Podcasts about Federal Reserve Bank

A bipartisan bill signed into law last year is now giving Native Americans residing in Arizona the option to update their state-issued identification to show their tribal affiliation. As KJZZ's Gabriel Pietrorazio reports, it comes at a time when Indigenous peoples are being swept up in immigration raids – including Peter Yazzie (Navajo), who was recently detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in the Phoenix metro area. This new marker is akin to getting an organ donor or veteran insignia on any form of ID, including a driver license. To do so, applicants need to prove that they're enrolled in a tribe by submitting a Certificate of Indian Blood (CIB), and so far, the Arizona Department of Transportation has gotten more than 1,600 requests for the designation. That idea of streamlining legal documents came from State Rep. Myron Tsosie (Navajo/D-AZ). “Instead of having to dig out all your cards to show that you are Native American.” And had nothing to do with ICE. “That wasn't the purpose, but I'm hearing from constituents saying that I feel safer now.” And it's something Thomas Cody, executive director of the Navajo Nation's Division for Child and Family Services, is encouraging his Diné urban relatives to seek out. “It's unfortunate that we have to have an ID that we're Native Americans. We shouldn't but I'm glad the state of Arizona, Gov. [Katie] Hobbs is taking an extra step.” His deputy director Sonlatsa Jim thinks this service is much-needed – not just for Navajos living in the Grand Canyon State. “Because we are the largest Native American tribe, you'll find a Navajo tribal member anywhere in the United States.” That's why Tsosie is working with neighboring Utah and New Mexico state lawmakers to adopt his legislation aiming to help cover more of Indian Country, including the rest of his sprawling 27,000-square-mile reservation. The federal government is reviewing the business program that benefits Alaska Native corporations and tribes. The Alaska Desk’s Alena Naiden from our flagship station KNBA reports. In a video posted on X January 16, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said his department will review the 8(a) Business Development Program. That program falls under the federal Small Business Administration (SBA) and supports businesses owned by socially disadvantaged individuals or tribes including Alaska Native Corporations. We are taking a sledgehammer to the oldest DEI program in the federal government—the 8(a) program. pic.twitter.com/c9iH8gcqG7 — Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) January 16, 2026 Sec. Hegseth said in the video that the 8(a) program promotes the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) framework and race-based contracting. In the 8(a) program, the federal government sets aside contracting opportunities for disadvantaged small businesses. Tribal entities can have multiple companies in the program, while individuals can only have one. Alaska Native Corporations rely heavily on federal contracts often received through the 8(a) program. Data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis shows that it is their primary source of revenue. And most of those contracts come from the U.S. Department of Defense. Quinton Carroll is the executive director of the Native American Contractors Association, and originally from Utqiagvik. “Native participation in the 8(a) program is not a DEI initiative.” Carroll says the program “fulfills longstanding federal trust and treaty obligations to tribes, Alaska Native Corporations, and Native Hawaiian Organizations.” Hegseth ordered a line-by-line review of sole-source 8(a) contracts that are over $20 million. He said in the social media video that the department will get rid of contracts that do not make the country's military more lethal. Hegseth also said the department will make sure that the businesses getting a contract are the ones actually doing the work. He claimed that often small businesses receive the contract, take a fee, and pass it to a giant consulting firm. However, Carroll says Native federal contractors have been partners of the Department of Defense. He added that Native contractors also support the elimination of fraud and waste within the program. The 8(a) program has faced scrutiny from other directions as well. President Donald Trump signed an executive order in April, directing rewriting of federal contracting regulations. The SBA and Treasury department have been both investigating the program as well. Get National Native News delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up for our daily newsletter today. Download our NV1 Android or iOs App for breaking news alerts. Check out the latest episode of Native America Calling Friday, January 23, 2026 — Native Bookshelf: “Special Places, Sacred Circles” by Virginia Driving Hawk Sneve

Zhu Wang and Russell Wong discuss the shutdown in the production of pennies in the U.S. and their research on how the penny's demise is expected to impose costs on consumers. Wang is vice president for research in financial and payments systems and Wong is a senior economist, both at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2026/speaking_2026_01_21_penny

This Day in Legal History: Nixon Aides ConvictedOn January 21, 1975, three of Richard Nixon's closest aides—H.R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, and former Attorney General John Mitchell—were convicted for their roles in the Watergate cover-up. The charges? Conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury. These convictions weren't just about punishing political wrongdoing; they were the direct legal aftermath of the Supreme Court's ruling in United States v. Nixon six months earlier. That decision famously held that executive privilege—long seen as a near-impenetrable shield—does not extend to cover-ups and criminal conduct. The message was as clear as it was historic: even the most powerful figures in government are not beyond the reach of the law.The Watergate trials became a masterclass in the tension between power and accountability. These weren't fringe operatives—they were the President's top men, brought down not by partisan maneuvering but by due process. In convicting them, the courts affirmed a fundamental principle: constitutional protections are not carte blanche for corruption. That principle has since been tested repeatedly, often invoked but rarely with the same clarity.While Nixon himself was pardoned by Gerald Ford, his aides faced real legal consequences. And in doing so, they served as a sobering example of what happens when loyalty to power eclipses loyalty to the law.On January 24, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a high-stakes case involving President Donald Trump's attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook—an unprecedented move that could reshape the legal boundaries of central bank independence. Trump is challenging a lower court ruling that barred him from removing Cook while her legal challenge continues. At issue is whether a president can dismiss a Fed governor without due process, despite the Federal Reserve Act's “for cause” removal standard, which lacks clear definition.Cook, the first Black woman appointed to the Fed's board (by President Biden in 2022), argues Trump's push is politically motivated, tied to disagreements over monetary policy. Trump cited past mortgage fraud allegations—which Cook denies—as grounds for her removal, but a district court found those likely insufficient and in violation of her Fifth Amendment rights. The D.C. Circuit declined to stay that ruling.The case has major implications: no president has ever tried to fire a Fed governor, and the Court's decision could determine how insulated the central bank remains from political interference. It also arrives amid broader questions about the scope of presidential control over independent agencies—and a criminal probe into Fed Chair Jerome Powell, which many see as part of the same pressure campaign.By way of brief background, a Federal Reserve governor is a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the central banking authority of the United States. The Board is composed of seven governors, each appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve staggered 14-year terms. These governors play a critical role in shaping U.S. monetary policy, overseeing the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks, and regulating certain financial institutions. Their primary responsibilities include setting the discount rate, influencing the federal funds rate (the interest rate banks charge each other for overnight loans), and voting on key decisions made by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)—the body that manages the nation's money supply and interest rate targets.Importantly, Fed governors are designed to be insulated from political pressure to preserve the central bank's independence. That's why they can only be removed by the president “for cause”—a vague legal standard that has rarely, if ever, been tested. This structural independence is meant to prevent short-term political interests from influencing decisions that have long-term economic consequences, such as controlling inflation, stabilizing employment, or responding to financial crises. While their work often operates behind the scenes, the policies they help shape impact virtually every corner of the U.S. economy—from mortgage rates to job growth to the value of the dollar.US Supreme Court considers Trump's bid to fire Fed's Lisa Cook | ReutersA court-appointed special master has recommended that women suing Johnson & Johnson over claims its talc-based products caused ovarian cancer should be allowed to present expert testimony supporting that link in upcoming trials. Retired Judge Freda Wolfson found that the plaintiffs' experts used reliable methods and cited statistically significant studies connecting genital talc use to ovarian cancer. The recommendation—part of a sprawling litigation involving over 67,500 cases—moves the lawsuits closer to federal trial, possibly later this year.Wolfson also allowed J&J's experts to present rebuttal testimony, but excluded certain plaintiff theories, such as talc migration via inhalation or links to fragrance chemicals and heavy metals. J&J criticized the ruling and plans to challenge it, arguing that the scientific evidence wasn't rigorously vetted.The litigation has dragged on for years, complicated by failed bankruptcy attempts by J&J to shield itself from liability. While the company denies its talc contains asbestos or causes cancer, prior jury verdicts have yielded multi-billion-dollar awards for plaintiffs, though some have been overturned. The case could become a major bellwether for corporate liability and the legal standard for expert scientific evidence in mass torts.Experts can testify about suspected J&J talc products' cancer link, special master recommends | ReutersLindsey Halligan, a Trump-aligned prosecutor and former personal attorney to the president, is leaving her post at the U.S. Justice Department after a federal judge sharply rebuked her for continuing to act as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia beyond her legally allowed interim term. Appointed without Senate confirmation, Halligan's authority expired after 120 days, yet she continued using the title—prompting Judge David Novak to call her conduct a “charade” and warn of potential disciplinary action.Halligan had led politically charged investigations targeting Trump adversaries like former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, though those cases were dismissed due to questions over her legitimacy. The Justice Department is appealing those rulings, but the controversy has sparked internal tension, with Novak criticizing the DOJ's recent filings as inflammatory and unprofessional.Her departure follows Senate Democrats' refusal to advance her formal nomination, citing the “blue slip” tradition that allows home-state senators to block nominees. Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed Democrats for obstructing Halligan's tenure, while Trump allies hinted at retaliation if the court names a replacement. The episode underscores ongoing friction between the judiciary, the Justice Department, and Trump's efforts to assert political control over federal prosecutions.After judge's rebuke, Trump ally Halligan to leave US Justice Department | ReutersA Massachusetts judge has ruled that Kalshi, a New York-based prediction market platform, cannot offer sports betting services in the state without a proper gambling license. The decision comes after Attorney General Andrea Campbell sued Kalshi, arguing that it was illegally offering unlicensed sports wagers to residents, including users as young as 18. Judge Christopher Barry-Smith agreed, stating that state oversight of sports betting protects public health and financial interests.Kalshi, which allows users to bet on outcomes of events like sports, politics, and the economy, claimed that its operations fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), due to its status as a registered contract market. The judge rejected that argument, ruling that federal oversight of financial instruments does not override state authority to regulate gambling.Kalshi plans to appeal the injunction, which could be finalized following a hearing. This marks the first court-ordered halt of Kalshi's operations in a state, though it faces similar legal challenges elsewhere. The case underscores growing friction between emerging event-based financial markets and traditional gambling laws.Kalshi cannot operate sports-prediction market in Massachusetts, judge rules | Reuters 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

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has been the subject of very public attacks by President Trump, and a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice. These are seen as efforts to influence the Fed to lower interest rates for short-run political advantage. But there has been widespread pushback to these efforts. Kenneth Kuttner joins EconoFact Chats to discuss how and why central banks are set up to be insulated from political pressure, and the economic consequences of a failure of central bank independence. Ken is the Robert F. White Class of 1952 Professor of Economics at Williams College. He has also served as Assistant Vice President in the Research Departments of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

We explore the forces likely to shape financial markets in 2026 and how to make better decisions as you pursue your goals this year.Topics covered include:The difference between intentions and resolutionsKey behavioral biases and how to overcome themThe cautionary tale of a private real estate fund that went publicIs the affordability crisis real?The big test for AI in 2026The financial and economic outlook for the yearSponsorsGelt - Taxes Done RightMasterworks - Invest in multimillion-dollar artwork offeringsDelete Me – Use code David20 to get 20% offInsiders Guide Email NewsletterGet our free Investors' Checklist when you sign up for the free Money for the Rest of Us email newsletterOur Premium ProductsAsset CampMoney for the Rest of Us PlusShow NotesA Slightly Better You in the New Year by Roland Fryer—The Wall Street JournalPaying Not to Go to the Gym by Stefano DellaVigna and Ulrike Malmendier—American Economic AssociationHandbook of Cognitive Biases—Federal Intelligence Service FISEmployed full time: Median usual weekly real earnings: Wage and salary workers: 16 years and over—Federal Reserve Bank of St. LouisAmerica's affordability crisis is (mostly) a mirage—The EconomistWhen Your Private Fund Turns $1 Into 60 Cents by Jason Zweig—The Wall Street JournalCanadians Are Furious After Real Estate Funds Lock Up Their Money by Paula Sambo—BloombergBlue Rock TI+ Annual Report—Securities and Exchange CommissionWhich jobs have grown (and declined) fastest during your working life? by Andrew Van Dam—The Washington PostIs AI More Like a Mind or a Market? by Walter Frick—BloombergDon't Fear the Bubble Bursting by Carl Benedikt Frey—The New York TimesRelated Episodes484: 7 Steps to Living a Longer Life414: Use Caution with Private REITs like Blackstone's BREITSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Anna Kovner, director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, reviews the significant, rapid changes in trade policy, immigration policy, and the size of the federal workforce in 2025. She also discusses how the Richmond Fed has assessed the economic impact of these changes through its research and outreach programs. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2026/speaking_2026_01_14_kovner_year_later

