Podcasts about gdp

In this episode of John Solomon Reports, we cover a remarkable operation that recently took place in Venezuela, where President Trump commended our military's success in capturing fugitive president Nicolas Maduro with minimal bloodshed. John reflects on the significance of this event and the bravery of those involved, highlighting the strength and capability of the U.S. military.The show features an insightful conversation with House Administration Committee Chairman Brian Steil, who shares alarming findings from election integrity reports regarding the upcoming 2024 election. As concerns mount over potential irregularities, Chairman Steil discusses the critical Save America Act, which aims to ensure voter registration checks and ID requirements, marking a significant step in the fight for election integrity.In the second segment, former ICE Director Mark Morgan joins John to discuss the conclusion of the first phase of President Trump's immigration crackdown and offers a glimpse into what phase two might entail. With millions of illegal immigrants still in the country, Morgan outlines strategies for future enforcement.The episode also addresses the current state of the economy, featuring Shannon Davis from American Alternative Assets, who analyzes recent job creation numbers and GDP growth. While optimism is rising, Davis warns of potential pitfalls, particularly in the commercial real estate market, and discusses the implications of central bank digital currencies on privacy and spending autonomy.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

From new cancer drugs to batteries and robotics – China's top-tier growth companies are forging paths of their own rather than following in the west's footsteps. Investment manager Sophie Earnshaw names companies that have caught her eye and explains why being a long-term stock picker differs in China from elsewhere. Background:Sophie Earnshaw is a decision-maker on our China Equities Strategy and joint manager of the Baillie Gifford China Growth Trust. In this conversation, she tells Short Briefings… host Leo Kelion about a select group of Chinese companies breaking new ground, supported by the state's efforts to become self-sufficient in more of today's critical technologies and a leader in some of those of the future. Earnshaw also details how the “phenomenal rate” at which companies are born, scale and die in the country makes stock-picking a challenging task – making the access we have to company leaders, academics and other local expertise core to our mission of finding the best firms to invest in on behalf of our clients. Portfolio companies discussed include:- CATL – the battery maker whose products power electric vehicles worldwide and increasingly support the renewable energy sector- BeOne and Innovent Biologics – pharmaceutical firms developing the next generation of cancer drugs - AMEC and NAURA – semiconductor equipment makers enabling China to develop increased self-reliance in computer chips - Alibaba, ByteDance and Tencent – China's ‘big tech' companies, whose artificial intelligence tools are becoming embedded into people's daily lives- MiniMax – the AI startup rolling out video and agentic tools at a fraction of the cost of western counterparts- Horizon Robotics – the automated driving tech provider with its eye on an even bigger opportunity. Resources:Baillie Gifford podcastsChina: a tale of two storiesChina investment strategy hub (institutional clients only)House of HuaweiPrivate investor forum 2025: investing in great growth companiesTrip notes: on the road with Baillie Gifford China Growth Trust  Companies mentioned include:AlibabaAMECASMLBeOneByteDanceCATLHorizon RoboticsInnovent BiologicsJiangsu HengruiHuaweiMiniMaxSamsungNAURATencentTSMCXiaohongshu Timecodes:00:00  Introduction01:55   Joining the China Equities Strategy02:40  Intense competition04:00  The government's influence06:10   CATL, the electrification champion08:45  Investing with a 5-year time horizon10:25   Shanghai office, local expertise11:45   Regulations and geopolitics14:30   China's next Five-year Plan16:15   Innovent Biologics' new cancer drugs18:10   Lower-cost clinical trials19:45   Being selective in semiconductors21:25   Investing in chip equipment makers23:00  China's ‘big tech and AI'25:10   MiniMax making AI like ‘tap water'27:45  The road to robotics29:35  A market you can't ignore30:30  Book choice Glossary of terms (in order of mention): Third plenum: a major policy meeting of China's ruling Communist Party, often used to set big economic/political direction.Sovereign bond issuance: The government raising money by selling bonds (IOUs) to investors.Opportunity set: the range of investable companies available to choose from.Capex: capital expenditure – money spent on long-term assets like factories, equipment, or data centres.Fiscal deficit target: how much more the government plans to spend than it collects in revenue (taxes plus other income), expressed as a share of the economy.GDP: gross domestic product – the total value of goods and services a country produces in a year.Market capitalisation: the total value of a company's shares (share price × number of shares).ESG: environmental, social and governance – how a company manages environmental impact, people issues, and corporate oversight.Large-form batteries: big battery packs used in things like electric vehicles and grid storage.Energy storage systems: large batteries that store electricity for later use (helping balance the grid).Generic drugs: copies of medicines whose patents have expired; usually cheaper, same active ingredient.Bi-specific (bispecific) drugs: drugs designed to bind to two targets at once (often to direct immune cells to cancer).ADC drugs: antibody–drug conjugates – antibodies that deliver a toxic payload to cancer cells.Out-licensing: selling rights to your drug/technology to another company (often for upfront + milestone payments).EUV machines: extreme ultraviolet lithography equipment used to make the most advanced chips.Foundry: a factory business that manufactures chips for other companies.Etch and deposition: steps in chipmaking – etch removes material to form patterns, deposition adds thin layers.Picks and shovels: a metaphor for companies that sell essential tools to an industry (rather than end products).Digitalisation: moving processes and services from offline to software and data-driven systems.Compute: the processing power (chips and servers) used to train/run AI.Large language model (LLM): an AI trained on lots of text to generate and understand language.Margins: how much profit a company makes per pound/dollar of revenue (after costs).Cloud business: selling computing power/storage/software over the internet instead of on a local machine.Algorithm layer: the method or software logic that makes the AI work (as distinct from the hardware).Gross margin: revenue minus direct costs (before overheads), a rough measure of product profitability.Assisted driving: features that help a driver (lane-keeping, adaptive cruise control, etc) but don't fully replace them.Autonomous driving: a car driving itself with minimal or no human input.Software attachment rate: the percentage of customers who add paid software features and/or subscriptions.

