think people being able to see in their everyday lives, big gains year after year, I think the national mood would be considerably different.Well, I think, even now, if you look at real consumption per household, it's $128,000, it's at an all-time record high. And yeah, I guess the rich might be gluttons and might eat more than the rest of us, and maybe they have bigger and more houses and cars, but there just aren't enough of them to really explain how it could possibly be that real consumption per household is at an all-time record high. And I know that's materialistic, but I can't think of a better way to measure the standard of living than looking at real consumption per household: All-time record high.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Micro Reads▶ Business/ EconomicsMeta, in Its Biggest A.I. Push, Places Smart Assistants Across its Apps - NYTGoogle streamlines structure to speed up AI efforts - FTTesla's Layoffs Won't Solve Its Growing Pains - Wired▶ PolicyPut Growth Back on the Political Agenda - WSJRegulate AI? How US, EU and China Are Going About It - BbergThree ways the US could help universities compete with tech companies on AI innovation - MIT▶ AI/DigitalThe AI race is generating a dual reality - FTSearching for the Next Big AI Breakthrough at the TED Conference - BbergThese photos show AI used to reinterpret centuries-old graffiti - NSEnvironmental Damage Could Cost You a Fifth of Your Income Over the Next 25 Years - WiredAI now surpasses humans in almost all performance benchmarks - New Atlas▶ Biotech/HealthA new understanding of tinnitus and deafness could help reverse both - New ScientistBeyond Neuralink: Meet the other companies developing brain-computer interfaces - MIT▶ RoboticsHello, Electric Atlas: Boston Dynamics introduces a fully electric humanoid robot that “exceeds human performance” - IEEE Spectrum▶ Space/TransportationNASA may alter Artemis III to have Starship and Orion dock in low-Earth orbit - Ars▶ Up Wing/Down WingTechnological risks are not the end of the world - Science▶ Substacks/NewslettersFive things to be optimistic about in America today - NoahpinionWho Governs the Internet? - HyperdimensionalMeta is Surprisingly Relevant in Generative AI - AI SupremacyLarry Summers isn't worried about secular stagnation anymore - Slow BoringFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Carlos Lozada is currently an Opinion columnist at The New York Times, after spending nearly 20 years at The Washington Post - where he earned the Pulitzer Prize in 2019 for criticism as The Post's nonfiction book critic. He's also an author, with his second book -  The Washington Book - recently published: a collection of essays exploring what books by and about D.C. power players reveal about the people and political conflicts that define Washington. In this conversation, Carlos talks his path from Peru to South Bend to D.C., his accidental route to working in the press, some of his favorite Washington books and stories, and deeply mining his own insights into our current political moment.IN THIS EPISODECarlos' personal journey from Lima, Peru to Washington D.C...Carlos "gateway drug" books into the genre of Washington books...How Carlos defines what exactly is a "Washington Book"...Carlos weighs in on what he considers some of the earliest Washington Books...Carlos' rave  review of the U.S. Grant memoir...The place of All The President's Men in the pantheon of Washington Books...Carlos' favorite cliches from presidential campaign memoirs...The D.C. corridors of power that are undercovered in Washington Books...The Washington Books that are purely exercises in settling scores...Carlos compares the Donald Trump of 2016 to the Donald Trump of 2024...The Washington Books that never were that Carlos would love to read...What reading Vladimir Putin revealed to Carlos about the Russian leader...Carlos' 101 on sharp essay-writing...Carlos waxes nostalgic about the late Washinton Post Outlook Section...AND The 1619 Project, Alexis de Tocqueville, all sorts of minutia, Jody Allen, the American Enterprise Institute, Carol Anderson, animating impulses, The Appalachian Trail, Appomattox, asymmetric polarization, Peter Baker, Steve Bannon, Bob Barnett, beleaguered officials, Joe Biden, Joan Biskupic, Kate Boo, George H.W. Bush, Robert Caro, Jimmy Carter, Jesus Christ, Julie Davis, drop-down menus, enabling environments, farm foremen, The Federal Reserve, Craig Fehrman, Foreign Policy magazine, full absorption, Susan Glasser, Garret Graff, Lindsay Graham, Alan Greenspan, Stephanie Grisham, Maggie Haberman, Susan Hennessey, Fiona Hill, Dustin Hoffman, holy crap anecdotes, David Ignatius, joining-ness, Jurassic Park, Bob Kaiser, Ibram X. Kendi, the Kerner Commission, Adam Kushner, Robert E. Lee, Joe Lieberman, Steve Luxenberg, Thomas Mann, David Maraniss, Mark Meadows, mid-level authoritarian regimes, military duds, Mark Milley, Robert Moses, Robert Mueller, murdered darlings, murky institutions, The New York Review of Books, Kirstjen Nielsen, Notre Dame, Barack Obama, obligatory campaign memoirs, obscene crescendos, Norm Ornstein, parallel histories, the paralysis of power, George Pataki, Tim Pawlenty, policy wonks, John Pomfret, Robert Redford, Marco Rubio, Mark Sanford, Michael Schaffer, Brent Scowcroft, Michael Shear, silent Moscow, John Sununu, Barton Swaim, targeted excerpts, Mark Twain, Mario Vargas Llosa, velociraptors, Scott Walker, Ben Wittes, Michael Wolff, Bob Woodward...& more!