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureConspiracy no more, the D’s in Mass want to limit miles people can drive because of climate change. Biden/Obama forces electrical prices higher, Trump is now bringing the prices down and AI datacenters will be powered separately. The [CB] awakening has begun. Sometime you need to show the people the truth. The world is changing, Trump has shutdown the money supply around the world, the [DS] is in a deep panic and soon the people of Iran will take back their own country. As the [DS] criminal syndicate falls apart are they planning an armed civil war? Trump admin designates the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, other chapters to follow. In the end the Patriots have full control, once the chaos begins the partios will round them all up, it will be clean and swift. Economy https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2010831605430976627?s=20  Telecommunications, Utilities, & Energy and now heads to the Senate Ways and Means Committee (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");    major changes beginning this week to ensure that Americans don't “pick up the tab” for their POWER consumption, in the form of paying higher Utility bills. We are the “HOTTEST” Country in the World, and Number One in AI. Data Centers are key to that boom, and keeping Americans FREE and SECURE but, the big Technology Companies who build them must “pay their own way.” Thank you, and congratulations to Microsoft. More to come soon! President DJT Trump Will Request to Limit Credit Card Interest Rates to 10% for One Year to Combat the Scams of the Big Financial Companies   Trump Administration. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP This initiative is a great for reversing the damage caused by leftist policies that prioritized uncontrolled spending and galloping inflation over the well-being of the working people. Under the Biden administration, credit card interest rates skyrocketed, reaching an average of 21.5 % in 2024, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank, exacerbated by inflation that reached peaks of 9 % in 2022. This escalation was not an accident, but the direct result of Democratic policies that injected trillions in unnecessary stimuli, increasing the national debt and forcing the Fed to raise base rates to contain the crisis. Source:  gatewayhispanic.com  https://twitter.com/truflation/status/2011071380175860037?s=20   price data has been showing  https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/2010924086981984640?s=20 https://twitter.com/DrJStrategy/status/2011032604313518251?s=20  a hoax. What Powell actually did •Powell chose to go public with a dramatic video statement saying DOJ subpoenas “threatened a criminal indictment” over his testimony on the Fed's multibillion‑dollar building renovations. •He explicitly framed the subpoenas as “pretexts” and cast them as retaliation for the Fed setting rates independently of the president, elevating a renovation/cost‑overrun inquiry into an existential attack on central bank independence. The framing of criminal indictment came from Powell! In what look liked a scripted response, all of the Fed acolytes on Wall St cried foul, they bought in hook line and sinker!!! What the U.S. Attorney is saying •The U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C. has stated they contacted the Fed “on multiple occasions” about cost overruns and Powell's congressional testimony, were ignored, and therefore resorted to formal legal process, which they stress “is not a threat.” •Jeanine Pirro has been explicit that “the word ‘indictment' has come out of Mr. Powell's mouth, no one else's,” and that “none of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach.” “Above the law” behaviour. •Powell now publicly insists “no one is above the law,” even as the record shows the Fed disregarded informal outreach and only engaged once grand jury subpoenas landed, which is the opposite of transparent cooperation. Recall Choke Point 2.0 and the unbanking of individuals. •By recasting a straightforward question of cost overruns and possible misstatements to Congress as an illegitimate “criminal indictment threat,” Powell is effectively demanding a special zone of immunity wrapped in the rhetoric of independence. Why central bankers are “charging the hill” •Former Fed chairs and global monetary grandees have rushed out statements condemning the probe as an attack on Fed independence, treating any prosecutorial look at a central banker as inherently out of bounds. The former Fed officials' statement is doing exactly what the “51 intel officials” letter did on the Hunter Biden laptop: using elite signatures to launder a political narrative into institutional dogma and declare scrutiny itself illegitimate. Powell and his allies are recasting a narrow DOJ inquiry into cost overruns and testimony accuracy as an existential assault on “independence,” and an all‑too‑willing media is once again treating the letter as revealed truth instead of asking hard questions This closes ranks around the idea that central banks sit on a higher plane than normal agencies, immune not only from political pressure on rates, which is legitimate, but also from standard legal and fiscal oversight, which is not. MSM and the death of the 4th estate •Much of legacy media has adopted Powell's framing almost verbatim: “unprecedented attack on independence,” “monetary policy under assault,” while relegating the core factual dispute,ignored outreach, cost overruns, accuracy of testimony, to secondary status. Powell and the central banking crowd are behaving in a way that is frankly odd: they stonewall basic oversight, scream “independence” the moment anyone reaches for legal tools, and act as though they stand above the law—while a compliant MSM gladly carries their narrative, proof the fourth estate has checked out. All of this does not meet the smell test. Is the Fed above the US Constitution? Why did Powell go public and choose the framing that he did? Why did MSM and so called objective pundits not do any objective analysis. Smells like elements of a Russia Russia Russia hoax strategy to me. https://twitter.com/MetaLawMan/status/2010816276508082343?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2010816276508082343%7Ctwgr%5E6585e9ff019ea8191354a3bf06c918cdfd10f00c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fjoehoft.com%2Fcorrupt-fed-head-jerome-powell-added-trillions-in-unnecessary-us-debt%2F   service of a subpoena on the Fed is not a threat to indict him. Subpoenas are investigative tools. It's possible that the government separately advised Powell that he was a “target” of the investigation, but he didn't say that. 3. Nowhere in the statement does Powell say his testimony to Congress about the Fed construction project was truthful and accurate. https://twitter.com/USAttyPirro/status/2010886969518170452?s=20  Powell's mouth, no one else's. None of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach. This office makes decisions based on the merits, nothing more and nothing less. We agree with the chairman of the Federal Reserve that no one is above the law, and that is why we expect his full cooperation. Political/Rights https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/2011107269585616922?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2011108530842108290?s=20 https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2010742739562901678?s=20   Procedure is same used in any location, such as hospital etc. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2011067479603257616?s=20 https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2011085032606102012?s=20  American law and the accompanying reduction in crime. However, there are a few certain locations where law enforcement refuses to assist in law enforcement, and the local politicians and a base of Marxist-organized civilians actively oppose (sometimes violently) ICE’s lawful operations. It’s those latter locations, few in number but outsized in media reporting–all run by Democrats–that give a false impression as to how much Americans appreciate getting what they voted for. https://twitter.com/KCPayTreeIt/status/2010475982038147336?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/2010965644867485898?s=20   Tehran, according to the Wall Street Journal https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2011029585161568307?s=20 lowballing. In 2019 they said 230 died, Reuters reported 1,500. Iran International estimated 2,000+ last week based on hospital reports and morgue footage. Now the regime’s confirming it. But they’re framing it as “terrorists killed these people” not “we shot 2,000 protesters.” That’s the setup for mass trials and executions. 2,000 dead in 2 weeks. That’s 140+ per day. During a communications blackout. In a country claiming it has “total control.” Source: Reuters, Iranian official https://twitter.com/IranIntl_En/status/2011018647255322754?s=20   a coordinated blackout aimed not only at security control but at concealing the truth, reflected in internet cuts, crippled communications, media shutdowns, and the intimidation of journalists and witnesses. Publication was delayed until the evidence converged. The assessment is based on a multi-stage review of information from a source close to the Supreme National Security Council; two sources in the presidential office; accounts from several sources within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Mashhad, Kermanshah and Isfahan; testimonies from eyewitnesses and families of those killed; field reports; data linked to medical centers; and information provided by doctors and nurses in multiple cities.  Trump administration designates 3 Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organizations   The Trump administration labeled three Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organizations on Tuesday, imposing sanctions on them and their members. The Lebanese, Jordanian and Egyptian chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood pose a risk to the United States and American interests, according to the Treasury and State departments. “These designations reflect the opening actions of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood chapters' violence and destabilization wherever it occurs,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement obtained by The Associated Press. “The United States will use all available tools to deprive these Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism.” The Jordanian and Egyptian branches were designated by the Treasury as specifically designated global terrorists for providing support to Hamas. The Lebanese branch was labeled a foreign terrorist organization, which is the most severe, meaning it is a criminal offense to provide material support to the group. Source;  wsbt.com  Rubio Designates Egyptian, Jordanian and Lebanese Chapters of Muslim Brotherhood as Foreign Terrorist Organizations Keep in mind the Muslim Brotherhood is the fabric on the umbrella of political Islam. Each faction represents and individual spline on the umbrella construct, but the Muslim Brotherhood overall is a political extremist system for various levels of authentic Islam. The regional chapters that really matter, the difficult ones to navigate will be in Qatar, Syria and especially the Turkish factions. These are more politically connected to the home government interests. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com 1237 Apr 22, 2018 1:31:31 AM EDT Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 3e4934 No. 1141069  “The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan [MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…” https://clarionproject.org/muslim_brotherhood_explanatory_memorandum/ Q 3881 Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: b03e04 No.8238822 Feb 24 2020 20:36:43 (EST) EMHyS2xXkAA8JrB.png https://twitter.com/cain_nate/status/1231066589996318720 Listen carefully. Think: re: why [no] arrests (justice) yet? What if (almost) every critical position [sr] within the US GOV apparatus was infiltrated? WHAT MUST BE DONE FIRST? THE SWAMP RUNS DEEP. +Sleepers Backgrounds are important. Muslim Brotherhood List of ‘in the news now [names]‘ w/ known ties to Islam? THIS IS NOT ANOTHER 4-YEAR ELECTION. [assumptions correct – package well rec [known]] Q https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/2010902536757162398?s=20 765 Feb 15, 2018 1:08:41 AM EST Q !UW.yye1fxo ID: 276796 No. 382161  WATCH THE WATER. Q War/Peace Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2010746570853990773?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2010419447987937370?s=20 Antifa TikTok Agitator Urges Armed Leftist Militias to ‘Fight' ICE Agents Radical TikTok agitator Danesh Noshirvan has crossed a dangerous line. The Antifa-aligned mega influencer is now openly calling for organized, armed left-wing militias to confront ICE agents and federal law enforcement in America's largest cities. Danesh Noshirvan is directly linked to Scott Dworkin, founder of the Democratic Coalition Against Donald Trump. According to reports, Dworkin and even foreign interests bankroll Noshirvan's activities. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2010988104853659986?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2010833162151346316?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2010833162151346316%7Ctwgr%5Ec535903544267d9392f4466181097498d09593a1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fnew-minnesota-ag-keith-ellison-minneapolis-mayor-jacob%2F   should be in JAIL. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Says There Are “DISTURBING TAPES” of Minnesota AG Keith Ellison Taking Money to Stop Investigations Into Somali Fraud   the U.S. Treasury Secretary confirmed that federal authorities are aggressively “following the money” amid explosive fraud investigations tied to Minnesota's sprawling Somali-linked financial networks. According to Bessent, the Treasury Department has launched multiple enforcement actions focused on suspicious financial flows between Minnesota residents and businesses and overseas destinations, including East Africa, as the federal government intensifies its immigration and fraud crackdown in the state. But the real bombshell dropped during an interview with Blaze: Scott Bessent:“It's hard to follow the money. There are evidently some disturbing tapes of AG Ellison in meetings with people who donated to him—calling for political favors to stop the investigations. We'll see. I don't want to get out ahead of the investigation. It's going to be very methodical. But I can guarantee you—when the bear trap snaps, we're going to get these folks. We're going to follow the money, whether it's here in Minneapolis and St. Paul or over in East Africa. There are tons of luxury properties and cars that have been bought over there.” WATCH: Source: thegatewaypundit.com    Countries who illegally entered the USA though Sleepy Joe Biden's HORRIBLE Open Border's Policy. Every place we go, crime comes down. In Chicago, despite a weak and incompetent Governor and Mayor fighting us all the way, a big improvement was made. Thousands of Criminals were removed! Minnesota Democrats love the unrest that anarchists and professional agitators are causing because it gets the spotlight off of the 19 Billion Dollars that was stolen by really bad and deranged people. FEAR NOT, GREAT PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA, THE DAY OF RECKONING & RETRIBUTION IS COMING! Minnesota’s total population as of July 1, 2024, is estimated at 5,793,151.  Approximately 8% of the state’s population is foreign-born, meaning about 463,452 individuals, while 92% (around 5,329,699) are native-born (U.S.-born). Minnesota is home to the largest Somali-American population in the United States, with people of Somali descent making up a notable ethnic group.  Recent estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) for 2024 put the number of individuals of Somali descent in Minnesota at around 107,000 to 108,000, representing about 1.85% of the state’s total population.  (Note: Some sources provide slightly varying figures, such as 76,000 as a lower estimate, but the ACS data consistently points to the higher range. )Breakdown Within the Somali Population in MinnesotaThe Somali community in Minnesota includes both U.S.-born individuals and foreign-born immigrants or refugees. Here’s a detailed split based on nativity and citizenship status:  https://twitter.com/DataRepublican/status/1919002207896174765?s=20  or his NGOs appeared in the Journal of Democracy. It’s the flagship journal of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the same organization featured prominently in that widely circulated “Uniparty NGO” network diagrams below. NED is a U.S. government-funded outfit. It includes currently sitting members of Congress on its board… from both parties, not just former officials. Soros's involvement is deep. He has co-chaired NED conferences abroad and his Open Society NGOs regularly partner with NED operations, especially in countries undergoing “transitions” (read: regime change or soft power penetration). Together, Soros and US-backed NGOs have shaped funding pipelines, media narratives, and even foreign electoral strategies. So when people ask, “Why isn't Soros banned?” … they need to understand: he’s not an outsider. He’s part of our government. The Uniparty protects and partners with him, because he helps carry out a shared foreign policy vision… the same one that labels President Trump as a threat to democracy. NED members include:    Victoria Nuland – Director of the National Endowment for Democracy; Acting United States Deputy Secretary of State under Biden (served in both parties).   Karen Bass – Vice Chair of the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Representative and current Mayor of Los Angeles (Democrat).    Todd Young – Honorary at the National Endowment for Democracy; U.S. Senator from Indiana (Republican).    Elise Stefanik – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; U.S. Representative from New York and House GOP Conference Chair (Republican).   Mel Martinez – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Senator from Florida (Republican).   Steve Biegun – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State (Republican).    Todd Young – Honorary at the National Endowment for Democracy; US Senator from Indiana (Republican). https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2011165232815882294?s=20 Just In: Bill and Hillary Clinton Refuse To Testify in Front of House Oversight Committee, Daring Chairman Comer To Hold Them in Contempt of Congress After months of dispute against House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Bill and Hillary Clinton have today (13) REFUSED to testify in the House's Jeffrey Epstein investigation. This escalates the battle with Comer, Republican of Kentucky, and the former U.S. President and Secretary of State are effectively daring him to hold them in contempt of Congress. The New York Times reported: Source: thegatewaypundit.com President Trump's Plan Lefty DOJ Lawyers Rage-Quit After Harmeet Dhillon Blocks ICE Witch Hunt A group of lawyers in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) have reportedly resigned after Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon declined to investigate the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer involved in last week’s shooting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The group had apparently pushed Dhillon to let a DOJ delegation fly to Minneapolis to investigate the January 7 shooting death of far-left agitator Renee Nicole Good, who was shot after she used her two-ton Honda Pilot as a weapon against the officer. Despite pressure from the lefty lawyers – described as “career prosecutors” – to initiate a witch hunt against the officer, Dhillon put a kibosh on their plans. They were apparently informed of the decision not to move forward with an investigation of the ICE agent last Friday.  After being told “no,” a group of “top leaders” in the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division “have left their jobs to register their frustration with the department.” Shock, horror. Sounds like the DOJ is well rid of this cabal, and these departures could be part of a trend of mass resignations amongst the old guard. This, of course, also saves Dhillon the trouble of having to draw up their pink slips.  Source: redstate.com  https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2010791586980933826?s=20   later. This is a system built for abuse by design https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2010886531838595278?s=20 https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2010777023673999531?s=20 https://twitter.com/USDOL/status/2010771852696617401?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