ถอดรหัสปฏิรูป ‘เวียดนาม' รื้อโครงสร้างรัฐครั้งประวัติศาสตร์ สั่งปลดข้าราชการ 1.5 แสนคน ยึดหลักความซื่อสัตย์ ความสามารถ ความเชี่ยวชาญ สู่ภารกิจปั้น GDP โต 10% ต่อปี บริษัทจดทะเบียนสหรัฐฯ ประกาศงบไตรมาส 4 ออกมาเป็นอย่างไรบ้าง ส่งผลกระทบต่อภูมิทัศน์การลงทุนอย่างไร พูดคุยกับ ชาตรี โรจนอาภา CFA, FRM หัวหน้าทีมที่ปรึกษาการลงทุน SCB CIO ธนาคารไทยพาณิชย์

HISTORY This Week will return with new episodes this Monday, February 16th, with a story about the most vital train tunnels in the United States. The North River Tunnels—their formal name—connect New Jersey to Penn Station in New York City, carrying 200,000 passengers every day. These tunnels underneath the Hudson are now over 115 years old, and are in desperate need of repair. The tunnel rehabilitation effort will be the largest infrastructure project in the country. It's just getting underway, but now, the funding has been tied up in a political battle between the Trump Administration, Amtrak, and the states of New York and New Jersey. The stakes could not be higher. If these tunnels were to fail, up to 20% of U.S. GDP could be at risk. In this episode, we will unpack just how difficult it was to dig these tunnels in the first place. One man, Pennsylvania Railroad President Alexander Cassatt, was determined to build this critical rail connection, ultimately linking the entire Eastern Seaboard via train for the first time, using engineering methods that had never been tried before. If he failed, his corporation—the largest in the world at the time—would have been doomed.

Global markets are leaning into growth. Following the upside surprise in U.S. non-farm payrolls — with 130,000 jobs added and unemployment falling to 4.3% — investors are focusing on economic resilience rather than fading hopes of aggressive rate cuts. MSCI's All-World index is trading near record highs, while South Korea's Kospi has crossed 5,500 for the first time. Attention now turns to initial jobless claims and the upcoming CPI print, which could shape expectations for the Federal Reserve's June decision. CME FedWatch odds for a rate hold have climbed to 40%. In the UK, GDP expanded just 0.1% in Q4, while industrial production fell unexpectedly. Meanwhile, Nuveen has agreed to acquire asset manager Schroders for $13.5 billion. In digital assets, crypto markets remain steady despite Blockfills halting withdrawals. BlackRock is deepening its move into tokenized finance, bringing its Treasury-backed BUIDL token to Uniswap through Securitize. Court drama surrounding FTX has resurfaced, and Kraken has replaced its CFO ahead of its public listing. A busy macro backdrop with institutional crypto developments accelerating beneath the surface.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has outlined her intentions bring down barriers to closer integration with the EU's defence industry - with an eye on its huge spending plans. We speak to the UK industry's trade body to discover what's at stake. And ahead of the publication of the UK's GDP figures for the end of last year, we speak to a businesswoman and a finance expert to hear their thoughts on what the economy needs to grow. Also, musical Billy Elliot is going on tour, more than 20 years after it left the West End. We'll be finding out why shows like this are so important to keep the arts alive outside London.