JD and Joel discuss gold's new record high and silver's tear upwards, an earthquake in NYC, headline jobs numbers, and Peter's most recent podcast. OTHER TOPICS DISCUSSED -Gold is trading at $2,329 (up $100 on the week) -Silver is trading at $27.46 (up about 10% on the week) -Fed governor Adriana Kugler's dovish comments push gold above $2300) -Nonfarm payrolls come in above expectations (303,000 vs. 200,000) -The recent spike in commodities -Peter Schiff's recent podcast -Alan Greenspan's affinity for Rothbard Quote from Murray Rothbard: It is easy to be conspicuously 'compassionate' if others are being forced to pay the cost.” The SchiffGold Friday Gold Wrap podcast combines a succinct summary of the week's economic precious metals news coupled with thoughtful analysis. You can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts and other podcasting platforms. The links are below. SchiffGold on Instagram: www.instagram.com/schiffgoldnews SchiffGold on Twitter: twitter.com/SchiffGold SchiffGold on Facebook: www.facebook.com/schiffgold SchiffGold's website: www.schiffgold.com

Alan Greenspan served as chair of the Federal Reserve for 18 years, cooling inflation in the 1990s and demonstrating that the Fed was independent from politicians. But he also made mistakes that helped lead to the financial crisis of 2008. In this episode, biographer Sebastian Mallaby dives into Greenspan’s complicated legacy. Plus, why beef and other animal product prices haven’t fallen to pre-pandemic levels, and what wholesale inventory numbers signal about the economy.

Alan Greenspan served as chair of the Federal Reserve for 18 years, cooling inflation in the 1990s and demonstrating that the Fed was independent from politicians. But he also made mistakes that helped lead to the financial crisis of 2008. In this episode, biographer Sebastian Mallaby dives into Greenspan’s complicated legacy. Plus, why beef and other animal product prices haven’t fallen to pre-pandemic levels, and what wholesale inventory numbers signal about the economy.

The Daily Show jumps in our time machine and heads back to this day in 2013: the nation is in the middle of a Republican-caused government shutdown and the Democrats have just botched the nationwide rollout of Obamacare. Host Jon Stewart recaps the failed launch before diving deep into HealthCare.gov's glitches and issues with John Oliver. Stewart then celebrates the legalization of same-sex marriage in New Jersey, recapping a wedding ceremony officiated by a very excited Cory Booker. Alan Greenspan then joins Jon to discuss his new book "The Map and the Territory" and the lessons learned in the years since the Great Recession. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Are most modern problems caused by selfishness or a lack of it? Ayn Rand, a Russian American philosopher and writer, would say it's the latter — that selfishness is not a vice but a virtue — and that capitalism is the ideal system. Everyone from Donald Trump, to Alan Greenspan, to Brad Pitt have sung Ayn Rand's praises. The Library of Congress named her novel Atlas Shrugged the second most influential book in the U.S. after the Bible. Ayn Rand wasn't politically correct, she was belligerent and liked going against the grain. And although she lived by the doctrine of her own greatness, she was driven by the fear that she would never be good enough. In this episode, historian Jennifer Burns will guide us through Rand's evolution and how she eventually reshaped American politics, becoming what Burns calls "a gateway drug to life on the right."