We all love winners. We love hearing about the big wins and the perfect track records. It feels good. It feels safe. It instills us with a sense of trust. But I've been in business long enough to know that virtually all individuals who are long-term winners have had profound moments of failure from which they learned invaluable lessons. Those are the people I really want to hear from. They have the kind of knowledge we all need as we navigate through life. It's called wisdom. Surgeons have a saying: “If you've never had a complication, you haven't done enough surgery.” In my surgeon days, I had a handful of complications. Let me tell you—they are no fun. You stay up at night replaying things in your mind, trying to figure out how you could have done things differently—how you could have had a better outcome. Even when unavoidable, those complications teach you something you'll never get from textbooks. It's been no different for me when it comes to business and investing. But I take comfort in knowing that even the greatest investors of all time had their moments of failure and rose from the ashes stronger and wiser. Warren Buffett. Ray Dalio. Every big winner has a story of failure. And while it may be cliché to say that we learn best from mistakes, I truly believe it. The good news is that those mistakes don't have to be our own. Learning from other people's mistakes can be just as effective. This week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is with Russell Gray—a guy many of you already know from his podcasting and radio career. Russ lived through 2008 up close. He took a beating, and he talks openly about what went wrong. But that period also changed the way he sees the world—in a good way. It changed how he thinks about risk, leverage, and what actually matters when things stop going up. That mindset is a big reason he's been successful since then. It's a conversation worth your time. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  If you let the debt run, at some point you fall into a debt trap where the interest on the outstanding debt consumes all of the available discretionary income, and then you’re borrowing just to service the debt. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula Podcast coming to you from Montecito, California. Before we begin today, I wanna remind you there’s website associated with this. Podcast called wealthformula.com. It’s where you will go if you would like to, uh, become more, uh, ingrained with the community, including getting on some of our lists such as the Accredit Investor Club. Of course, it is a new year and there are new deal flows coming through. Lots of opportunities that you won’t see anywhere else if you are a, an accredit investor, which means you. Make at least $200,000 per year for the last couple years with a reasonable expectation of doing so in the future. That’s 300,000 if you’re filing jointly or you have a million dollars of net worth outside of your personal residence. If you, uh, meet those criteria, you are an accredited investor. Congratulations. You don’t have to apply for anything, whatever, but you do need to go to wealthformula.com. Sign up for the Accredited Investor Club, get onboarded. And all you do at that point is look at deal flow, and if nothing else, you’ll learn something. So check it out. And who doesn’t want to be part of a club? Now let’s talk, uh, a little bit about today’s show. You know, um, we all love winners, right? We love hearing about big wins, the perfect track record. It feels good. It feels safe, gives us a sense of trust. But the thing is, I’ve been in business long enough to know that virtually all individuals who are, what you would call long-term winners, have had profound moments of failure from which they learned, um, invaluable lessons. So those are the people that I really like to hear from. You know, they have the kind of knowledge we all need that as we navigate through all of life, and it’s called wisdom. Um, surgeons, as you know, I’m an ex surgeon. Have a saying, if you’ve never had a complication, you haven’t done enough surgery. Uh, in my surgery days, I certainly, you know, had a handful of complications just like anyone else who did a lot of surgery. And, and lemme tell you, there, there are no fun, right? So you stay up at night replying things in your mind, trying to figure out how you could have done things differently, how you could have had a better outcome. And sometimes you realize that those mistakes were unavoidable, but. You still learn something from them. And in these cases, you always learn something that you’re not gonna get from the textbooks, just from reading something. And you know what, it’s been no different for me when it comes to business and, and investing, but I, I take comfort in the fact, uh, that even the greatest investors of all time had their moments of failure and arose from the ashes stronger and wiser. All you have to do is look up stories of Warren Buffet and Ray Dalio. And Ray Dalio basically lost everything at one point, uh, because he, you know, he had a macro prediction that went completely south. But listen, uh, the, the point I’m trying to make here is that every big winner, every big winner I know of as a story of failure. And while it may be cliche to say, you know what we learned best from our mistakes, I, I truly believe that. But the good news is that those mistakes don’t have to be our own, right? So you can learn from other people’s mistakes as well, and that can be just as effective. Uh, so this week’s episode of Well, formula Podcast is featuring a guy that you may know. His name is Russell Gray. Russ, uh, has been around a long time, uh, in the podcasting world. And radio. You know, he talks a lot. He’s talked many times to me at least about living through 2008. And you know what that was like, the beating he took and, you know, what went wrong? Uh, you know, it’s, it’s something that he talks about because, you know, he’s a successful guy and that period in time changed. You know, the way he sees the world, the way in which he behaves in that world. How he thinks about things like risk and leverage and you know, what actually matters when things stop going up. Uh, it’s a mindset thing and it’s important. Um, and we also obviously talk about other things as well, such as, uh, Russ’s current take on the economy. Uh, so anyway, it’s a, a good conversation and it’s one that you’re gonna wanna listen to, and we’ll have that for you right after these messages. Wealth formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying. You compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it at result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique, it’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its back. Turbo charge your investments. Visit www.wealthformulabanking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to Show Everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Russell Gray. He’s a second generation financial strategist and, uh, you may know him from being a, the former co-host of the Real Estate Guy Radio Show, which is one of the longest running, uh, uh, radio shows of its time, uh, in the United States. He’s, he’s a founder of. Raising Capitalist project, which is an initiative focused on helping aspiring investors and entrepreneurs how to better understand how wealth is actually created and how uh, economic systems really work. Uh, he’s best known for his emphasis on real assets, cash flow, economic cycles, and preserving wealth and what he views as an increasingly fragile financial system. Welcome, Ross. How are you? Good buck, happy to be here. And, uh, proud of your success on your show. I remember way back at the beginning you were like, Hey, I wanna start a podcast. Yeah. Yep. You’ve done a great job. Yeah, it was an idea. I was like, here’s the idea. Start a podcast, build a community, all that kind of stuff. But it’s interesting. Uh, well, and let’s talk about what’s going on now. You’ve spent decades teaching people about, you know, real assets and cash flow. But lately your writings feel more focused on systems and and macro forces. So what’s changed? Has something finally become too big to ignore? Well, I think there’s two things you know personally, uh, most people who have heard of me or followed me know that 2008 wasn’t kind to me. I was in the mortgage business. I was very leveraged into real estate all over the place. Had my businesses for cash flow, had the real estate for equity growth. Believed that real estate was hyper resilient and gonna be the beneficiary of inflation. Didn’t understand the dependency on credit markets in both my business and my portfolio. And so that was a big mess, not doing, uh, a real SWOT analysis and understanding. And the third part of that, that was tough, is that I operated the business primarily on credit lines as well. So I had virtually no cash. And so when the credit markets seized up. Canceled my income, it canceled my credit lines and it evaporated my equity. And now all I had was negative cash flow on debt, on real estate. I couldn’t control. And so I looked at that and I said to myself, you know, I’m a pretty smart guy. I. Pride myself on paying attention. So obviously I’m not paying attention to the right thing. So I became obsessed with the macro, uh, picture and, and the financial system, which, you know, to me it’s, it’s the macro economy is what’s going on with, uh. Geopolitics and the energy and, you know, even policy, uh, that affects, uh, how well money can flow through the system. Both monetary policy from the Federal Reserve and fiscal policy from the government now today in the Trump administration trade policy. And so I began to pay attention to all those things, but from the standpoint of not how it was gonna affect the stock market, but how it was gonna affect the bond market and interest rates and the availability of credit, and how it was gonna affect Main Street. Directly and specifically now in terms of jobs and job creation are real wages. And so when I started really looking at all that, um, I, I, I realized that there were some things happening that were gonna be really good, and there were also some things that we needed to pay attention to. And these things move very slowly. So in 2010. I saw that coming outta the financial crisis, the Chinese were very upset with the United States about how much the Fed Balance sheet was expanding, and they were concerned about their very large investment in US dollar denominated. Bonds, and so they began creating bilateral trade agreements with Russia and many other countries to where they could begin this large process of de Dollarizing. Well, that was the first time I’d seen that movie, because it was the same thing that the Europeans did after they saw the Nixon default. Right? They began working on the Euro, which took ’em from 71, 72 when they started, maybe 74 when they started, but it took ’em till 99 to get it done. But you know, once they got it in place, over time, the Euro, the Euro has taken over 20% of global trade. You know, that’s market share from the US dollar. And so I saw this BrickX thing beginning to form. Uh, and then I saw the other thing on the macro that I thought was gonna be really good was in the jobs act, something you’ve benefited from as a syndicator, we. I wrote that report, new law breaks Wall Street Monopoly. And so, uh, even though I, I can’t tell you I was a big fan of Barack Obama, but he signed that legislation that happened on his watch. And I think it was fantastic because now it allowed Main Street syndicators, main Street Capital raisers to advertise for accredited investors and began to really, uh, level that playing field and open up Main Street, uh, to invest directly in Main Street. And so I met you in the syndication program that we put together with the real estate guys to coach real estate investors on how to become capital raisers to, to capitalize on that trend. So that’s, you know, kind of how I kind of became doing what I’m doing. And then when I decided, uh, just about 20 months ago to depart the real estate guys, I wanted to take some of the things that I originally set out to do when I first met Robert Helms way back in the day. And, you know, as relationships go, you know, he has his interest in the things that he wants to do, and I had my interest in things I came to do. And for a long time we were aligned well enough to continue to work together. But it got to a point where, for me, I, I wanted to go off in a different direction, and part of that was driven. By the, the death of my late wife. Uh, you had me on the show right after that happened to me, and I was going through this like, who am I? Why am I here? What am I supposed to do next? What do I really want to get done before I die? And so all of those things kind of informed my personal decisions to, to make a switch. And then of course, what’s going on in the macro. Um, what I saw with Trump 1.0, what I saw in the Biden administration and those policies, and then what I thought would happen in Trump 2.0. And I did a presentation on this at the best ever conference in March of 2025, right after he’d been inaugurated. And, and so, uh, that, that’s kind of has me where I feel like there’s some real opportunity coming. Uh, there’s also some things we need to be aware of on Main Street. Yeah. So you’re bullish on Main Street in general, but you’ve been pretty cautious about the broader financial system. So, uh, what are the things that you’re worried about? Well, I, I think if you understand the way the financial system works, uh, it has a shelf life and that. It’s because it’s, it’s a system that is, depends upon ever increasing debt. Um, people say, I wanna pay the debt off, but if they, if they really understood the system, at least the way I think I understand it, uh, and I’m not alone in this, so it’s not something I just figured out on my own. But, um, you know. I, I don’t want to sit here and pretend like I’m the world’s foremost expert, but the way I understand the way the system works is that it, it requires ever increasing debt, and if we were to pay the debt off, it would collapse the system. So I think you waste a lot of time and energy and from a policy perspective, trying to argue about doing that. And I think that’s why it’s never, ever, no matter what administration, what politician, what mix of congress, what. Pressure there is everywhere globally. The system, the central banking system, the way it works globally, is designed to create ever increasing debt. So the, the flip side of that then is to let the debt run. And if you let the debt run, at some point you fall into a debt trap where the interest on the outstanding debt consumes all of the available discretionary income. And then you’re borrowing just to service the debt. Yeah, that’s about $1 trillion right now, by the way. Which is. Which is, uh, about the, the, the defense, uh, budget. Well, and I think that the bigger thing is when you look at, at the interest on the debt and mandatory spending, there’s virtually no room left after that. So if you’ve got, you’ve got the mandatory spending and you’ve got, um, debt service, you, you have very little room. So it’s not. Feasible either for two reasons. One is there’s just not enough discretionary room to be able to cut expenses enough to, to ever manage the debt. Number two, as I previously mentioned, if we were ever to effectively try to pay down the debt in any appreciable way, it would crash the the system. So the, the way I look at it is it’s, it’s, it’s got to be replaced. There’s going to be a great reset. I think the World Economic Forum was trying to set that up for the world, and they had an agenda. I’m, I’m not particularly fond of. Um, there’s been talk about creating a central bank digital currency, which I think is what, you know, the Federal Reserve and the, what I all call the wizards, uh, or the powers of B would prefer. Uh, but I think if you care about privacy and, and, you know, individual sovereignty, uh, and, and just personal freedom, um, I have a lot of concerns about a central bank digital currency. Um, I think the popularity of Bitcoin, uh, if it was, you know, and who knows what the. True origins were, but let’s just take it at face value. I think a lot of the people, at least that were the early adopters before it had the big price run up, was just a way to escape, uh, the system before it failed. And so you’ve got that. And then you’ve got, again, as I mentioned, the bricks and this global effort to de dollarize, which was I think really kicked off. After the great financial crisis and the massive expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet. And then I think picked up a little steam when we froze Russian assets and people began to see that the US might use the dollar and the dollar system, uh, for political instead of being neutral. And I think that picked up some steam. And, and so there’s, there’s both a geopolitical drive to. Uh, come up with a new system. There is, I think we’re at the end of a shelf life that some type of a new system is gonna have to be, uh, created. Uh, and, and then you look at what Donald Trump is doing and what he’s espousing. You know, let’s get rid of income taxes. Let’s get back to pulling in, uh, revenue from tariffs the way the country was originally founded. Uh, he’s talked about eliminating the IRS and going with an ERS, an external revenue service. There’s people that think that he might beat. Wanting to try to get back on some form of sound money, you know, coming out of, Hey, let’s audit the Fed, let’s audit the gold. I mean, let’s audit the gold. And, um, so, you know, we, you, you never know what what’s really gonna happen, but, but I think what we have to pay attention to are the signs that the system is beginning to break down. And one of those signs that I pay a lot of attention to is monetary, metals, gold and silver. I make a distinction between precious metals, which would also include platinum and palladium, and of course they’re strategic metals, but I just focus on monetary metals, which would be gold and silver, and gold and silver. We’re telling you that people would prefer to be the, the, the safe ha haven asset is no longer us treasuries, but, um, but, but gold and central banks have been driving a lot of it. This isn’t the retail market driving it yet. It, it’s really central banks have been accumulating. And so those are the ultimate insiders when it comes to currency. And if the insiders in the currency markets are repositioning into gold, uh, I’d, I’d call that a clue. Yeah, absolutely. Um. Yeah. You recently commented on the public criticism, president Donald Trump made toward, uh, uh, Peter Schiff. What stood out to you about that exchange? Maybe give us some background people. Not everybody knows who Peter is and, and, uh. And all that. So, yeah. Well, I mean, as you know, I’ve known Peter for 12 or 13 years and, uh, I had read his father’s work way back in the day. He is a very famous in the tax protestor world as somebody who just believed that income taxes were unconstitutional. And he resisted that and ended up going to jail for, died in jail as a matter of fact. And so that was, uh, I think sad. Um. But, but to me it felt like a little bit of being a political prisoner, but be that as it may, that’s how I got to know Peter. And so Peter is a guy that comes from the Austrian School of Economics and he believes in sound money. He believes in gold. He does not like Bitcoin. I’ve sat on panels the last two years with Peter, uh, in between him and Larry Lepard. And you know, Larry is a, a former gold guy. He’s still not opposed to gold, but he’s a hardcore sound money guy. But he likes Bitcoin. Peter hates Bitcoin and they get into it, and I usually sit in between ’em and try to keep things calm. Well, you know, so Peter ended up going on Fox and Friends, uh, I think on whatever it was, Friday the eighth I think it was, or whatever, whatever day that was. And he, he criticized Donald Trump’s spending. And, um, budget deficits and said that it would lead to inflation, and that’s a hot button for Trump. And so Trump, yeah. Uh, responded to him, uh, I think like four 30 in the morning on Saturday morning and called Peter, uh, a. Jerk and a total loser. Well, actually I saw it before Peter did, and so I took a screenshot and I texted it to him. I said, Hey, have you seen this? You know, maybe I’ll press is good press. And I think to a degree, maybe it has been me from, I understand Peter ended up on Tucker Carlson’s show as a result of that. So, but I made a video right after that because I, you know, there was a time when. I’m friends with Peter Schiff and I’m friends with Robert Kiyosaki. As you know, I, we introduced you to both those guys and, and at one point they didn’t like each other very much. They got into it ’cause, you know, and, and so we introduced ’em to each other and found that they had more in common than they, they didn’t. And I, I think that that would be true. Not that I’m in a position to introduce Peter to, to Donald Trump, but I think the way Peter is looking at it is true. Um, but there’s context and I think the context is super important. Now I’ve been studying Donald Trump as a businessman way before he was a presidential candidate or a politician, you know, before he was a polarizing guy, a pariah for some people. He, he was just this real estate guy. He’s good at marketing, he’s a real estate guy, and as you know. We got to know his longtime attorney, George Ross. And so I’ve had a chance to have conversations about what it was like working with Donald Trump, the real estate guy, and when he became a politician, I asked George, is he a crazy man? Does he shoot from the hip? And you know, I got a lot of reassurances that he is a sober sound. Methodical, self-disciplined guy and, and I think he uses the eroticism to keep people off balance as a negotiating tactic. And he writes about that in the art of the deal. So the context that I think that people need to have, and I’m not here to defend Donald Trump, the man. I’m not here to defend Donald Trump, the politician, but I look at the policies and what I think he’s up to in the context of realizing that we have a system that is fundamentally flawed and has to be remodeled. So to use a real estate, uh, metaphor, it would be like we have a hotel building that is very tired. It’s at the end of its life, it’s got to be remodeled, and so you can’t. Completely shut it down because it’s an operating business, so it’s gotta operate during the remodel. And so you begin to, um, reposition things and. You, you, you’re not gonna run optimally, so you’re gonna run some deficits while you’re doing the remodel. You’re gonna go into debt because you got a lot of CapEx to do, and during that period of time, your debt and deficits are gonna be a problem. But real estate guys look at debt and deficits not as a permanent condition. I think Peter is saying, Hey, you’re just running up debt and deficits. Well, in the short term he is. Honestly, I don’t think Trump is concerned about that. I think he’s focused on getting this remodel done, and part of that remodel was showed up in the last jobs report, right? We lost jobs to a degree, but they were government jobs, and what we got was a lot of gains in private sector jobs. Scott descent, his treasury secretary, has come out and overtly said, we are an administration for Main Street, not for Wall Street. So if you’re going to de financialize this economy and turn it back into a productive economy. You’re going to have to have policies that are gonna stimulate Main Street, and that’s, that’s the, the, the new units that you’ve rehabbed in your hotel that you wanna move people into. At the same time, you gotta move them outta the old units, which is people making money, trading claims on wealth instead of producing real goods and services, which is the financial ice economy. So it’s not about banking, it’s not about stocks, it’s not about Wall Street. You know, you need the stock market to stay up. But really what you need to do is you need to create production. And, and, and I think that’s fundamental. I think he understands we’re never gonna pay the debt off by cutting. We’ve got to keep the system running until we can get to some form of sound money. We’re actually paying the debt off as realistic, and then we have to earn so much money that the debt relative to our earnings shrinks. So it’s not paying down the debt, it’s paying down the percentage of GDP by growing GDP. And the presentation I did at best ever in March of 2025 was me explaining why I thought. His policies, were going to allow him to increase velocity and increase wages by cutting taxes, interest regulation, transportation costs, and, and again, that was six weeks into administration. That was theory. I’m gonna do a follow up in March of this year to say, okay, looking back when I gave the speech a year ago, what’s transpired, but I can already tell you a lot of the stuff that I thought he would do. He’s done. And I think that’s muting some of the inflation that his spending and deficits to Peter’s point are causing. And that’s why when this last CPI report came out, it wasn’t as ugly as everybody thought it would be. And, and this is when you don’t look at, when you look at it in the mono, you just look at one thing and Peter’s very fixated on this quantity of money theory. Then the expectation is that you print a bunch of money, you run a bunch of deficits, you’re gonna get inflation. And it’s just a. Equals B or A leads to B. But there are other nuances and I think Trump is looking at more like a real estate developer, which makes sense. ’cause that’s his background. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. It’s, I mean, and then the other just point to, to make there is that there is probably, um, now inflation’s a tricky thing, right? Like on the one hand you don’t want this riding up, but on the other hand, it actually helps with that debt. You’re, you’re basically eroding the debt by letting inflation ride a little bit higher at the same time. And I think the Trump administration knows that it’s a tricky thing to balance, but the goal is to, you know, get GDP pumping at, you know, four or 5%, but it’s gotta be real production buck. And that’s the difference, right? The old way of dealing with the debt was inflation. And, and I think people think that he’s using the old formula, but I don’t think he is. Well, I think it’s, I think, I think it’s definitely geared towards increasing real GDP, but I think in the process there’s probably, they probably care less a little bit. Of inflation riding up a little bit in the meantime. ’cause you’re still gonna have, I think he thinks he can mute it. I think he can mute it with lower taxes, lower interest expense, lower energy costs. And the energy is the economy. And from day one, that was the first policy. He’s, he’s aggressively gone after lowering energy costs because that has a, a, a ripple through, it just affects every area of the economy. And then the regulations in, in the last cabinet meeting. It was reported, the way I understood it, that for every regulation his administration passes, they’ve eliminated 48. So it’s actually, he’s removing the friction. And I think the bigger thing is, and I, and I was on a panel at Limitless, uh, this last summer, and TaRL, Yarborough was moderating the panel, asked the panelists what we were looking at that maybe other people weren’t looking at that. Um. You know, is, is a signal about maybe the direction it was. We, I, I can’t remember. This was a prediction panel and what I said was trade policy because everybody in finance spends all their time looking at the flow of money and trying to get in front of the flow of money. And we’re so used to the money coming from the Fed or coming from the treasury. So they’re gonna come from monetary policy or fiscal policy. And that’s what Peter’s doing. He’s looking at the Fed and he is looking at the treasury. And so what I’m looking at is not just the tariff income, which is relatively minor, but I’m looking at the trade deals, and those are published at the White House and there’s a couple trillion dollars of money that’s FDI, foreign Direct Investments coming right into Main Street. And it’s gonna build infrastructure. It’s gonna build factories. It’s good. And they tell you where it’s gonna be because they, they came back with the opportunity zones, which I thought they would do. Makes sense. It’s the way he thinks. And then taking those opportunity zones, the governors can say where in their state they want that money to go. Well, people on Wall Street don’t think geography ’cause they operate in a commodity world that trades on global exchanges. But real estate people. Geography matters a lot. So if I’m a Main Street person, I live on Main Street and I’m looking for Main Street opportunities, I wanna look where that money is going to be flowing in geographically. And then there may be opportunities in real estate or small businesses in those economies, and you can see it coming, but nobody talks about it. So I created Main Street Capitalist as a show to begin to talk about it. I still do the investor mentoring club, which is, you know. A premium thing where we get together every month and we talk about these things. And the point is, is that if you understand, I think what he’s doing, then you can, you can begin to paddle into position. And I think, again, I am really bullish if he loses inflation. If he loses to inflation, he’s cooked. He knows it. I think that that even the suggestion that Peter made that he was losing to inflation is what flared him up. And so I wasn’t trying to necessarily defend. Peter and I wasn’t trying to defend Trump, I was just trying to reconcile that it is possible that both guys could be right at the same time from their perspective. And so I, you know, I, I had one guy take exception because he felt like I was defending Trump, but for the most part, I got positive feedback on the video. I, I, I, you saw it. So you tell me. Did it make sense? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Absolutely. So when you look at today’s environment, everything going on, where do you think investors are most vulnerable? Um, I, I think that if you are very dependent upon, um, healthy credit markets, we could have a disruption. And that’s what happened to me. If Trump loses the inflation battle even for a little while, little be reflected in interest rates. And the challenge is right now that he is asked the Fed to quote unquote lower rates, but the Fed actually doesn’t like. Set rates, what they do is they set a target and then they manipulate markets to achieve those rates. And if, if people believe the fed, there’s a little bit of front running. So what’ll happen is the Fed will come out and go, oh, we’re gonna lower rates, which means bond prices are gonna go up. So they’re like, that’s great, let’s go buy a bunch of bonds, which drives rates down. So the Fed just by talking. Begins to move the market and then they hope that later on the Fed will buy those bonds from them at a profit to push rates down. Does that make sense? So, so when the last two times the Fed has raised rates in their target, the 10 year has responded in the opposite direction. Which means that the market is like not buying in, and the Fed is gonna have to step in. And when the Fed steps in, they do it by printing money out out of thin air. Now, the concern about that is that when they print the money out of thin air. If they’re replacing bonds on their own balance sheet, that’s kind of a circle and it doesn’t leak out into the economy. If they’re buying new issuance from the the treasury, then that money is gonna work its way through the government to to to main street. Now, the Trump administration can prevent some of that by keeping the money in the Treasury, for example, uh, Trump 1.0 left. The Biden administration with, I think over a trillion dollars in, in the treasury checking account, and Janet Yellen put that into the economy right away during the lockdowns, which immediately created extreme inflation because you muted production at the same time you goose. Uh. Purchasing power, you know? So anybody with like three ounces of economic understanding could have told you that that inflation was gonna come, it was gonna come hard, it was gonna come fast, and it was gonna be stickier than than you thought. ’cause once you let that money out in the economy, it’s out. It’s out and the only way to mute it is either to suck it back, which is very, very difficult, or to outproduce it, and it’s very hard to produce anything when everything’s in lockdown. So I think that, you know, those days are behind us. I think the policies that we’re embracing now are more. Pro productivity. And I think that even if the Fed does have to step in, as long as that money doesn’t leak out into the economy, and part of it is the treasury being able to throttle some of that, and the money that does go into the economy doesn’t go into stimulus, but goes into CapEx and infrastructure, that’ll actually, uh, create. Production. Then I think that, you know, this, this game plan that I think they’re trying to execute has a chance. And so I, I’m, I’m watching for it. And of course, to answer your question, what do we have to worry about that it doesn’t work? Right? If it doesn’t work, then inflation will show up. Interest rates will rise, credit markets will crash, it will take real estate values with it. And the hedge is really gonna be, what I’ve always talked about is gold. I started talking back in 2018 when we were the zero bound with interest rates. Hey, there’s only one way interest rates can go and that’s up. And if they go up fast, then that’s gonna crash bonds. So it would be smart, and that’s gonna take real estate equity with it. So it’d be smart when you have real estate equity and low rates to pull some of that equity out and move it into gold. And I called that my precious equity strategy. If I have a video I did at the Vancouver Resource Investment Conference in January of 2022, explaining that when you could still really execute on that, and I’m not saying that you couldn’t do it today, but it’s harder, but the people who did it back then, I mean, you know, they’ve, they’ve seen their gold almost triple. And at the same time, they were able to lock in interest rates that are, you know, a half what they are today. So when you see those mega trends and you can begin, and that’s the stuff I didn’t know how to do in 2006, 2007. I didn’t understand any of this stuff. The, the, you know, losing everything in 2008 forced me to become a hardcore student and then try to apply that to Main Street strategy. And so I think gold and real estate and debt, they all work really well together depending on where you are in the cycle. Do you think that Main Street investors may actually have some advantages in periods like this? Yes, a ton because I think what’s gonna happen is if we have a, um, a, a, a restructure of the financial system into something more responsible, which I think is either gonna be forced upon us or it’s gonna be done by design, and I hope we do it by design. But when that happens, then the days of just buying low and selling high and riding the inflation wave that goes away. And so now it’s gonna be very, very important to understand how to invest for. Productivity. So I call it, you know, buy low sell high trading as an acronym, B-L-S-H-T you. You can sound it out for yourself phonetically. And then the other one is poo, which is productivity of others. And I think that if people focus on investing in the productivity of others, which is what Main street investors, especially real estate investors, focus on, I think cash flow, real profits on small businesses, not speculating on. Uh, exit price or a company that’s gonna take a company public, everybody trying to tap into this giant flood of money that gets pre created from thin air in the banking system and in Wall Street. If, if, if people on Main Street will just start investing. Kind of what Kenny McElroy was doing going through 2008, just focusing on sound assets and good markets with good fundamentals. That cash flow and, and are run by good managers, whether it’s a business, an apartment building, a mobile home park, a self storage, residential assisted living doesn’t really matter. Invest in real businesses that produce real profits where you’re not overpaying for that production of income and especially where there’s some upside. Not to flipping out of the stock, but to actually growing the market share and growing the income. That’s what investing really should be. Wall Street has perverted it into just placing bets and riding a wave and trying to figure out where the money is gonna flow from the Treasury or for from Fed stimulus. And I think Main Street is gonna pick up on the new game sooner. And the good news is if you get good at playing that game, even if the system stays the same, you’re probably gonna do better off anyway. When you talk about buying, buying or investing into productive businesses, I mean, what, what’s the difference in your mind between investing in a private business versus investing in a, you know, a publicly traded business that’s run off, you know, dividends? Yeah, so I, I, I think that it could be okay if the dividend yield makes sense, but anytime you have a publicly traded security, it’s a highly liquid market, which means it’s gonna be volatile and the stocks become chips in the casinos where professional traders are just gambling all day long. And some of that gambling can create an impact on the stock, and it doesn’t matter to you if you’ve only bought it for production of income. Um. And so, uh, you know, I, I don’t think it’s bad. I’ve, you know, Peter’s always been an advocate of, uh, dividend paying stocks, and I think if you’re gonna be in the stock market, that’s what you want to do. I think the opportunity in a private placement in a small business is the opportunity not to have to pay the high multiples because it’s not a perfect market. It’s, it’s the same reason there’s so much more opportunity in real estate. If real estate could trade on an electronic exchange where. You know, millions of buyers could find it, and you could have perfect price discovery. It’s very difficult to find a deal, right? It’s very difficult. But we, if you buy a private business, you know there’s gonna be considerations. You, you deal with a, a owner. Who cares about his customers, who cares about his team, maybe would be willing to carry back the way you would if you were buying a, a, a piece of property from somebody that cares about their neighbors or whatever. I mean, there’s, there’s, there’s a lot more humanity in it. There’s a lot more room for negotiation in it. And a lot of times there’s a lot more room to have control. So, you know, one of the adages with real estate that real estate investors like is, I’m gonna buy an asset, one that I understand, two that I can control. And so when you buy a stock, like a dividend paying stock, you, you might understand the business, you may not understand completely the. Uh, market dynamics that drive the stock price. But as long as the dividends are there, that can be okay, but you don’t have any control. When you actually go buy a small business, you have a, a degree of control. Now, if you’re a passive investor buying into a syndication, then you still have a little bit more, um. Relationship, you have a little bit more insight. You maybe have a voice. You may know the people that are making the decision and running the company personally. So it’s the same thing. You know, you Buck is a syndicator. When you go do a deal, your investors know you. They have a personal relationship with you. Go buy stuff in the stock market and mutual fund managers and investor. You don’t have a relationship with that fund manager and I think that’s worth something if you have a voice right. So we’ve, we’re talking a little bit about credit markets, um, volatility, you know, interest rates. Are they gonna go down like, you know, Donald Trump would like to see, and you know, we’ve got a new fed share coming, all that kind of thing. How should investors be thinking about leverage and risk right now? I, I think the adage with real estate, uh, I mean, sorry, with leverage is always the same, is, um, you know, manage cash flow. I, if, if you use leverage to speculate, that could be a real problem. And whether you did it. Do it for real estate like I did by having very thin or negative cash flow and making that up someplace else and believing that somehow, you know, rents or appreciation are gonna do it. Or buying a non-income producing asset with borrowed funds hoping it’s gonna go higher. I think that would be dangerous, but I think if you fundamentally use debt as a tool. Based on cash flows and you use conservative cash flows, you know, so the debt service coverage ratio, you know, if you have $10,000 a month going out in debt service, make sure you have at least, you know, $12,000 a month coming in on income or above. Then that’s how you begin to build resiliency into your portfolio. And the other thing is don’t borrow long to invest short, right? So your duration matters a lot. We were talking about this before we hit the record button, and I think what happens is people. Uh, make a mistake when they try to operate like a bank. ’cause banks lend short and invest long. And the only reason they get away with it is because they have the Federal Reserve Bank system backstopping them. But you don’t have that as an individual, so you better to do the opposite. Um, if you can match the durations, that’s perfect, right? ’cause then you know what your interest expense is for the, for the duration of the investment. And once you lock in the spread, then you just have the counterparty risk of the, whoever is responsible for creating that income stream that’s gonna service the debt you use to control the asset. And then it just comes down to underwriting and then recourse. And if you feel comfortable with the underwriting and you feel comfortable with the recourse, and you’ve got spread and you’ve locked in a, a duration. Um, that, that is compatible, then that can be a, a, a fairly safe way to use debt. And if interest rates work against you, then you’re okay. And if interest rates work for you, you might be able to refinance your debt and actually increase your spread, but you don’t need it to happen to be successful. Let’s talk a little bit more about what you’re doing right now. So in the past year, you’ve launched, um, several new initiatives. You had masterminds via platforms. Tell us a little bit about this and, and a little bit more what, what you’re trying to accomplish. Well, you know, after losing my wife, um, you, you go through this. Period of time of like figuring out, okay, life is short. What do I want to get done before I left die myself. And so, um, after thinking about that, I went back to really what I came to do when I first met Robert Helms and got involved in the real estate guys. And so I just kinda went back to home base and. Then the other thing is now I’ve got 17 grandchildren, and so I’m thinking a lot less like a father, more like a, a grandfather, a founding father. And, um, and so I’m thinking about what the world is gonna be like in 40, 50, 60 years, and what can I do to plant a seed that will make that world better for my grandchildren? And so I, I did a couple things. One is, um, after I left the real estate guys, we were going through a merger with Ken McElroy, George Gammon and Jason Hartman to create, um, a mastermind group, which we did. And I, I was CEO of that for the. The year during the merger. And that took up some time. And the second thing I decided to do, uh, ironically, it was after a conversation I had with Charlie Kirk. I had a conversation with Charlie Kirk. I said, Hey, I’ve got this idea to help, uh, K through 12 get involved in, in capitalism by starting businesses or working with businesses. Their parents start, and I explained to him the model. He goes, I love it. I want to help you. And so that encouraged me. And then I had a follow up meeting in January of 20. 24 with Mark Victor Hansen, and he really encouraged me. And so with the strength of those two endorsements, I go, you know, I’m gonna do this. And so, uh, I left the real estate guys in, um. March, late March of 2024, and in the summer of 2024, I, I launched the Raising Capitalists Foundation, and people can learn more about that by going to raising capitalists plural.org. And I, I literally launched it at Freedom Fest on July 13th, 2024 and five minutes before I took the stage, Donald Trump got shot. Always remember where I was and how distracting it was, but I did record that presentation and it’s on the website, and so it explains the model. But in, in short, it’s pairing, um, or it’s, it’s putting parents who are in what Kiyosaki, uh, rich Dad would call the E-Class employees. And, uh. Put them under a mentorship program with experienced entrepreneurs and investors to help them start a business, a side hustle. They need the money and they need a mentor. And so then they, um, it can create a situation where their children can come to work for them in the business. And today, information Society, you know, there’s a lot of things kids can do where they learn real life skills, um, working with their parents. So that’s what the Raising Capitalist Foundation is all about. Then I launched two shows. Uh, in 2025, uh, one is I literally just launched like a week ago, and that’s. That Donald Trump video was really the first one that I put out, the Donald Trump versus Peter Schiff video on YouTube. I haven’t even started the podcast side of it. Um, and in on September 27th, uh, on pray.com, I started, uh, another show that, that one’s called the Main Street Capitalist. So if you go to YouTube and look at the Main Street capitalist, you’ll, you can find me there. And then the other one I created was the Christian capitalist. And I kind of went back to, you know, my, my core roots of realizing when I started looking at. Where the country was at, John Adams said that, um. Our Constitution was designed for a moral and religious people and is really wholly inadequate for any other, and so I thought, you know what? I’m I, I’m going to do that because my experience as a, as a Christian businessman is that I find that sometimes the stuff I get in church is more consumer oriented, and it doesn’t, it’s more employee oriented. I, I don’t. And, and then the other part of that is I created a, a ministry called Fellowship, a Christian capitalist, which is really about helping people put purpose into their business and then, you know, express their faith. Love your neighbor. Through their business. And so I’ve got all these different initiatives going and then I created the Main Street Media Network because I wanting to reach youth. I hired a YouTube coach and I said, look, I want to create content to encourage youth. He goes, that’s great. You can’t do it. You’re too old, he said, so what you need to do is find young people you can mentor and teach them the things that you’ve learned and let them teach it in their own words and they’ll reach their generation better than you. So with Main Street Media Network, I’m I, I’ve got. Two guys that I’m apprenticing right now, but I’m gonna be adding a lot more. Um, one, one young man is 20 years old, the other one is 26 years old. And, uh, I just came back from the Turning Point USA event where we had a broadcast booth and they were conducting interviews and I did the New Orleans Investment Conference. And so these guys are sitting down with Peter Schiff, Robert Kiyosaki, Mike Maloney, Ken McElroy, you know, you, you know what that did for you, buck with your show. You know, you, you met all these people through us and then you. We’re able to build upon that and create a very credible show. So I’m doing that for these guys that are in their twenties with the idea that they will be able to reach a generation of people. Uh, I call it putting Boomer Wisdom in Gen Z mounts. I mean, they get to process it and it gets to be their own. And I’m helping them build financial podcasts that actually make the money and is the foundation of, in this case, they’re both capital raisers of their capital raising business. I got all these different things going, but I’m doing it through leaders, so I’m not trying to do all things myself. Yeah, yeah. Um, but I’m building out an ecosystem to accomplish all these goals and so far so good. It’s a lot. Sounds working like a young man, man, man. I’ll tell you that. I know, I know. Wow. I I thought you were gonna slow down after you. No, I’ve actually, I put my, I put, I put my foot on the gas. I, I’ve probably never worked, uh, harder. Um, but I, I think I’m working smart, you know, so I’m hiring coaches and I’m bringing in, um, leaders and going through all that EOS and organizing to scale stuff. Sounds good. Well, always a pleasure, Russ. Um, make sure not to be a stranger to have you on again, um, you know, in a few months and figure out where you’re going with all this stuff. All the new things that you’ve accomplished, but it’s, uh, it’s great to see you. Well, happy to be here, proud of you. Uh, keep up the good work and keep educating people. Thank you. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. As always, Russ, uh, is, uh, you know, he’s, he’s got a lot of wisdom. He is the guy you really wanna listen to. And I would encourage you to follow his work anyway. Uh, just pivoting back, you know, to where this economy is and all that. I think for me personally, it’s about allocating capital in a market that is a, uh, is certainly losing value in its dollars. And, um, and I think that we’re gonna continue to see that. Speaking of that, make sure if you haven’t, as I mentioned before, sign up for the Accredited Investor Club. Go to wealthformula.com, go to investor club, as we have plenty of those types of things that are hedging against inflation, um, saving taxes in terms of tax mitigation strategies, that kind of thing. Check it out. That’s it for me This week on Well Formula Podcast. This is Buck Joffrey signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