Cameron Dawson says there are 2 key indicators to watch right now: market leadership and intermarket analysis, including high-yield spreads. She is closely watching the ratio between consumer discretionary and consumer staples stocks as she points out that consumer spending accounts for 2/3 of U.S. GDP. Later, Cameron discusses the SaaS selling, or as she calls it "software as a soreness," as a crowded trade with companies that held lighter assets. ======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – / schwabnetwork Follow us on Facebook – / schwabnetwork Follow us on LinkedIn - / schwab-network About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Bank lending standards are easing, CRE financing competition is rising, and even office is seeing selective reengagement. In this episode, our hosts, Omar Eltorai and Cole Perry, share and discuss the latest SLOOS data, earnings insights from major banks and asset managers, county-level GDP data, consumer sentiment, and small business optimism. Featuring a special conversation with Andrew Pabon, Director of Debt Advisory at Altus Group, on the latest trends from Altus Group's Debt Capital Market Survey.Key moments01:47 Stat of the Day: Multifamily property age03:09 Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey insights07:48 ADP employment data analysis10:07 County-level GDP data breakdown16:19 Consumer and business sentiment reports20:58 Earnings season highlights27:55 CRE Debt Capital Market Survey results with Andrew Pabon47:02 Upcoming Data Releases and AnnouncementsResources mentionedReonomy: https://www.altusgroup.com/solutions/reonomy/ Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey: https://www.federalreserve.gov/data/sloos/sloos-202601.htm ADP Employment Report: https://adpemploymentreport.com BEA County-Level GDP & Personal Income: https://www.bea.gov/news/2026/gross-domestic-product-county-and-personal-income-county-2024 University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment: https://www.sca.isr.umich.edu/ NFIB Small Business Optimism Index: https://www.nfib.com/news/press-release/new-nfib-survey-small-business-optimism-remains-above-52-year-average/ Altus Debt Capital Market Survey: https://www.altusgroup.com/featured-insights/cre-debt-capital-markets-survey-registration/ Altus Connect: https://www.altusgroup.com/connect/

China's Commerce Ministry announces a tariff of up to 11.7% (prev. 42.7%) on EU dairy products; effective from February 13th.European equities broadly in the green; Financials lead as Schroders (+28.5%) gets acquired by Nuveen; US equity futures are entirely in the green.G10s mostly firmer against the USD; AUD takes a slight breather.Gilts lead after soft GDP though BoE pricing largely unaffected; USTs tread water ahead of Friday's CPI.WTI and Brent trade slightly lower as geopolitics remain quiet; IEA cut 2026 global oil demand growth and nudged lower supply growth forecasts.Looking ahead, highlights include US Weekly/Continuing Claims, Existing Home Sales (Jan), EU Informal Leaders Retreat, Speakers including ECBʼs Lane & Nagel, BoCʼs Rogers, Supply from the US, Earnings from Applied Materials, Arista Networks, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Howmet Aerospace, Coinbase & American Electric Power.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

For many worldwide, smartphones are used for everything from financial transactions to social media.对全球许多人来说，智能手机的用途广泛，从金融交易到社交媒体无所不包。So when screens break or crack, it can feel like life itself comes to a halt.当手机屏幕破裂时，我们会感觉生活都停止了一样。Long-time US glassmaker Corning has spent more than a decade making smartphone glass stronger.美国老牌玻璃制造商康宁公司花了十多年时间致力于提升智能手机玻璃的强度。These devices are typically a much higher percentage of a person's GDP.这些设备通常占个人国内生产总值的很大一部分。In emerging regions so durability and longevity of that phone becomes a much more critical feature than other developed countries.在新兴地区，手机的耐用性和使用寿命比在其他发达国家成为了更为关键的特性。Corning founded in 1851 has pivoted with the times. In 1879 Thomas Edison went to Corning for glass for his light bulb.康宁公司成立于1851年，一直与时俱进。1879年，托马斯·爱迪生去康宁为他的灯泡买玻璃。Corning's glasses used in the windows for NASA's space shuttles.美国宇航局航天飞机窗户上使用的是康宁玻璃。In the 1950s Corning became a household name with Corningware cookware, and Steve Jobs used it for the iphone.20世纪50年代，康宁凭借康宁餐具成为家喻户晓的品牌，史蒂夫·乔布斯还将其技术应用于iPhone手机。Now Corning dominates the worldwide smartphone glass industry.现在康宁在全球智能手机玻璃行业占据主导地位。Its latest product Gorilla Glass Victus is even tougher, says the company.该公司表示，其最新产品“大猩猩玻璃Victus”更加坚固耐用。Whenever we develop a new glass, we set the bar high. The new glass must be clearly better than our current flagship product, and far superior to the competition.每当研发一款新玻璃时，我们都会设定很高的标准。新玻璃必须明显优于我们目前的旗舰产品，并且远超竞争对手。Corning said they were able to improve both drop and scratch performance at the same time at first in the industry.康宁公司表示，他们首次在行业内同时提高了抗摔和抗刮性能。Gorilla Glass Victus can drop from two meters in height which is taller than I am onto a rough surface like asphalt and has 2x better scratch performance than our previous glass.“大猩猩玻璃Victus”能从比我身高还高的两米处跌落至类似沥青的粗糙表面，而且其抗刮性能比我们之前的玻璃强两倍。So the next time you drop your phone and it miraculously doesn't shatter, it's most likely thanks to this company in upstate New York. 下次你手机摔了却奇迹般地没碎，很可能要感谢纽约州北部的这家公司。

「「森を壊してGDP増」をいつまで賞賛するのか？国連が先導する、脱・成長依存の指標づくり」　2026年、私たちは成長の定義を問い直す岐路に立っています。GDPが伸びる一方で、自然と気候の危機は深まっています。国連が提起する「GDPを超える指標」とは何か。私たちの豊かさを考えます。The post 「森を壊してGDP増」をいつまで賞賛するのか？国連が先導する、脱・成長依存の指標づくり first appeared on IDEAS FOR GOOD.