Glenn Hubbard is Dean Emeritus and Russell L. Carson Professor of Finance and Economics at Columbia Business School. He served as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2003 and was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy at the U.S. Treasury. He has served on the boards of BlackRock, ADP, MetLife, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.In this episode of World of DaaS, Glenn and Auren discuss:Why consumer sentiment contradicts economic indicatorsThe Fed's impossible dilemma on rate cutsSmarter tariff policy and growthWhy most MBA programs are ROI negativeLooking for more tech, data and venture capital intel? Head to worldofdaas.com for our podcast, newsletter and events, and follow us on X @worldofdaas.You can find Auren Hoffman on X at @auren and Glenn Hubbard on LinkedIn.Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com)

Immigrants significantly benefit the U.S. economy by growing the labor force, filling essential jobs in sectors like services, construction, and tech. In this episode, panelists discuss the effects of recent refugee and immigration policy developments on the U.S. economy.   Background Reading: This article outlines the critical role immigrants have long played in boosting the U.S. economy and GDP. This article highlights how the second Trump administration has ramped up immigration enforcement, putting pressure on federal, state, and local agencies to meet the president's deportation goals.   Host: Nelson W. Cunningham, Former President, McLarty Associates; Former Senior Advisor for Economic Affairs, U.S. Department of State; Former Special Advisor on Western Hemisphere Affairs; CFR Member   Guests: Steven A. Camarota, Director of Research, Center for Immigration Studies   Andrea R. Flores, Founder, America's Promise   Pia Orrenius, Vice President and Senior Economist, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas   Want more comprehensive analysis of global news and events sent straight to your inbox? Subscribe to CFR's Daily News Brief newsletter. To keep tabs on all CFR events, visit cfr.org/event. To watch this event, please visit it on our YouTube channel: Immigration Policy and the U.S. Economy

When you don't have generational wealth or a built-in network, the startup path isn't just harder — it's different. In this episode, I'm joined by James Norman and Sean Green of Black Operator Ventures for a candid conversation about what early-stage founders actually need to understand to raise capital and scale companies when they're coming from the outside. We talk about why fundraising is a power-dynamic game, not a meritocracy — and why underrepresented founders have to master the theater of venture capital without losing themselves in the process.  James and Sean also break down what they look for when leading seed rounds, why warm intros function as the first real filter, and how founders can manufacture momentum even without friends-and-family money. This conversation goes deep on: How to position yourself when you don't start at the same starting line The difference between venture-scale companies and businesses that shouldn't chase VC Why execution, storytelling, and follow-up matter more than polish How to turn cold outreach into real human capital Why Black founders are uniquely positioned to exploit the current AI moment If you're an underrepresented founder trying to de-risk your leap, get into the right rooms, or understand why the rules feel unwritten — this conversation names the rules out loud. RUNTIME 54:24   EPISODE BREAKDOWN (1:52)  What motivated Sean and James to start Black Operator Ventures (6:51) Where are they looking for opportunities? (8:27) Top priority: Founders building real-world solutions with few regulatory hurdles (11:44) Why obtaining a warm intro to a VC is a founder's first test (15:20)  Fundraising is theater: Study the audience to learn your role (22:29) Red flags first-time founders should avoid waving (27:00) Tactical advice for aspiring founders who still work full-time jobs (30:24) “ It doesn't seem risky because we're betting on ourselves, and we believe we can do anything.” (34:38) How to find out if you should bootstrap or find a VC (38:30) Which signals tell Sean and James a founder is ready for a check (41:55) Why founders still need to spend some time in Silicon Valley (46:02) Black founders can " 10x ourselves with AI in ways that other people can't." (48:32) One action you can take this week to extend your network LINKS James Norman Sean Green Black Operator Ventures Q2 2025 Black Venture Funding Report, HBCUvc Share Of Startup Funding For Black Founders Hits Multiyear Low, Crunchbase The State of U.S. Household Wealth, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Three in Ten Black Americans Over Age 25 Hold a Bachelor's Degree, The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education SUBSCRIBE

Kevin covers the following stories: U.S. Labor Department reported the Weekly Initial Jobless Claims; how different news outlets report the same Initial Jobless Claims numbers; Oxford Economics takes a look at supposed layoffs due to AI; the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco takes an interesting view on higher tariffs; data regarding the U.S. economy's "secret weapon" was released yesterday; Kevin has the details, sifts through the data, puts the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and a few opinions along the way.

Kevin covers the following stories: U.S. Labor Department reported the Weekly Initial Jobless Claims; how different news outlets report the same Initial Jobless Claims numbers; Oxford Economics takes a look at supposed layoffs due to AI; the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco takes an interesting view on higher tariffs; data regarding the U.S. economy's "secret weapon" was released yesterday; Kevin has the details, sifts through the data, puts the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and a few opinions along the way. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Huberto Ennis provides an updated view of the Federal Reserve's management of its balance sheet and the flow of reserves between banks, which were the focus of a recent conference held at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Ennis is group vice president for micro, macro and financial economics at the Richmond Fed. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2026/speaking_2026_01_07_balance_sheet_update

This episode of Our Two Cents With MBA features Ryan Harwell with the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and Megan Kahlenberg with the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. They join MBA President and CEO Jackson Hataway to discuss the changes banks can expect with exam practices based on the Fed's new supervisory operating principles that refocus bank supervision on material financial risks to ensure bank safety and soundness.This episode is brought to you by two MBA associate members — Anders and Integris. The views expressed do not reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.Connect with MBAFacebook | X | LinkedIn | Instagram

Minneapolis Fed researchers Libby Starling, a senior community development adviser, and Ben Horowitz, a senior policy analyst, talk to F&C reporter Dan Netter. Starling and Horowitz discuss the work from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis' community development team on housing and commercial real estate.

As a special bonus, we're bringing you an episode of WSJ's Take On the Week. Co-host Telis Demos and guest host WSJ Chief Economics Correspondent Nick Timiraos are joined by Beth Hammack, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, to discuss the state of the U.S economy, interest rates and the central bank itself. Hammack shares her views on what she's hearing from businesses in her district and what that could mean for consumer prices and the labor market. She emphasizes the importance of Fed independence and the chairman's role in fusing differing viewpoints to create stable monetary policy. She also offers her perspective on the so-called neutral rate as well as artificial intelligence. If you like what you hear, subscribe to WSJ's Take On the Week for weekly market previews and analysis. Visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of WSJ.com. Check Out Past Episodes: Inside Visa's Tech-Charged Future: From Crypto to AI Why This Investor Says the AI Boom Isn't the Next Dot-Com Crash This CEO Says Global Trade Is Broken. What Comes Next? Further Reading: Cleveland Fed's Beth Hammack Skeptical of Further Cuts Let us know what you think of the show. Email us at BoldNames@wsj.com. Sign up for the WSJ's free Technology newsletter. Read Christopher Mims's Keywords column.Read Tim Higgins's column.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Day in Legal History: Federal Reserve ActOn December 23, 1913, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law, creating the Federal Reserve System, the central banking system of the United States. The law was the culmination of decades of debate over banking reform, intensified by the financial panic of 1907. The Act aimed to provide the country with a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system. It established twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks overseen by a central Board in Washington, D.C., striking a balance between public oversight and private banking interests.The Federal Reserve was given key powers, including the ability to issue Federal Reserve Notes (now the dominant form of U.S. currency), regulate banks, and serve as a lender of last resort during financial crises. This marked a significant shift from the fragmented and largely unregulated banking environment of the 19th century.Critics feared it concentrated too much financial power in the hands of a few, while supporters believed it brought necessary structure and national oversight. Over the decades, the Fed's role expanded, especially during the Great Depression, World War II, and more recently the 2008 financial crisis and COVID-19 pandemic. The creation of the Fed also represented a broader legal evolution in how the federal government engaged with economic policy.A coalition of 21 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Oregon to prevent the Trump administration from defunding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The states argue that the administration's decision to stop requesting funds from the Federal Reserve is unlawful and undermines Congress's constitutional authority. Since returning to office in January, President Trump has taken steps to dismantle the CFPB, including appointing his budget director, Russell Vought, as acting head and halting most agency operations.The CFPB was created in 2011 to safeguard consumers in the financial sector and has recovered over $21 billion for Americans. It is uniquely funded directly by the Federal Reserve rather than through Congressional appropriations. The administration claims the Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFPB's funding to come from the Fed's combined earnings, which they argue are unavailable due to the Fed operating at a loss since 2022.The lawsuit highlights that the CFPB is legally required to process consumer complaints from states, and without funding, it cannot fulfill this duty. Plaintiffs also contend that the administration's move violates the separation of powers by interfering with a congressionally established funding mechanism. Additional lawsuits from a federal employee union and nonprofits are pending in other courts, also seeking to compel the agency to resume funding requests.Democratic-led states sue to block US consumer watchdog's defunding under Trump | ReutersA new push by the Trump administration to challenge corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) faces steep legal hurdles. Under EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, the agency is shifting toward what she calls a more “conservative view of civil rights,” focusing on potential discrimination against white men. Lucas has announced plans to investigate corporate DEI policies and pursue enforcement where race- or sex-based decisions are suspected.However, legal experts emphasize that proving such claims is difficult. Discrimination cases require clear evidence that someone was denied a job or benefit specifically because of their race or sex, not just because they were part of a changing applicant pool. Critics argue that the administration's narrative misunderstands the legal and practical realities of workplace diversity, which is often designed to prevent discrimination, not perpetuate it.Despite aggressive executive orders targeting DEI, many companies are maintaining or quietly adjusting their programs to remain compliant. Legal audits and program rebranding are common, especially in industries like automotive. DEI advocates point out that the business case for inclusion remains strong, as companies see diverse teams as essential to long-term success.Ultimately, while the administration's rhetoric may galvanize parts of its base, experts say turning that rhetoric into enforceable legal action will be difficult under existing anti-discrimination laws.Trump's anti-corporate DEI campaign faces high legal hurdles | ReutersMercedes-Benz has agreed to pay $120 million to settle environmental and consumer protection claims brought by multiple U.S. states over its use of emissions-cheating software in certain diesel vehicles. The settlement resolves the remaining U.S. legal actions tied to the broader Dieselgate scandal, which has affected several automakers. The claims focused on Mercedes' BlueTEC diesel models, which were previously marketed as especially clean and advanced.As part of the agreement, Mercedes will continue retrofitting affected vehicles with approved emissions software. These additional updates are expected to cost the company tens of millions more. However, the company stated that its financial results won't be impacted, as it had already set aside sufficient funds to cover the settlement and associated costs.Mercedes reaches $120 million settlement with US states over emissions scandal | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg this week, I argue that the IRS has a rare opportunity to repair its deeply flawed Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP), which has become so punitive and complex that it actively discourages taxpayers from coming forward. While the program is supposed to help bring people back into compliance, its current structure demands that taxpayers essentially confess to wrongdoing—sometimes criminal—in a sworn statement, without any assurance the IRS will even consider their disclosure.Recent proposed reforms introduce a more structured penalty system and eliminate the notorious “willfulness checkbox” from Form 14457, a small but significant change that previously forced taxpayers to admit to criminal conduct just to apply. Still, the process remains risky. The IRS continues to require extensive narratives of past noncompliance, and for taxpayers with crypto assets, the demands are even greater: wallet addresses, transaction hashes, and mixer use must all be disclosed upfront. That level of technical and legal exposure could deter even well-meaning taxpayers.I argue the IRS must go further. It should offer flexible payment options—like installment agreements or offers in compromise—and abandon its rigid “pay-in-full” approach. It should also adopt a tiered penalty framework that accounts for intent, scale, and the evolving complexity of assets like cryptocurrency. Finally, the IRS needs to delay the most invasive digital asset reporting until after a taxpayer has been preliminarily accepted into the program, rather than forcing exhaustive disclosures at the outset.Without deeper changes, the VDP risks continuing as a trapdoor rather than a lifeline—one that punishes honesty and rewards silence. The current moment of public review is the best chance to realign the program with its original purpose: restoring compliance, not burying it.The IRS Has a Chance to Fix Its Voluntary Disclosure Program 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

In this week's episode of WSJ's Take On the Week, co-host Telis Demos and guest host WSJ Chief Economics Correspondent Nick Timiraos are joined by Beth Hammack, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, to discuss the state of the U.S economy, interest rates and the central bank itself. Hammack shares her views on what she's hearing from businesses in her district and what that could mean for consumer prices and the labor market. She emphasizes the importance of Fed independence and the chairman's role in fusing differing viewpoints to create stable monetary policy. She also offers her perspective on the so-called neutral rate as well as artificial intelligence. At the end of the episode, Telis and Nick analyze the interview, offering their takes on the outlook for tariffs, inflation and jobs. They also break down what influence the new Fed chair will have on the central bank's rate-setting committee and how markets may react to the nominee. This is WSJ's Take On the Week where we cut through the noise and dive into markets, the economy and finance—the big trades, key players and business news ahead. Have an idea for a future guest or episode? How can we better help you take on the week? We'd love to hear from you. Email the show at takeontheweek@wsj.com. To watch the video version of this episode, visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of WSJ.com Further Reading The Fed's New Rate-Setting Officials for 2026: Three Hawks and a Dove Fed Officials Spar Over Whether Rate Cuts Risk Credibility on Inflation Cleveland Fed's Beth Hammack Skeptical of Further Cuts ‘We Still Have an Inflation Problem.' A Fed Newcomer Wants to Go Slow on Rate Cuts. The Fed Did Banks a Solid This Week. More Favors May Be Needed For more coverage of the markets and your investments, head to WSJ.com, WSJ's Heard on The Street Column, and WSJ's Live Markets blog. Sign up for the WSJ's free Markets A.M. newsletter.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

X: @JCats2013 @ileaderssummit @americasrt1776 @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk @JTitMVirginia Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with John Catsimatidis, a leading national business figure and senior lay leader in the Greek Orthodox Church community. John Catsimatidis is the Chairman and CEO, The Red Apple Group and Owner of the Iconic 77 WABC Radio in New York City. The Red Apple Group is a conglomerate that owns and operates assets in the energy, real estate, finance, insurance, and supermarket industries. 77 WABC Radio is heard in 50 states and 173 countries. John is the author of Wall Street Journal Bestseller and Publishers Weekly Bestseller — “How Far Do You Want to Go: Lessons from a Common-Sense Billionaire.” As a leading American entrepreneur, John Catsimatidis will provide insights into the state of the US economy as inflation drops, nationwide gas prices fall under $2.80 per gallon and rent prices coming down. John will explain how free market principles applied by House Republicans in Congress with President Trump's "The One, Big, Beautiful Bill" will cut taxes for Americans earning under $50,000 by 14.9%. John will also highlight the benefits for 4 million tipped workers like waitresses, barbers, hairstylists, and taxi drivers who will not pay taxes on tips. For those working overtime - once again, this group of hard-working Americans will not be taxed on overtime. A major savings and great benefit for senior citizens who will not have to pay taxes on social security. Natasha Srdoc and John Catsimatidis discuss key economic data of economic growth rates and how changes at the Federal Reserve Bank may usher in an era of lower interest rates that will further help working families. Joel Anand and John Catsimatidis discuss the major fraud and money laundering unveiled in Minnesota with federal taxpayer funds abused. According to published reports: "A Minnesota safety net program was so easy to scam, it attracted tourists, Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson said Thursday. The extent of fraud in Minnesota human services programs — which has become infamous across the country — is even higher than the public knew. Providers in 14 “high-risk,” state-run Medicaid programs being audited by the state have billed $18 billion since 2018, and “half or more” is possibly fraudulent, Thompson said." The conversation on America's Roundtable will also focus on the horrific terrorist attack in Sydney, Australia, with 15 innocent civilians murdered and over 40 injured as the Jewish community gathered for the first day of Hanukkah. The brazen manifestation of anti-Semitism in the West, including America is brought to the forefront. The concerns of the waves of socialism battering America will be highlighted as the Democratic Party becomes more influenced by the Democratic Socialist Party's agenda which pushes communism and socialism, dangerous ideologies that have failed and left billions of people around the world in poverty. The conversation will also bring to the forefront economic forecasts for 2026 and what Americans can expect in the New Year. americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 X: @JCats2013 @ileaderssummit @americasrt1776 @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk @JTitMVirginia America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 68 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Tune into WTON in Central Virginia on Sunday mornings at 9:30 A.M. (ET). Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

Inflation is showing fresh signs of cooling, ticking up 2.7% year-over-year, lower than many economists had expected. It follows the release of a delayed jobs report that showed weak growth and the highest unemployment rate in four years. The numbers could bolster the case for more interest rate cuts in 2026. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Austan Goolsbee of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Tom Barkin, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, looks back at 2025 and the resilience of the U.S. economy in the face of uncertainty and changes in the economy, including trade policy, consumer sentiment, and labor market demand and supply. He also discusses how monetary policymakers have navigated the year. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2025/speaking_2025_12_17_barkin_year_in_review

In this episode of J.P. Morgan's Making Sense, Joyce Chang, chair of Global Research, is joined by Sarah Isgur, senior editor at The Dispatch and Supreme Court expert, and Peter Harrell, visiting scholar at Georgetown Law and Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Together, they unpack the Supreme Court cases challenging President Trump's use of executive power, focusing on trade, tariffs and presidential authority over independent agencies and the Federal Reserve Bank. The discussion explores the legal and economic implications of these cases, the evolving balance between Congress and the executive branch and the potential consequences for markets, businesses and governance.   This episode was recorded on November 19, 2025.   This communication is provided for information purposes only. Please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. JPMorgan Chase & Co. or its affiliates and/or subsidiaries (collectively, J.P. Morgan) normally make a market and trade as principal in securities, other financial products and other asset classes that may be discussed in this communication. This communication has been prepared based upon information from sources believed to be reliable, but J.P. Morgan does not warrant its completeness or accuracy except with respect to any disclosures relative to J.P. Morgan and/or its affiliates and an analyst's involvement with any company (or security, other financial product or other asset class) that may be the subject of this communication. Any opinions and estimates constitute our judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This communication is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument. J.P. Morgan Research does not provide individually tailored investment advice. Any opinions and recommendations herein do not take into account individual circumstances, objectives, or needs and are not intended as recommendations of particular securities, financial instruments or strategies. You must make your own independent decisions regarding any securities, financial instruments or strategies mentioned or related to the information herein. Periodic updates may be provided on companies, issuers or industries based on specific developments or announcements, market conditions or any other publicly available information. However, J.P. Morgan may be restricted from updating information contained in this communication for regulatory or other reasons. This communication may not be redistributed or retransmitted, in whole or in part, or in any form or manner, without the express written consent of J.P. Morgan. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. Receipt and review of this information constitutes your agreement not to redistribute or retransmit the contents and information contained in this communication without first obtaining express permission from an authorized officer of J.P. Morgan. Copyright 2025, JPMorganChase & Co. All rights reserved.

In the comedy business, it's easy to cancel one gig for another, better paying gig. Many times entertainers are looking at the short-term gain of making more money, instead of keeping their word. Here's a quick story about how keeping my word paid off BIG.  https://www.TheWorkLady.com  Jan McInnis is a top change management keynote speaker, comedian, and funny motivational speaker who helps organizations use humor to handle change, build resilience, and strengthen leadership skills. With her laugh-out-loud stories and practical tips, Jan shows audiences how humor isn't just entertainment—it's a business skill that drives communication, connection, and stress relief.   A conference keynote speaker, Master of Ceremonies, and comedy writer, Jan has written material for The Tonight Show with Jay Leno as well as radio, TV, and syndicated cartoon strips. She's the author of two books—Finding the Funny Fast and Convention Comedian—and her insights on humor in business have been featured in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The Huffington Post. For over 25 years, she has been helping leaders and teams discover how to bounce back from setbacks, embrace change, and connect through comedy.   Jan has delivered keynote speeches at thousands of events nationwide, from the Federal Reserve Banks to the Mayo Clinic, for industries that include healthcare, finance, government, education, women's leadership events, technology, and safety & disaster management. Her client list features respected organizations such as: Healthcare: Mayo Clinic, Kaiser Permanente, Abbott Pharmaceuticals, Health Information Management Associations, Assisted Living Associations Finance: Federal Reserve Banks, Merrill Lynch, Transamerica Insurance, BDO Accounting, American Institute of CPAs, credit unions, banking associations Government: U.S. Air Force, Social Security Administration, International Institute of Municipal Clerks, National League of Cities, public utilities, correctional associations Women's Leadership Events: Toyota Women's Conference, Go Red for Women, Speaking of Women's Health, Soroptimists, Women in Insurance & Financial Services Education: State superintendent associations, community college associations, Head Start associations, National Association of Elementary and Middle School Principals Safety & Disaster: International Association of Emergency Managers, Disney Emergency Management, Mid-Atlantic Safety Conference, risk management associations   Her background as a Washington, D.C. marketing executive gives her a unique perspective that blends business acumen with stand-up comedy. Jan was also honored with the Greater Washington Society of Association Executives "Excellence in Education" Award. Along with her podcast Finding the Funny: Leadership Tips from a Comedian, Jan also produces Comedian Stories: Tales From the Road in Under 5 Minutes. Whether she's headlining a major convention, hosting a leadership retreat, or teaching resilience at a safety conference, Jan's programs give audiences the tools to laugh, learn, and lead.  

The Weekly Option trading podcast Episode 405 December 13, 2025 Welcome to The Weekly Option, a weekly program that offers practical trades and discussion for beginners and professionals alike. The topic of the week is sandbagging your numbers. In this week's show, we will cover the trades from last week on iRobot Corp, USA Rare Earth, Pfizer, and Him & Hers Inc. And we discuss four new trades on Plug Power Inc, Richtech Robotics Inc, Alcoa Corp, and Barrick Mining Corp. The US market spent the week anticipating and then digesting the quarter basis point reduction in the interest rate announced on Wednesday by the Federal Reserve Bank. The Dow Jones Industrial Average grew 503 points, closing at 48,458 points. The S&P 500 Index lost 42 points, ending the week at 6,827 points. It's always great to hear from listeners. If you have any questions about the trades presented here or about your own positions, feel free to email me. Email questions to me: eric@theweeklyoption.com Visit our YouTube Channel for The Weekly Option.com. PODCAST LINKS FOR EPISODE POST Listen on iTunes:  https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-weekly-option/id1375267155 Listen on YouTube Music:  https://music.youtube.com/channel/UCTo2yTkZPhqvlE8PdZkyTZA Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6HoYh2XxVCWaidJP4dJiSD Listen on Audible by Amazon: https://www.audible.com/podcast/The-Weekly-Option/B08K57QL6S?language=en_US Listen on PodBean: https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/r5aam-6a884/The-Weekly-Option-Podcast YouTube Channel: https://goo.gl/u7JKJd Option Trading Basics: My Favorite Strategies: https://youtu.be/8UmPK5tuez0 How to Trade Stock Using Technical Analysis: https://youtu.be/wAATt0RpE0w Technical Analysis Videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnpPLl3EB_RBC5kyrCnsHow TradingView Stock Charts For Analysis: https://www.tradingview.com/gopro/?share_your_love=TraderEric

On this episode of Simply Money presented by Allworth Financial, Bob and Brian are joined by a very special guest: Dr. Loretta Mester, former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland and one of the most influential voices in monetary policy. Alongside Allworth's Chief Investment Officer Andy Stout, the team gets Dr. Mester’s exclusive insight on the Fed’s recent rate cut, where inflation is really headed, and what she sees for the economy in 2026. Plus, she pulls back the curtain on what it’s actually like inside a divided Fed when key policy decisions are being made. Later, Bob and Brian break down why your once-smart financial tools—like whole life insurance, muni bonds, or annuities—could now be holding you back. And, could 12-year-olds be the next big investors? They explore a surprising trend among today’s youngest market participants.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The next Fed chair must prove that they are able to balance issues and have debates without regard to political pressure and political considerations, says Robert Kaplan, Vice Chairman of Goldman Sachs and former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. He speaks with Bloomberg's Tom Keene and Paul SweeneySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Economic and social science research suggests climate risks are beginning to inform where people choose to live, raise families, and invest, foreshadowing the decline of a near 75-year trend of domestic migration to the Southern U.S. This is the focus of urban planner and trusted climate adaptation scholar Jesse M. Keenan's new book, North: The Future of Post-Climate America.  As the costs of environmental risks to homes, communities and livelihoods become insupportable in the most vulnerable areas of the country, many who are able will gravitate to regions where life can be relatively stable and secure.  North is a comprehensive assessment of trendlines and evidence that suggest how this migration will occur—and how leaders can ensure equity and continuity as American populations shift.  Drawing on his extensive background in climate adaptation research, Keenan offers strategies for locations that will be sending people and those that will receive them. He concludes North with a fictional description of what America could look like near the end of this century, when many climate impacts are expected to mature.   In this episode, Ten Across founder Duke Reiter and author Jesse Keenan discuss implications for the Ten Across geography, which is among the most climate-vulnerable regions in the country.  Relevant Articles and Resources  North: The Future of Post-Climate America  “Zillow deletes climate risk data from listings after complaints it harms sales” (The Guardian, December 2025)  “America's Home Insurance Affordability Crunch: See What's Happening Near You.” (The New York Times, November 2025)  “As millions face climate relocation, the nation's first attempt sparks warnings and regret” (Floodlight, September 2025)  “Snow Belt to Sun Belt Migration: End of an Era?” (Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, July 2024)  “Climate-proof Duluth? Why the city is attracting ‘climate migrants'” (MPR News, October 2021)“Want to Escape Global Warming? These Cities Promise Cool Relief” (The New York Times, April 2019)  “The Rise of the Sunbelt” (Edward L. Glaeser and Kristina Tobio, May 2007)  Relevant Ten Across Conversations Podcasts  How the 10X Region Can Plan for Climate Migration with Abrahm Lustgarten  CreditsHost: Duke ReiterProducer and editor: Taylor GriffithMusic by: Pearce Roswell, Out To The World, Johan GlössnerResearch and support provided by: Kate Carefoot, Rae Ulrich, and Sabine Butler  About our guestJesse M. Keenan is the Favrot II Associate Professor of Sustainable Real Estate and Urban Planning and Director of the Center on Climate Change and Urbanism at the School of Architecture and Built Environment at Tulane University. His research spans design, engineering, finance, and policy, with service to U.S. government agencies, international organizations, and major corporations. Widely published and cited, Jesse's work has shaped climate policy, financial regulation, and concepts like climate gentrification. He is the author of North: The Future of Post-Climate America, which is available in bookstores on December 17.

Yes there's a thin line between helping out vs being taken advantage of, and in comedy you have to pay attention or you will get taken advantage of a lot! Here's a quick story about 2 times where I had each of these things happen . . . or almost happen. Please listen and subscribe - my stories are short, behind the scenes things that happened to me as a comedian. They come out 1 time per week!  https://www.TheWorkLady.com  Jan McInnis is a top change management keynote speaker, comedian, and funny motivational speaker who helps organizations use humor to handle change, build resilience, and strengthen leadership skills. With her laugh-out-loud stories and practical tips, Jan shows audiences how humor isn't just entertainment—it's a business skill that drives communication, connection, and stress relief.   A conference keynote speaker, Master of Ceremonies, and comedy writer, Jan has written material for The Tonight Show with Jay Leno as well as radio, TV, and syndicated cartoon strips. She's the author of two books—Finding the Funny Fast and Convention Comedian—and her insights on humor in business have been featured in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The Huffington Post. For over 25 years, she has been helping leaders and teams discover how to bounce back from setbacks, embrace change, and connect through comedy.   Jan has delivered keynote speeches at thousands of events nationwide, from the Federal Reserve Banks to the Mayo Clinic, for industries that include healthcare, finance, government, education, women's leadership events, technology, and safety & disaster management. Her client list features respected organizations such as: Healthcare: Mayo Clinic, Kaiser Permanente, Abbott Pharmaceuticals, Health Information Management Associations, Assisted Living Associations Finance: Federal Reserve Banks, Merrill Lynch, Transamerica Insurance, BDO Accounting, American Institute of CPAs, credit unions, banking associations Government: U.S. Air Force, Social Security Administration, International Institute of Municipal Clerks, National League of Cities, public utilities, correctional associations Women's Leadership Events: Toyota Women's Conference, Go Red for Women, Speaking of Women's Health, Soroptimists, Women in Insurance & Financial Services Education: State superintendent associations, community college associations, Head Start associations, National Association of Elementary and Middle School Principals Safety & Disaster: International Association of Emergency Managers, Disney Emergency Management, Mid-Atlantic Safety Conference, risk management associations   Her background as a Washington, D.C. marketing executive gives her a unique perspective that blends business acumen with stand-up comedy. Jan was also honored with the Greater Washington Society of Association Executives "Excellence in Education" Award. Along with her podcast Finding the Funny: Leadership Tips from a Comedian, Jan also produces Comedian Stories: Tales From the Road in Under 5 Minutes. Whether she's headlining a major convention, hosting a leadership retreat, or teaching resilience at a safety conference, Jan's programs give audiences the tools to laugh, learn, and lead.  

Erika Bell and Hunter Jones describe the importance of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond connecting with small towns and rural communities throughout the Fifth District, including those in western North Carolina recovering from Hurricane Helene. Bell is a community development regional manager and Hunter is a senior business analyst. In addition, Russ Harris of the Southwestern Commission Council of Governments and Nathan Ramsey of the Land of Sky Regional Council reflect on the value of their partnerships with the Richmond Fed and other regional organizations, both before and after the hurricane. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2025/speaking_2025_12_10_partnerships_wnc

Show notes: (0:00) Intro (1:05) Ryan's journey from sports psychology to mindset research (2:41) The story of Cheryl and the difference between "doing" and "being" (6:37) Why mindset matters more than skillset (9:09) Fixed vs. Growth Mindset (11:54) Closed vs. Open mindset and the power of feedback (22:28) Prevention vs. Promotion mindset: how goals change your wiring (29:57) Inward vs. Outward mindset: seeing others as people, not objects (34:08) Trauma, healing, and upgrading your inner programming (35:50) Three levels of development: from journaling to deeper healing (41:40) How to work with Ryan and access the free mindset assessment (44:25) Outro Who is Ryan Gottfredson, PhD?   Ryan Gottfredson, Ph.D., is a leading leadership development author, researcher, and consultant specializing in vertical development and mindset transformation. A Wall Street Journal and USA Today best-selling author, he wrote Success Mindsets and The Elevated Leader. Through his firm, Ryan Gottfredson LLC, he helps executive teams and organizations elevate performance and culture, working with major brands such as CVS Health, Deutsche Telekom, Experian, the Federal Reserve Bank, Nationwide Insurance, and Cook Medical. Ryan also serves as a leadership professor at California State University–Fullerton. He holds a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources from Indiana University and has published more than 20 scholarly articles across top journals. His research on leadership and organizational behavior has been cited over 4,000 times since 2018, establishing him as a respected authority in the field.   Connect with Ryan: Website: https://ryangottfredson.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ryan-gottfredson-9a0b466 Links and Resources: Peak Performance Life Peak Performance on Facebook Peak Performance on Instagram  

Robert Kaplan, Goldman Sachs vice chair and former Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas president talks about what's next for the Federal Reserve and who could be the next Fed chair.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It is a special edition of the Beigies Awards where one regional Federal Reserve Bank will receive lifetime achievement recognition. Today on the show, we speak to its President about the value of economic anecdotes.Related episodes: What keeps a Fed president up at nightUsing anecdotes to predict recessionsFor sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Fact-checking by Tyler Jones. Music by Drop Electric. Find us: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Newsletter.  Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Today on the show, Katie Martin and Rob Armstrong talk with special guest Adam Posen about the prospects for inflation and even a financial crisis. Posen has worked for both the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Bank of England, and is the current president of the non-profit Peterson Institute for International Economics. They talk about the options facing the next Fed chair, the conditions for serious inflation, and AI's role in our economic future. Also they go short crypto and long the New England Patriots. For a free 30-day trial to the Unhedged newsletter go to: https://www.ft.com/unhedgedoffer.You can email Robert Armstrong and Katie Martin at unhedged@ft.com.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

John Bailey Jones and Urvi Neelakantan discuss the decline in the movement of workers from one place to another, and possible explanations and policy solutions for the decline. Jones is vice president of microeconomic analysis and Neelakantan is a senior policy economist, both at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2025/speaking_2025_12_03_geographic_mobility

Chuck Gascon, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Senior Economist joins Megan Lynch to talk about the impact of government shutdown now that the shutdown has ended a couple weeks ago.

New research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland finds that earning a college degree can still help you keep a job and get higher wages, but it's less of an advantage than it used to be. ​The unemployment gap between college graduates and those with just a high school diploma is narrowing. Also: a handful of stocks driving economic growth, a potential trade agreement between the U.S. and Taiwan, and life as a 67-year-old retiree.

New research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland finds that earning a college degree can still help you keep a job and get higher wages, but it's less of an advantage than it used to be. ​The unemployment gap between college graduates and those with just a high school diploma is narrowing. Also: a handful of stocks driving economic growth, a potential trade agreement between the U.S. and Taiwan, and life as a 67-year-old retiree.

Stijn Schmitz welcomes Christopher Whalen to the show. Christopher Whalen is an Investment Banker, Author, and Chairman Whalen Global Advisors. The discussion centers on the current economic landscape, with a particular focus on gold, monetary policy, and the future of the global financial system. Whalen argues that the world is in the early stages of a gold up-cycle, primarily driven by central banks increasingly adopting gold as a key reserve asset. He emphasizes that while the US dollar remains crucial for global trade, its dominance is gradually shifting. Whalen provides insights into the current economic challenges, highlighting inflation as a significant concern. He suggests that the federal deficit and monetary expansion are primary drivers of economic instability. The conversation explores the potential for alternative monetary approaches, including gold-linked bonds and revaluing gold stocks, though Whalen remains skeptical about a complete return to a gold standard. Regarding global currency dynamics, Whalen believes the BRICS settlement currency and attempts to challenge the US dollar’s supremacy are unlikely to succeed in the near term. He argues that the dollar’s utility in financing transactions and its widespread acceptance make it difficult to replace. However, he anticipates a gradual decline in the dollar’s global share, moving towards a more multilateral system reminiscent of the pre-World War II era. On investment strategies, Whalen recommends diversification, particularly advocating for 10-20% of portfolios to be allocated to gold. He is cautious about current equity markets, especially tech stocks driven by artificial intelligence hype. The banking sector presents mixed prospects, with consumer banking relatively stable but commercial real estate posing significant challenges. Ultimately, Whalen remains optimistic about the United States’ economic potential. He believes the country’s natural resources, economic flexibility, and inherent strengths will help manage current financial challenges. The discussion concludes with a nuanced view of economic transformation, suggesting adaptation rather than catastrophic decline. Timestamps: 00:00:00 – Introduction 00:00:54 – Gold’s Long-Term Cycle 00:01:21 – Central Banks Buying Gold 00:03:13 – Inflation and AI Hype 00:05:44 – Monetary Inflation Defined 00:07:04 – Metals as Safe Havens 00:11:13 – Commodity Supercycle Thesis 00:13:03 – Treasury Debt Issuance Strategy 00:15:44 – Gold-Linked Bonds Proposal 00:19:12 – Gold Remonetization Incentives 00:21:36 – BRICS Currency Challenge 00:26:56 – Outgrowing US Debt 00:32:41 – Equities in Inflation 00:36:26 – Banking Sector Health 00:38:32 – Concluding Thoughts Guest Links: Website: https://www.rcwhalen.com/ X: https://x.com/rcwhalen Books (Amazon): https://tinyurl.com/mv3wctcr LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rcwhalen/ 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,” also with Wiley. He served on FINRA’s Economic Advisory Committee from 2011 to 2023 and was an advisor on Season 5 of SHOWTIME's “Billions.” Additionally, he was a fellow at Indiana State University (2008-2014), a member of Villanova School of Business' Finance Department Advisory Council (2013-2016), and a board member of the Global Interdependence Center (2017-2019). Christopher edits The Institutional Risk Analyst and contributes to other publications and forums. He has testified before Congress, the SEC, and FDIC. A regular media commentator on CNBC, Bloomberg, and Fox News, Chris is active on social media under “rcwhalen.” He is also a member of The Mortgage Bankers Association and The Lotos Club of New York.

On November 17, 2025, the Economic Club of Minnesota hosted a captivating fireside chat between Ecolab CEO Christophe Beck and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari, drawing a packed house of business leaders, policymakers, and curious Minnesotans eager for a pulse on the state's—and the nation's—economic trajectory. As head of Ecolab, a St. Paul-based global giant in water, hygiene, and infection prevention solutions, Beck brought a practitioner's lens to the discussion, sharing how the company is viewing and engaging with AI to improve Ecolab's performance. Christophe also discussed the deep commitment Ecolab has in the state and in the local economy and well-being of Ecolab's neighbors. Just that morning, at a separate event, Christophe and the Ecolab Foundation announced a collaborative investment to increase safe, stable, and affordable housing.  Christophe Beck believes in "growing the pie"  rather than taking the existing pie and trying to share more. Beck is an inspirational and energetic force.

Job growth was better than expected in September with the best job gains since April, according to the delayed government report. But key data is still missing, and questions remain about the strength of the economy. That uncertainty comes as the Fed prepares to consider another rate cut. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers in America and around the world:What really gets AI optimists excited isn't the prospect of automating customer service departments or human resources. Imagine, rather, what might happen to the pace of scientific progress if AI becomes a super research assistant. Tom Davidson's new paper, How Quick and Big Would a Software Intelligence Explosion Be?, explores that very scenario.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with Davidson about what it would mean for automated AI researchers to rapidly improve their own algorithms, thus creating a self-reinforcing loop of innovation. We talk about the economic effects of self-improving AI research and how close we are to that reality.Davidson is a senior research fellow at Forethought, where he explores AI and explosive growth. He was previously a senior research fellow at Open Philanthropy and a research scientist at the UK government's AI Security Institute.In This Episode* Making human minds (1:43)* Theory to reality (6:45)* The world with automated research (10:59)* Considering constraints (16:30)* Worries and what-ifs (19:07)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Making human minds (1:43). . . you don't have to build any more computer chips, you don't have to build any more fabs . . . In fact, you don't have to do anything at all in the physical world.Pethokoukis: A few years ago, you wrote a paper called “Could Advanced AI Drive Explosive Economic Growth?,” which argued that growth could accelerate dramatically if AI would start generating ideas the way human researchers once did. In your view, population growth historically powered kind of an ideas feedback loop. More people meant more researchers meant more ideas, rising incomes, but that loop broke after the demographic transition in the late-19th century but you suggest that AI could restart it: more ideas, more output, more AI, more ideas. Does this new paper in a way build upon that paper? “How quick and big would a software intelligence explosion be?”The first paper you referred to is about the biggest-picture dynamic of economic growth. As you said, throughout the long run history, when we produced more food, the population increased. That additional output transferred itself into more people, more workers. These days that doesn't happen. When GDP goes up, that doesn't mean people have more kids. In fact, the demographic transition, the richer people get, the fewer kids they have. So now we've got more output, we're getting even fewer people as a result, so that's been blocked.This first paper is basically saying, look, if we can manufacture human minds or human-equivalent minds in any way, be it by building more computer chips, or making better computer chips, or any way at all, then that feedback loop gets going again. Because if we can manufacture more human minds, then we can spend output again to create more workers. That's the first paper.The second paper double clicks on one specific way that we can use output to create more human minds. It's actually, in a way, the scariest way because it's the way of creating human minds which can happen the quickest. So this is the way where you don't have to build any more computer chips, you don't have to build any more fabs, as they're called, these big factories that make computer chips. In fact, you don't have to do anything at all in the physical world.It seems like most of the conversation has been about how much investment is going to go into building how many new data centers, and that seems like that is almost the entire conversation, in a way, at the moment. But you're not looking at compute, you're looking at software.Exactly, software. So the idea is you don't have to build anything. You've already got loads of computer chips and you just make the algorithms that run the AIs on those computer chips more efficient. This is already happening, but it isn't yet a big deal because AI isn't that capable. But already, one year out, Epoch, this AI forecasting organization, estimates that just in one year, it becomes 10 times to 1000 times cheaper to run the same AI system. Just wait 12 months, and suddenly, for the same budget, you are able to run 10 times as many AI systems, or maybe even 1000 times as many for their most aggressive estimate. As I said, not a big deal today, but if we then develop an AI system which is better than any human at doing research, then now, in 10 months, you haven't built anything, but you've got 10 times as many researchers that you can set to work or even more than that. So then we get this feedback loop where you make some research progress, you improve your algorithms, now you've got loads more researchers, you set them all to work again, finding even more algorithmic improvements. So today we've got maybe a few hundred people that are advancing state-of-the-art AI algorithms.I think they're all getting paid a billion dollars a person, too.Exactly. But maybe we can 10x that initially by having them replaced by AI researchers that do the same thing. But then those AI researchers improve their own algorithms. Now you have 10x as many again, you have them building more computer chips, you're just running them more efficiently, and then the cycle continues. You're throwing more and more of these AI researchers at AI progress itself, and the algorithms are improving in what might be a very powerful feedback loop.In this case, it seems me that you're not necessarily talking about artificial general intelligence. This is certainly a powerful intelligence, but it's narrow. It doesn't have to do everything, it doesn't have to play chess, it just has to be able to do research.It's certainly not fully general. You don't need it to be able to control a robot body. You don't need it to be able to solve the Riemann hypothesis. You don't need it to be able to even be very persuasive or charismatic to a human. It's not narrow, I wouldn't say, it has to be able to do literally anything that AI researchers do, and that's a wide range of tasks: They're coding, they're communicating with each other, they're managing people, they are planning out what to work on, they are thinking about reviewing the literature. There's a fairly wide range of stuff. It's extremely challenging. It's some of the hardest work in the world to do, so I wouldn't say it's now, but it's not everything. It's some kind of intermediate level of generality in between a mere chess algorithm that just does chess and the kind of AGI that can literally do anything.Theory to reality (6:45)I think it's a much smaller gap for AI research than it is for many other parts of the economy.I think people who are cautiously optimistic about AI will say something like, “Yeah, I could see the kind of intelligence you're referring to coming about within a decade, but it's going to take a couple of big breakthroughs to get there.” Is that true, or are we actually getting pretty close?Famously, predicting the future of technology is very, very difficult. Just a few years before people invented the nuclear bomb, famous, very well-respected physicists were saying, “It's impossible, this will never happen.” So my best guess is that we do need a couple of fairly non-trivial breakthroughs. So we had the start of RL training a couple of years ago, became a big deal within the language model paradigm. I think we'll probably need another couple of breakthroughs of that kind of size.We're not talking a completely new approach, throw everything out, but we're talking like, okay, we need to extend the current approach in a meaningfully different way. It's going to take some inventiveness, it's going to take some creativity, we're going to have to try out a few things. I think, probably, we'll need that to get to the researcher that can fully automate OpenAI, is a nice way of putting it — OpenAI doesn't employ any humans anymore, they've just got AIs there.There's a difference between what a model can do on some benchmark versus becoming actually productive in the real world. That's why, while all the benchmark stuff is interesting, the thing I pay attention to is: How are businesses beginning to use this technology? Because that's the leap. What is that gap like, in your scenario, versus an AI model that can do a theoretical version of the lab to actually be incorporated in a real laboratory?It's definitely a gap. I think it's a pretty big gap. I think it's a much smaller gap for AI research than it is for many other parts of the economy. Let's say we are talking about car manufacturing and you're trying to get an AI to do everything that happens there. Man, it's such a messy process. There's a million different parts of the supply chain. There's all this tacit knowledge and all the human workers' minds. It's going to be really tough. There's going to be a very big gap going from those benchmarks to actually fully automating the supply chain for cars.For automating what OpenAI does, there's still a gap, but it's much smaller, because firstly, all of the work is virtual. Everyone at OpenAI could, in principle, work remotely. Their top research scientists, they're just on a computer all day. They're not picking up bricks and doing stuff like that. So also that already means it's a lot less messy. You get a lot less of that kind of messy world reality stuff slowing down adoption. And also, a lot of it is coding, and coding is almost uniquely clean in that, for many coding tasks, you can define clearly defined metrics for success, and so that makes AI much better. You can just have a go. Did AI succeed in the test? If not, try something else or do a gradient set update.That said, there's still a lot of messiness here, as any coder will know, when you're writing good code, it's not just about whether it does the function that you've asked it to do, it needs to be well-designed, it needs to be modular, it needs to be maintainable. These things are much harder to evaluate, and so AIs often pass our benchmarks because they can do the function that you asked it to do, the code runs, but they kind of write really spaghetti code — code that no one wants to look at, that no one can understand, and so no company would want to use that.So there's still going to be a pretty big benchmark-to-reality gap, even for OpenAI, and I think that's one of the big uncertainties in terms of, will this happen in three years versus will this happen in 10 years, or even 15 years?Since you brought up the timeline, what's your guess? I didn't know whether to open with that question or conclude with that question — we'll stick it right in the middle of our chat.Great. Honestly, my best guess about this does change more often than I would like it to, which I think tells us, look, there's still a state of flux. This is just really something that's very hard to know about. Predicting the future is hard. My current best guess is it's about even odds that we're able to fully automate OpenAI within the next 10 years. So maybe that's a 50-50.The world with AI research automation (10:59). . . I'm talking about 30 percent growth every year. I think it gets faster than that. If you want to know how fast it eventually gets, you can think about the question of how fast can a kind of self-replicating system double itself?So then what really would be the impact of that kind of AI research automation? How would you go about quantifying that kind of acceleration? What does the world look like?Yeah, so many possibilities, but I think what strikes me is that there is a plausible world where it is just way, way faster than almost everyone is expecting it to be. So that's the world where you fully automate OpenAI, and then we get that feedback loop that I was talking about earlier where AIs make their algorithms way more efficient, now you've got way more of them, then they make their algorithms way more efficient again, now they're way smarter. Now they're thinking a hundred times faster. The feedback loop continues and maybe within six months you now have a billion superintelligent AIs running on this OpenAI data center. The combined cognitive abilities of all these AIs outstrips the whole of the United States, outstrips anything we've seen from any kind of company or entity before, and they can all potentially be put towards any goal that OpenAI wants to. And then there's, of course, the risk that OpenAI's lost control of these systems, often discussed, in which case these systems could all be working together to pursue a particular goal. And so what we're talking about here is really a huge amount of power. It's a threat to national security for any government in which this happens, potentially. It is a threat to everyone if we lose control of these systems, or if the company that develops them uses them for some kind of malicious end. And, in terms of economic impacts, I personally think that that again could happen much more quickly than people think, and we can get into that.In the first paper we mentioned, it was kind of a thought experiment, but you were really talking about moving the decimal point in GDP growth, instead of talking about two and three percent, 20 and 30 percent. Is that the kind of world we're talking about?I speak to economists a lot, and —They hate those kinds of predictions, by the way.Obviously, they think I'm crazy. Not all of them. There are economists that take it very seriously. I think it's taken more seriously than everyone else realizes. It's like it's a bit embarrassing, at the moment, to admit that you take it seriously, but there are a few really senior economists who absolutely know their stuff. They're like, “Yep, this checks out. I think that's what's going to happen.” And I've had conversation with them where they're like, “Yeah, I think this is going to happen.” But the really loud, dominant view where I think people are a little bit scared to speak out against is they're like, “Obviously this is sci-fi.”One analogy I like to give to people who are very, very confident that this is all sci-fi and it's rubbish is to imagine that we were sitting there in the year 1400, imagine we had an economics professor who'd been studying the rate of economic growth, and they've been like, “Yeah, we've always had 0.1 percent growth every single year throughout history. We've never seen anything higher.” And then there was some kind of futurist economist rogue that said, “Actually, I think that if I extrapolate the curves in this way and we get this kind of technology, maybe we could have one percent growth.” And then all the other economists laugh at them, tell them they're insane – that's what happened. In 1400, we'd never had growth that was at all fast, and then a few hundred years later, we developed industrial technology, we started that feedback loop, we were investing more and more resources in scientific progress and in physical capital, and we did see much faster growth.So I think it can be useful to try and challenge economists and say, “Okay, I know it sounds crazy, but history was crazy. This crazy thing happened where growth just got way, way faster. No one would've predicted it. You would not have predicted it.” And I think being in that mindset can encourage people to be like, “Yeah, okay. You know what? Maybe if we do get AI that's really that powerful, it can really do everything, and maybe it is possible.”But to answer your question, yeah, I'm talking about 30 percent growth every year. I think it gets faster than that. If you want to know how fast it eventually gets, you can think about the question of how fast can a kind of self-replicating system double itself? So ultimately, what the economy is going to be like is it's going to have robots and factories that are able to fully create new versions of themselves. Everything you need: the roads, the electricity, the robots, the buildings, all of that will be replicated. And so you can look at actually biology and say, do we have any examples of systems which fully replicate themselves? How long does it take? And if you look at rats, for example, they're able to double the number of rats by grabbing resources from the environment, and giving birth, and whatnot. The doubling time is about six weeks for some types of rats. So that's an example of here's a physical system — ultimately, everything's made of physics — a physical system that has some intelligence that's able to go out into the world, gather resources, replicate itself. The doubling time is six weeks.Now, who knows how long it'll take us to get to AI that's that good? But when we do, you could see the whole physical economy, maybe a part that humans aren't involved with, a whole automated city without any humans just doubling itself every few weeks. If that happens, and the amount of stuff we're able to reduce as a civilization is doubling again on the order of weeks. And, in fact, there are some animals that double faster still, in days, but that's the kind of level of craziness. Now we're talking about 1000 percent growth, at that point. We don't know how crazy it could get, but I think we should take even the really crazy possibilities, we shouldn't fully rule them out.Considering constraints (16:30)I really hope people work less. If we get this good future, and the benefits are shared between all . . . no one should work. But that doesn't stop growth . . .There's this great AI forecast chart put out by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, and I think its main forecast — the one most economists would probably agree with — has a line showing AI improving GDP by maybe two tenths of a percent. And then there are two other lines: one is more or less straight up, and the other one is straight down, because in the first, AI created a utopia, and in the second, AI gets out of control and starts killing us, and whatever. So those are your three possibilities.If we stick with the optimistic case for a moment, what constraints do you see as most plausible — reduced labor supply from rising incomes, social pushback against disruption, energy limits, or something else?Briefly, the ones you've mentioned, people not working, 100 percent. I really hope people work less. If we get this good future, and the benefits are shared between all — which isn't guaranteed — if we get that, then yeah, no one should work. But that doesn't stop growth, because when AI and robots can do everything that humans do, you don't need humans in the loop anymore. That whole thing is just going and kind of self-replicating itself and making as many goods as services as we want. Sure, if you want your clothes to be knitted by a human, you're in trouble, then your consumption is stuck. Bad luck. If you're happy to consume goods and services produced by AI systems or robots, fine if no one wants to work.Pushback: I think, for me, this is the biggest one. Obviously, the economy doubling every year is very scary as a thought. Tech progress will be going much faster. Imagine if you woke up and, over the course of the year, you go from not having any telephones at all in the world, to everyone's on their smartphones and social media and all the apps. That's a transition that took decades. If that happened in a year, that would be very disconcerting.Another example is the development of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons were developed over a number of years. If that happened in a month, or two months, that could be very dangerous. There'd be much less time for different countries, different actors to figure out how they're going to handle it. So I think pushback is the strongest one that we might as a society choose, “Actually, this is insane. We're going to go slower than we could.” That requires, potentially, coordination, but I think there would be broad support for some degree of coordination there.Worries and what-ifs (19:07)If suddenly no one has any jobs, what will we want to do with ourselves? That's a very, very consequential transition for the nature of human society.I imagine you certainly talk with people who are extremely gung-ho about this prospect. What is the common response you get from people who are less enthusiastic? Do they worry about a future with no jobs? Maybe they do worry about the existential kinds of issues. What's your response to those people? And how much do you worry about those things?I think there are loads of very worrying things that we're going to be facing. One class of pushback, which I think is very common, is worries about employment. It's a source of income for all of us, employment, but also, it's a source of pride, it's a source of meaning. If suddenly no one has any jobs, what will we want to do with ourselves? That's a very, very consequential transition for the nature of human society. I think people aren't just going to be down to just do it. I think people are scared about three AI companies literally now taking all the revenues that all of humanity used to be earning. It is naturally a very scary prospect. So that's one kind of pushback, and I'm sympathetic with it.I think that there are solutions, if we find a way to tax AI systems, which isn't necessarily easy, because it's very easy to move physical assets between countries. It's a lot easier to tax labor than capital already when rich people can move their assets around. We're going to have the same problem with AI, but if we can find a way to tax it, and we maintain a good democratic country, and we can just redistribute the wealth broadly, it can be solved. So I think it's a big problem, but it is doable.Then there's the problem of some people want to stop this now because they're worried about AI killing everyone. Their literally worry is that everyone will be dead because superintelligent AI will want that to happen. I think there's a real risk there. It's definitely above one percent, in my opinion. I wouldn't go above 10 percent, myself, but I think it's very scary, and that's a great reason to slow things down. I personally don't want to stop quite yet. I think you want to stop when the AI is a bit more powerful and a bit more useful than it is today so it can kind of help us figure out what to do about all of this crazy stuff that's coming.On what side of that line is AI as an AI researcher?That's a really great question. Should we stop? I think it's very hard to stop just after you've got the AI researcher AI, because that's when it's suddenly really easy to go very, very fast. So my out-of-the-box proposal here, which is probably very flawed, would be: When we're within a few spits distance — not spitting distance, but if you did that three times, and we can see we're almost at that AI automating OpenAI — then you pause, because you're not going to accidentally then go all the way. It is actually still a little bit a fair distance away, but it's actually still, at that point, probably a very powerful AI that can really help.Then you pause and do what?Great question. So then you pause, and you use your AI systems to help you firstly solve the problem of AI alignment, make extra, double sure that every time we increase the notch of AI capabilities, the AI is still loyal to humanity, not to its own kind of secret goals.Secondly, you solve the problem of, how are we going to make sure that no one person in government or no one CEO of an AI company ensures that this whole AI army is loyal to them, personally? How are we going to ensure that everyone, the whole world gets influenced over what this AI is ultimately programmed to do? That's the second problem.And then there's just a whole host of other things: unemployment that we've talked about, competition between different countries, US and China, there's a whole host of other things that I think you want to research on, figure out, get consensus on, and then slowly ratchet up the capabilities in what is now a very safe and controlled way.What else should we be working on? What are you working on next?One problem I'm excited about is people have historically worried about AI having its own goals. We need to make it loyal to humanity. But as we've got closer, it's become increasingly obvious, “loyalty to humanity” is very vague. What specifically do you want the AI to be programmed to do? I mean, it's not programmed, it's grown, but if it were programmed, if you're writing a rule book for AI, some organizations have employee handbooks: Here's the philosophy of the organization, here's how you should behave. Imagine you're doing that for the AI, but you're going super detailed, exactly how you want your AI assistant to behave in all kinds of situations. What should that be? Essentially, what should we align the AI to? Not any individual person, probably following the law, probably loads of other things. I think basically designing what is the character of this AI system is a really exciting question, and if we get that right, maybe the AI can then help us solve all these other problems.Maybe you have no interest in science fiction, but is there any film, TV, book that you think is useful for someone in your position to be aware of, or that you find useful in any way? Just wondering.I think there's this great post called “AI 2027,” which lays out a concrete scenario for how AI could go wrong or how maybe it could go right. I would recommend that. I think that's the only thing that's coming top of mind. I often read a lot of the stuff I read is I read a lot of LessWrong, to be honest. There's a lot of stuff from there that I don't love, but a lot of new ideas, interesting content there.Any fiction?I mean, I read fiction, but honestly, I don't really love the AI fiction that I've read because often it's quite unrealistic, and so I kind of get a bit overly nitpicky about it. But I mean, yeah, there's this book called Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, which I read maybe 10 years ago, which I thought was pretty fun.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised Faster, 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

Alexander Wolman discusses the Federal Reserve's recent unveiling of its revised Statement of Policy Goals, highlighting what has changed and what has remained consistent with past statements. Wolman is vice president for monetary and macroeconomic research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Full transcript and related links: https://www.richmondfed.org/podcasts/speaking_of_the_economy/2025/speaking_2025_11_19_fed_framework_followup

Kevin talks about the beginning of he and his wife's quest for their Thanksgiving feast ingredients and covers the following stories: food inflation estimates from the beginning of the year versus the actual price increases; in addition to Walmart's announcement, last month, lowering the cost of the Thanksgiving, Target announces price reductions across the board, as well as, their Thanksgiving meal prices; the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland's "nowcast" estimated present inflation levels because the Government Shutdown delayed the release of the Bureau of Labor Statistics; Trump cuts tariffs certain food items; Kevin has the details, sifts through the data, put the information into historical perspective, offers his insights and a few opinions.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Target is lowering its prices for Thanksgiving just like Walmart. This is going to be a cheap holiday for the people. Inflation has been tamed and with lowering fuel prices Trump is countering the [CB] inflation. Fed Bostic is retiring which will leave an opening for Trump, slowly but surely is gaining control over the Fed. Trump is taking back control of the economy. The [DS] tried everything to take Trump down and it has failed. The pushed the Epstein files hoax on him and he didn't take the bait, now they failed with the shutdown, so they decided they would release the hoax. They took the bait and now they have started the Epstein narrative. Attacks will intensify against Trump team, when the time is right he will strike like a thunderbolt.   Economy Target reduces prices on 3,000 groceries and essentials Target announced Tuesday it is lowering prices on 3,000 food, beverage and essential items, though prices could vary by location and online. This is the latest in a string of initiatives the retailer has rolled out to offer shoppers lower prices. The retailer also announced a $500,000 donation to Feeding America to support its hunger relief efforts amid increased demand at food banks. Lowering prices on thousands of items that shoppers frequently buy “will make a difference for families managing tight household budgets during the holidays,” Lisa Roath, chief merchandising officer of food, essentials and beauty at Target, said in the announcement. The press release noted it will not reduce prices in Alaska and Hawai'i. The price cuts build on Target's growing affordability efforts as the holiday season arrives. The retailer highlighted in the Tuesday announcement its lowest price ever for a Thanksgiving meal, which the retailer unveiled earlier this month. The meal feeds four for less than $5 per person and includes a Good & Gather turkey that costs 79 cents per pound. Source: retaildive.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Bessent, Treasurer Striking Final Penny at Philadelphia Mint Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Treasurer Brandon Beach will visit the Philadelphia Mint on Wednesday to oversee production of the final circulating one-cent coin or penny, each of which costs nearly 4 cents to produce, the Treasury Department said. President Donald Trump said in February he was ordering the Treasury to halt what he called the "wasteful" minting of pennies, prompting gas stations, fast-food chains and big-box stores to adjust prices and round cash transactions. Source: newsmax.com https://twitter.com/DoryBeutel/status/1988579974354477175?s=20 More Doves Incoming: Atlanta Fed President Bostic To Retiring Feb 2026 More turnover at the Fed ahead of what can be a historic, for the US central bank, year as Trump prepares to stack the Fed with a deep bench of uber-doves. With the "fired" Lisa Cook's lawsuit marinating at the Supreme Court, moments ago the Atlanta Fed announced that its president Raphael Bostic would retire at the end of his current term in February. Bostic, who in the press release was described as "the first African American and openly gay president of a regional Federal Reserve Bank in its 111-year histo...

In our news wrap Wednesday, President Trump is urging Israel's president to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his corruption case, a former aide to California's Gov. Newsom has been indicted on charges related to an alleged scheme to steal campaign money, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is retiring and the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia pressed its last penny. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

When gas prices skyrocket, do station owners get a windfall? And where do their profits really come from? Zachary Crockett pulls up to the pump. SOURCES:Garrett Golding, assistant vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.Jeetander P. Sethi, founding member of the American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association.Kai Trimble-Lea, owner of a B.P. gas station in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. RESOURCES:"Top Numbers Driving America's Gasoline Demand," by Lem Smith (American Petroleum Institute, 2022)."Electric Cars Are Coming. How Long Until They Rule the Road?" by Brad Plumer, Nadja Popovich and Blacki Migliozzi (The New York Times, 2021)."Petroleum & Other Liquids," (U.S. Energy Information Administration). EXTRAS:"In the 1890s, the Best-Selling Car Was … Electric," by Freakonomics Radio (2022)."Is it Too Late for General Motors to Go Electric?" by Freakonomics Radio (2020).  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The U.S. economy is headed for financial collapse. Repo market stress. Private credit market liquidity crunch. Subprime lending crisis. Spiraling deficits. Basis trade exposure. Dollar debasement. U.S. states in recession. Oil market contango. Tariff and trade wars. Each of these are like explosive devices hiding in the corners of the economic edifice that is the U.S. economy. And the Federal Reserve just released a shocking paper that exposes the biggest potential threat of all. Explosive devices have been set all around the economy and a new bomb was just uncovered in the most unlikely of places. Chapters Intro: 00:05:21 Chapter One: The Road to Economic Hegemony. 00:06:24 Chapter Two: Collision Course. 00:30:55 Chapter Three: Hidden Bomb. 00:35:50 Chapter Four: Bring It Home, Max. 00:44:50 Resources The Lead Left: Middle Market & Private Credit – 2/10/2025 Mark Zandi on X Axios: 22 states are in a recession or close to it, new analysis finds The Fed: The Cross-Border Trail of the Treasury Basis Trade FSB: Leverage in Nonbank Financial Intermediation: Final report Morningstar: Official data dramatically underestimates hedge funds' involvement in the Treasury market, Fed paper finds Federal Reserve Bank of New York: Repo Operations Fidelity: Investor behind Zions, Western Alliance bad loans is tied to $270 million in troubled debt Car Dealership Guy: Tricolor: The messy collapse of a subprime auto lender explained Investopedia: Basis Trading: Definition, How It Works, Example The Guardian: What is private credit, and should we be worried by the collapse of US firms? OilPrice.com: Oil Market Braces for Contango and Shale Slowdown -- If you like #UNFTR, please leave us a rating and review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify: unftr.com/rate and follow us on Facebook, Bluesky, TikTok and Instagram at @UNFTRpod. Visit us online at unftr.com. Join our Discord at unftr.com/discord. Become a member at unftr.com/memberships. Buy yourself some Unf*cking Coffee at shop.unftr.com. Visit our bookshop.org page at bookshop.org/shop/UNFTRpod to find the full UNFTR book list, and find book recommendations from our Unf*ckers at bookshop.org/lists/unf-cker-book-recommendations. Access the UNFTR Musicless feed by following the instructions at unftr.com/accessibility. Unf*cking the Republic is produced by 99 and engineered by Manny Faces Media (mannyfacesmedia.com). Original music is by Tom McGovern (tommcgovern.com). The show is hosted by Max and distributed by 99.Support the show: https://www.unftr.com/membershipsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 693: In this very special episode, Neal and Toby sit down with the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Austan Goolsbee to discuss how the country's central bank is managing the data blackout from the government shutdown. Whether or not AI is actually affecting jobs for early grads or if it's just hype. Also, the importance of the Fed maintaining its independence from political influence. Then, it's an inside look into the voting process of a FOMC meeting.  Get your paper tablet at https://www.remarkable.com today Get your MBD live show tickets here! https://www.tinyurl.com/MBD-HOLIDAY  Subscribe to Morning Brew Daily for more of the news you need to start your day. Share the show with a friend, and leave us a review on your favorite podcast app. Listen to Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.swap.fm/l/mbd-note⁠⁠⁠  Watch Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@MorningBrewDailyShow⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A lot of jobs in the modern economy don't pay a living wage, and some of those jobs may be wiped out by new technologies. So what's to be done? We revisit an episode from 2016 for a potential solution. SOURCES:Erik Brynjolfsson, professor of economics at Stanford University.Evelyn Forget, professor of economics and community health sciences at the University of Manitoba.Sam Altman, C.E.O. of OpenAI.Robert Gordon, professor emeritus of economics at Northwestern University.Greger Larson, professor of archeology at the University of Oxford. RESOURCES:"Here's what a Sam Altman-backed basic income experiment found," by Megan Cerullo (CBS News, 2024).Utopia for Realists, by Rutger Bregman. The Correspondent (2016).The Second Machine Age, by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee (2014)."The Town With No Poverty: Using Health Administration Data To Revisit Outcomes of a Canadian Guaranteed Annual Income Field Experiment," by Evelyn Forget (Canadian Public Policy, 2011)."The Negative Income Tax and the Evolution of U.S. Welfare Policy," by Robert Moffitt (Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2003).Capitalism and Freedom, by Milton Freidman (2002)."Lesson from the Income Maintenance Experiments," (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and The Brookings Institution, 1986).Law, Legislation and Liberty, Volume 3: The Political Order of A Free People, by Frederick Hayek (1981)."Daniel Moynihan and President-elect Nixon: How charity didn't begin at home," by Peter Passell and Leonard Ross (New York Times, 1973)."Income Maintenance Programs," (Hearings Before The Subcommittee On Fiscal Policy Of The Joint Economic Committee Congress Of The United States, 1968). EXTRAS:"President Nixon Unveils the Family Assistance Program," (1969)."Milton Friedman interview with William F Buckley Jr.," (1968)."Martin Luther King Jr. advocates for Guaranteed Income at Stanford," (1967). Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.