Patrick Bet-David, Tom Ellsworth & Brandon Aceto are joined by Peter Schiff and Luke Groman as they break down the January jobs report, Trump's 15% GDP and $100K Dow predictions, El Paso airspace shutdown and Epstein revelations, and market reactions spanning gold, Bitcoin, nuclear IPO momentum, and the Tai Lopez FBI investigation.-------Ⓜ️ CONNECT ON MINNECT: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4kSVkso ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ⓜ️ PBD PODCAST CIRCLES: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4mAWQAP⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Stijn Schmitz welcomes Henrik Zeberg to the show. Henrik Zeberg is Head Macro Economist at Swissblock. In this in-depth discussion, Zeberg provides a comprehensive analysis of the current economic landscape, focusing on potential market dynamics and an impending economic recession. Zeberg argues that the current market, particularly in technology and AI, resembles the dot-com bubble, with valuations reaching unsustainable levels. He suggests that while AI will indeed be transformative, the current market exuberance is reminiscent of previous technological bubbles where expectations far outpace immediate economic realities. The market capitalization to GDP ratio currently stands at approximately 230%, compared to 137% during the dot-com bubble, indicating extreme market overvaluation. Regarding the economic outlook, Zeberg predicts a recession starting no later than the second quarter of 2026, potentially in March or April. He points to significant weaknesses in the job market, with job creation at its lowest levels in 50 years and a growing disconnect between the financial world and real economic conditions. The labor market indicators suggest a substantial economic slowdown, with 50% of consumer spending coming from just 10% of the population. Henrik anticipates a complex economic cycle involving an initial deflationary period followed by potential inflationary pressures. He expects the Federal Reserve will attempt to intervene, potentially creating a market rally before an eventual significant market correction. He suggests that investors should be prepared for volatility and consider hard assets like real estate, commodities, and precious metals as potential long-term investments. In terms of investment strategy, Zeberg recommends controlling emotional responses, avoiding getting caught in market euphoria, and being patient. He believes the current environment requires careful navigation, with potential opportunities emerging after a meaningful market pullback. The key is understanding that the era of double-digit growth in speculative assets is likely coming to an end. Timestamps: 00:00:00 – Introduction 00:00:46 – AI vs Dotcom Bubble 00:04:20 – Current Market Valuations 00:09:58 – Market Cap GDP Anomalies 00:12:07 – Consumer Job Market Weakness 00:15:18 – Delinquency Trends 00:16:38 – Historical Recession Parallels 00:18:40 – Government Debt Constraints 00:21:24 – Fed Intervention Inflation 00:26:25 – Deflationary to Inflationary Shift 00:29:37 – Asset Allocation Strategies 00:32:00 – Key Economic Indicators 00:36:05 – Gold Silver Outlook 00:43:14 – Recession Timeline Prediction Guest Links: Substack: https://henrikzeberg.substack.com X: https://x.com/HenrikZeberg Website: https://swissblock.net/ Henrik Zeberg is a Macroeconomist (M.Sc. Econ) from the University of Copenhagen. He is a Business Cycles student, Elliott Wave practitioner, and Chartist. He is the Head Macro Economist at Swissblock where he writes the Zeberg letter a comprehensive monthly macroeconomic report.

Episode 315 dives into a conversation Canada needs to be having right now. Erin Benjamin, President and CEO of the Canadian Live Music Association, breaks down why live music is one of the most powerful and misunderstood economic engines in the country. This episode goes far beyond concerts and culture, unpacking how live music fuels jobs, tourism, talent attraction, and city growth, while contributing billions to Canada's GDP. Despite its impact, the industry remains largely undervalued and underinvested, not because it lacks potential, but because business and policy have failed to fully recognize what's already working.Drawing from more than three decades in the music industry, Erin Benjamin explains what it will take to unlock the next phase of growth and why Canada is standing at a critical inflection point. From de-risking promoters and venues to integrating live music into economic development and tourism strategies, this episode makes a compelling case for why now is the moment to act. If Canada wants stronger cities, better talent retention, and globally competitive cultural industries, this conversation makes it clear that investing in live music isn't optional anymore, it's strategic.Rockstars, I just want to say thank you. Three years ago, this show started as an idea and a conversation I felt needed to exist. Today, it exists because you kept showing up, listening, sharing, challenging ideas, and supporting the journey week after week. Your support has turned this podcast into a global community, and I'm incredibly grateful for every download, every message, every conversation sparked because of it.Here's to the last three years of growth, learning, and momentum and to what we're building next. If you've been here since day one or you just joined us recently, know this: this show doesn't happen without you. Appreciate you all more than you know.

Infrastructure was passé…uncool. Difficult to get dollars from Private Equity and Growth funds, and almost impossible to get a VC fund interested. Now?! Now, it's cool. Infrastructure seems to be having a Renaissance, a full on Rebirth, not just fueled by commercial interests (e.g. advent of AI), but also by industrial policy and geopolitical considerations. In this episode of Tech Deciphered, we explore what's cool in the infrastructure spaces, including mega trends in semiconductors, energy, networking & connectivity, manufacturing Navigation: Intro We're back to building things Why now: the 5 forces behind the renaissance Semiconductors: compute is the new oil Networking & connectivity: digital highways get rebuilt Energy: rebuilding the power stack (not just renewables) Manufacturing: the return of “atoms + bits” Wrap: what it means for startups, incumbents, and investors Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 73 of Tech Deciphered, Infrastructure, the Rebirth or Renaissance. Infrastructure was passé, it wasn’t cool, but all of a sudden now everyone’s talking about network, talking about compute and semiconductors, talking about logistics, talking about energy. What gives? What’s happened? It was impossible in the past to get any funds, venture capital, even, to be honest, some private equity funds or growth funds interested in some of these areas, but now all of a sudden everyone thinks it’s cool. The infrastructure seems to be having a renaissance, a full-on rebirth. In this episode, we will explore in which cool ways the infrastructure spaces are moving and what’s leading to it. We will deep dive into the forces that are leading us to this. We will deep dive into semiconductors, networking and connectivity, energy, manufacturing, and then we’ll wrap up. Bertrand, so infrastructure is cool now. Bertrand Schmitt We're back to building things Yes. I thought software was going to eat the world. I cannot believe it was then, maybe even 15 years ago, from Andreessen, that quote about software eating the world. I guess it’s an eternal balance. Sometimes you go ahead of yourself, you build a lot of software stack, and at some point, you need the hardware to run this software stack, and there is only so much the bits can do in a world of atoms. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Obviously, we’ve gone through some of this before. I think what we’re going through right now is AI is eating the world, and because AI is eating the world, it’s driving a lot of this infrastructure building that we need. We don’t have enough energy to be consumed by all these big data centers and hyperscalers. We need to be innovative around network as well because of the consumption in terms of network bandwidth that is linked to that consumption as well. In some ways, it’s not software eating the world, AI is eating the world. Because AI is eating the world, we need to rethink everything around infrastructure and infrastructure becoming cool again. Bertrand Schmitt There is something deeper in this. It’s that the past 10, even 15 years were all about SaaS before AI. SaaS, interestingly enough, was very energy-efficient. When I say SaaS, I mean cloud computing at large. What I mean by energy-efficient is that actually cloud computing help make energy use more efficient because instead of companies having their own separate data centers in many locations, sometimes poorly run from an industrial perspective, replace their own privately run data center with data center run by the super scalers, the hyperscalers of the world. These data centers were run much better in terms of how you manage the coolings, the energy efficiency, the rack density, all of this stuff. Actually, the cloud revolution didn’t increase the use of electricity. The cloud revolution was actually a replacement from your private data center to the hyperscaler data center, which was energy efficient. That’s why we didn’t, even if we are always talking about that growth of cloud computing, we were never feeling the pinch in term of electricity. As you say, we say it all changed because with AI, it was not a simple “Replacement” of locally run infrastructure to a hyperscaler run infrastructure. It was truly adding on top of an existing infrastructure, a new computing infrastructure in a way out of nowhere. Not just any computing infrastructure, an energy infrastructure that was really, really voracious in term of energy use. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro There was one other effect. Obviously, we’ve discussed before, we are in a bubble. We won’t go too much into that today. But the previous big bubble in tech, which is in the late ’90s, there was a lot of infrastructure built. We thought the internet was going to take over back then. It didn’t take over immediately, but there was a lot of network connectivity, bandwidth built back in the day. Companies imploded because of that as well, or had to restructure and go in their chapter 11. A lot of the big telco companies had their own issues back then, etc., but a lot of infrastructure was built back then for this advent of the internet, which would then take a long time to come. In some ways, to your point, there was a lot of latent supply that was built that was around that for a while wasn’t used, but then it was. Now it’s been used, and now we need new stuff. That’s why I feel now we’re having the new moment of infrastructure, new moment of moving forward, aligned a little bit with what you just said around cloud computing and the advent of SaaS, but also around the fact that we had a lot of buildup back in the late ’90s, early ’90s, which we’re now still reaping the benefits on in today’s world. Bertrand Schmitt Yeah, that’s actually a great point because what was built in the late ’90s, there was a lot of fibre that was built. Laying out the fibre either across countries, inside countries. This fibre, interestingly enough, you could just change the computing on both sides of the fibre, the routing, the modems, and upgrade the capacity of the fibre. But the fibre was the same in between. The big investment, CapEx investment, was really lying down that fibre, but then you could really upgrade easily. Even if both ends of the fibre were either using very old infrastructure from the ’90s or were actually dark and not being put to use, step by step, it was being put to use, equipment was replaced, and step by step, you could keep using more and more of this fibre. It was a very interesting development, as you say, because it could be expanded over the years, where if we talk about GPUs, use for AI, GPUs, the interesting part is actually it’s totally the opposite. After a few years, it’s useless. Some like Google, will argue that they can depreciate over 5, 6 years, even some GPUs. But at the end of the day, the difference in perf and energy efficiency of the GPUs means that if you are energy constrained, you just want to replace the old one even as young as three-year-old. You have to look at Nvidia increasing spec, generation after generation. It’s pretty insane. It’s usually at least 3X year over year in term of performance. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro At this moment in time, it’s very clear that it’s happening. Why now: the 5 forces behind the renaissance Maybe let’s deep dive into why it’s happening now. What are the key forces around this? We’ve identified, I think, five forces that are particularly vital that lead to the world we’re in right now. One we’ve already talked about, which is AI, the demand shock and everything that’s happened because of AI. Data centers drive power demand, drive grid upgrades, drive innovative ways of getting energy, drive chips, drive networking, drive cooling, drive manufacturing, drive all the things that we’re going to talk in just a bit. One second element that we could probably highlight in terms of the forces that are behind this is obviously where we are in terms of cost curves around technology. Obviously, a lot of things are becoming much cheaper. The simulation of physical behaviours has become a lot more cheap, which in itself, this becomes almost a vicious cycle in of itself, then drives the adoption of more and more AI and stuff. But anyway, the simulation is becoming more and more accessible, so you can do a lot of simulation with digital twins and other things off the real world before you go into the real world. Robotics itself is becoming, obviously, cheaper. Hardware, a lot of the hardware is becoming cheaper. Computer has become cheaper as well. Obviously, there’s a lot of cost curves that have aligned that, and that’s maybe the second force that I would highlight. Obviously, funds are catching up. We’ll leave that a little bit to the end. We’ll do a wrap-up and talk a little bit about the implications to investors. But there’s a lot of capital out there, some capital related to industrial policy, other capital related to private initiative, private equity, growth funds, even venture capital, to be honest, and a few other elements on that. That would be a third force that I would highlight. Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Interestingly enough, in terms of capital use, and we’ll talk more about this, but some firms, if we are talking about energy investment, it was very difficult to invest if you are not investing in green energy. Now I think more and more firms and banks are willing to invest or support different type of energy infrastructure, not just, “Green energy.” That’s an interesting development because at some point it became near impossible to invest more in gas development, in oil development in the US or in most Western countries. At least in the US, this is dramatically changing the framework. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe to add the two last forces that I think we see behind the renaissance of what’s happening in infrastructure. They go hand in hand. One is the geopolitics of the world right now. Obviously, the world was global flat, and now it’s becoming increasingly siloed, so people are playing it to their own interests. There’s a lot of replication of infrastructure as well because people want to be autonomous, and they want to drive their own ability to serve end consumers, businesses, etc., in terms of data centers and everything else. That ability has led to things like, for example, chips shortage. The fact that there are semiconductors, there are shortages across the board, like memory shortages, where everything is packed up until 2027 of 2028. A lot of the memory that was being produced is already spoken for, which is shocking. There’s obviously generation of supply chain fragilities, obviously, some of it because of policies, for example, in the US with tariffs, etc, security of energy, etc. Then the last force directly linked to the geopolitics is the opposite of it, which is the policy as an accelerant, so to speak, as something that is accelerating development, where because of those silos, individual countries, as part their industrial policy, then want to put capital behind their local ecosystems, their local companies, so that their local companies and their local systems are for sure the winners, or at least, at the very least, serve their own local markets. I think that’s true of a lot of the things we’re seeing, for example, in the US with the Chips Act, for semiconductors, with IGA, IRA, and other elements of what we’ve seen in terms of practices, policies that have been implemented even in Europe, China, and other parts of the world. Bertrand Schmitt Talking about chips shortages, it’s pretty insane what has been happening with memory. Just the past few weeks, I have seen a close to 3X increase in price in memory prices in a matter of weeks. Apparently, it started with a huge order from OpenAI. Apparently, they have tried to corner the memory market. Interestingly enough, it has flat-footed the entire industry, and that includes Google, that includes Microsoft. There are rumours of their teams now having moved to South Korea, so they are closer to the action in terms of memory factories and memory decision-making. There are rumours of execs who got fired because they didn’t prepare for this type of eventuality or didn’t lock in some of the supply chain because that memory was initially for AI, but obviously, it impacts everything because factories making memories, you have to plan years in advance to build memories. You cannot open new lines of manufacturing like this. All factories that are going to open, we know when they are going to open because they’ve been built up for years. There is no extra capacity suddenly. At the very best, you can change a bit your line of production from one type of memory to another type. But that’s probably about it. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Just to be clear, all these transformations we’re seeing isn’t to say just hardware is back, right? It’s not just hardware. There’s physicality. The buildings are coming back, right? It’s full stack. Software is here. That’s why everything is happening. Policy is here. Finance is here. It’s a little bit like the name of the movie, right? Everything everywhere all at once. Everything’s happening. It was in some ways driven by the upper stacks, by the app layers, by the platform layers. But now we need new infrastructure. We need more infrastructure. We need it very, very quickly. We need it today. We’re already lacking in it. Semiconductors: compute is the new oil Maybe that’s a good segue into the first piece of the whole infrastructure thing that’s driving now the most valuable company in the world, NVIDIA, which is semiconductors. Semiconductors are driving compute. Semis are the foundation of infrastructure as a compute. Everyone needs it for every thing, for every activity, not just for compute, but even for sensors, for actuators, everything else. That’s the beginning of it all. Semiconductor is one of the key pieces around the infrastructure stack that’s being built at scale at this moment in time. Bertrand Schmitt Yes. What’s interesting is that if we look at the market gap of Semis versus software as a service, cloud companies, there has been a widening gap the past year. I forgot the exact numbers, but we were talking about plus 20, 25% for Semis in term of market gap and minus 5, minus 10 for SaaS companies. That’s another trend that’s happening. Why is this happening? One, because semiconductors are core to the AI build-up, you cannot go around without them. But two, it’s also raising a lot of questions about the durability of the SaaS, a software-as-a-service business model. Because if suddenly we have better AI, and that’s all everyone is talking about to justify the investment in AI, that it keeps getting better, and it keeps improving, and it’s going to replace your engineers, your software engineers. Then maybe all of this moat that software companies built up over the years or decades, sometimes, might unravel under the pressure of newly coded, newly built, cheaper alternatives built from the ground up with AI support. It’s not just that, yes, semiconductors are doing great. It’s also as a result of that AI underlying trend that software is doing worse right now. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro At the end of the day, this foundational piece of infrastructure, semiconductor, is obviously getting manifest to many things, fabrication, manufacturing, packaging, materials, equipment. Everything’s being driven, ASML, etc. There are all these different players around the world that are having skyrocket valuations now, it’s because they’re all part of the value chain. Just to be very, very clear, there’s two elements of this that I think are very important for us to remember at this point in time. One, it’s the entire value chains are being shifted. It’s not just the chips that basically lead to computing in the strict sense of it. It’s like chips, for example, that drive, for example, network switching. We’re going to talk about networking a bit, but you need chips to drive better network switching. That’s getting revolutionised as well. For example, we have an investment in that space, a company called the eridu.ai, and they’re revolutionising one of the pieces around that stack. Second part of the puzzle, so obviously, besides the holistic view of the world that’s changing in terms of value change, the second piece of the puzzle is, as we discussed before, there’s industrial policy. We already mentioned the CHIPS Act, which is something, for example, that has been done in the US, which I think is 52 billion in incentives across a variety of things, grants, loans, and other mechanisms to incentivise players to scale capacity quick and to scale capacity locally in the US. One of the effects of that now is obviously we had the TSMC, US expansion with a factory here in the US. We have other levels of expansion going on with Intel, Samsung, and others that are happening as we speak. Again, it’s this two by two. It’s market forces that drive the need for fundamental shifts in the value chain. On the other industrial policy and actual money put forward by states, by governments, by entities that want to revolutionise their own local markets. Bertrand Schmitt Yes. When you talk about networking, it makes me think about what NVIDIA did more than six years ago when they acquired Mellanox. At the time, it was largest acquisition for NVIDIA in 2019, and it was networking for the data center. Not networking across data center, but inside the data center, and basically making sure that your GPUs, the different computers, can talk as fast as possible between each of them. I think that’s one piece of the puzzle that a lot of companies are missing, by the way, about NVIDIA is that they are truly providing full systems. They are not just providing a GPU. Some of their competitors are just providing GPUs. But NVIDIA can provide you the full rack. Now, they move to liquid-cool computing as well. They design their systems with liquid cooling in mind. They have a very different approach in the industry. It’s a systematic system-level approach to how do you optimize your data center. Quite frankly, that’s a bit hard to beat. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro For those listening, you’d be like, this is all very different. Semiconductors, networking, energy, manufacturing, this is all different. Then all of a sudden, as Bertrand is saying, well, there are some players that are acting across the stack. Then you see in the same sentence, you’re talking about nuclear power in Microsoft or nuclear power in Google, and you’re like, what happened? Why are these guys in the same sentence? It’s like they’re tech companies. Why are they talking about energy? It’s the nature of that. These ecosystems need to go hand in hand. The value chains are very deep. For you to actually reap the benefits of more and more, for example, semiconductor availability, you have to have better and better networking connectivity, and you have to have more and more energy at lower and lower costs, and all of that. All these things are intrinsically linked. That’s why you see all these big tech companies working across stack, NVIDIA being a great example of that in trying to create truly a systems approach to the world, as Bertrand was mentioning. Networking & connectivity: digital highways get rebuilt On the networking and connectivity side, as we said, we had a lot of fibre that was put down, etc, but there’s still more build-out needs to be done. 5G in terms of its densification is still happening. We’re now starting to talk, obviously, about 6G. I’m not sure most telcos are very happy about that because they just have been doing all this CapEx and all this deployment into 5G, and now people already started talking about 6G and what’s next. Obviously, data center interconnect is quite important, and all the hubbing that needs to happen around data centers is very, very important. We are seeing a lot movements around connectivity that are particularly important. Network gear and the emergence of players like Broadcom in terms of the semiconductor side of the fence, obviously, Cisco, Juniper, Arista, and others that are very much present in this space. As I said, we made an investment on the semiconductor side of networking as well, realizing that there’s still a lot of bottlenecks happening there. But obviously, the networking and connectivity stack still needs to be built at all levels within the data centers, outside of the data centers in terms of last mile, across the board in terms of fibre. We’re seeing a lot of movements still around the space. It’s what connects everything. At the end of the day, if there’s too much latency in these systems, if the bandwidths are not high enough, then we’re going to have huge bottlenecks that are going to be put at the table by a networking providers. Obviously, that doesn’t help anyone. If there’s a button like anywhere, it doesn’t work. All of this doesn’t work. Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Interestingly enough, I know we said for this episode, we not talk too much about space, but when you talk about 6G, it make me think about, of course, Starlink. That’s really your last mile delivery that’s being built as well. It’s a massive investment. We’re talking about thousands of satellites that are interconnected between each other through laser system. This is changing dramatically how companies can operate, how individuals can operate. For companies, you can have great connectivity from anywhere in the world. For military, it’s the same. For individuals, suddenly, you won’t have dead space, wide zones. This is also a part of changing how we could do things. It’s quite important even in the development of AI because, yes, you can have AI at the edge, but that interconnect to the rest of the system is quite critical. Having that availability of a network link, high-quality network link from anywhere is a great combo. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Then you start seeing regions of the world that want to differentiate to attract digital nomads by saying, “We have submarine cables that come and hub through us, and therefore, our connectivity is amazing.” I was just in Madeira, and they were talking about that in Portugal. One of the islands of Portugal. We have some Marine cables. You have great connectivity. We’re getting into that discussion where people are like, I don’t care. I mean, I don’t know. I assume I have decent connectivity. People actually care about decent connectivity. This discussion is not just happening at corporate level, at enterprise level? Etc. Even consumers, even people that want to work remotely or be based somewhere else in the world. It’s like, This is important Where is there a great connectivity for me so that I can have access to the services I need? Etc. Everyone becomes aware of everything. We had a cloud flare mishap more recently that the CEO had to jump online and explain deeply, technically and deeply, what happened. Because we’re in their heads. If Cloudflare goes down, there’s a lot of websites that don’t work. All of this, I think, is now becoming du jour rather than just an afterthought. Maybe we’ll think about that in the future. Bertrand Schmitt Totally. I think your life is being changed for network connectivity, so life of individuals, companies. I mean, everything. Look at airlines and ships and cruise ships. Now is the advent of satellite connectivity. It’s dramatically changing our experience. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Indeed. Energy: rebuilding the power stack (not just renewables) Moving maybe to energy. We’ve talked about energy quite a bit in the past. Maybe we start with the one that we didn’t talk as much, although we did mention it, which was, let’s call it the fossil infrastructure, what’s happening around there. Everyone was saying, it’s all going to be renewables and green. We’ve had a shift of power, geopolitics. Honestly, I the writing was on the wall that we needed a lot more energy creation. It wasn’t either or. We needed other sources to be as efficient as possible. Obviously, we see a lot of work happening around there that many would have thought, Well, all this infrastructure doesn’t matter anymore. Now we’re seeing LNG terminals, pipelines, petrochemical capacity being pushed up, a lot of stuff happening around markets in terms of export, and not only around export, but also around overall distribution and increases and improvements so that there’s less leakage, distribution of energy, etc. In some ways, people say, it’s controversial, but it’s like we don’t have enough energy to spare. We’re already behind, so we need as much as we can. We need to figure out the way to really extract as much as we can from even natural resources, which In many people’s mind, it’s almost like blasphemous to talk about, but it is where we are. Obviously, there’s a lot of renaissance also happening on the fossil infrastructure basis, so to speak. Bertrand Schmitt Personally, I’m ecstatic that there is a renaissance going regarding what is called fossil infrastructure. Oil and gas, it’s critical to humanity well-being. You never had growth of countries without energy growth and nothing else can come close. Nuclear could come close, but it takes decades to deploy. I think it’s great. It’s great for developed economies so that they do better, they can expand faster. It’s great for third-world countries who have no realistic other choice. I really don’t know what happened the past 10, 15 years and why this was suddenly blasphemous. But I’m glad that, strangely, thanks to AI, we are back to a more rational mindset about energy and making sure we get efficient energy where we can. Obviously, nuclear is getting a second act. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I know you would be. We’ve been talking about for a long time, and you’ve been talking about it in particular for a very long time. Bertrand Schmitt Yes, definitely. It’s been one area of interest of mine for 25 years. I don’t know. I’ve been shocked about what happened in Europe, that willingness destruction of energy infrastructure, especially in Germany. Just a few months ago, they keep destroying on live TV some nuclear station in perfect working condition and replacing them with coal. I’m not sure there is a better definition of insanity at this stage. It looks like it’s only the Germans going that hardcore for some reason, but at least the French have stopped their program of decommissioning. America, it seems to be doing the same, so it’s great. On top of it, there are new generations that could be put to use. The Chinese are building up a very large nuclear reactor program, more than 100 reactors in construction for the next 10 years. I think everybody has to catch up because at some point, this is the most efficient energy solution. Especially if you don’t build crazy constraints around the construction of these nuclear reactors. If we are rational about permits, about energy, about safety, there are great things we could be doing with nuclear. That might be one of the only solution if we want to be competitive, because when energy prices go down like crazy, like in China, they will do once they have reach delivery of their significant build-up of nuclear reactors, we better be ready to have similar options from a cost perspective. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro From the outside, at the very least, nuclear seems to be probably in the energy one of the areas that’s more being innovated at this moment in time. You have startups in the space, you have a lot really money going into it, not just your classic industrial development. That’s very exciting. Moving maybe to the carbonization and what’s happening. The CCUS, and for those who don’t know what it is, carbon capture, utilization, and storage. There’s a lot of stuff happening around that space. That’s the area that deals with the ability to capture CO₂ emissions from industrial sources and/or the atmosphere and preventing their release. There’s a lot of things happening in that space. There’s also a lot of things happening around hydrogen and geothermal and really creating the ability to storage or to store, rather, energy that then can be put back into the grids at the right time. There’s a lot of interesting pieces happening around this. There’s some startup movement in the space. It’s been a long time coming, the reuse of a lot of these industrial sources. Not sure it’s as much on the news as nuclear, and oil and gas, but certainly there’s a lot of exciting things happening there. Bertrand Schmitt I’m a bit more dubious here, but I think geothermal makes sense if it’s available at reasonable price. I don’t think hydrogen technology has proven its value. Concerning carbon capture, I’m not sure how much it’s really going to provide in terms of energy needs, but why not? Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Fuels niche, again, from the outside, we’re not energy experts, but certainly, there are movements in the space. We’ll see what’s happening. One area where there’s definitely a lot of movement is this notion of grid and storage. On the one hand, that transmission needs to be built out. It needs to be better. We’ve had issues of blackouts in the US. We’ve had issues of blackouts all around the world, almost. Portugal as well, for a significant part of the time. The ability to work around transmission lines, transformers, substations, the modernization of some of this infrastructure, and the move forward of it is pretty critical. But at the other end, there’s the edge. Then, on the edge, you have the ability to store. We should have, better mechanisms to store energy that are less leaky in terms of energy storage. Obviously, there’s a lot of movement around that. Some of it driven just by commercial stuff, like Tesla a lot with their storage stuff, etc. Some of it really driven at scale by energy players that have the interest that, for example, some of the storage starts happening closer to the consumption as well. But there’s a lot of exciting things happening in that space, and that is a transformative space. In some ways, the bottleneck of energy is also around transmission and then ultimately the access to energy by homes, by businesses, by industries, etc. Bertrand Schmitt I would say some of the blackout are truly man-made. If I pick on California, for instance. That’s the logical conclusion of the regulatory system in place in California. On one side, you limit price that energy supplier can sell. The utility company can sell, too. On the other side, you force them to decommission the most energy-efficient and least expensive energy source. That means you cap the revenues, you make the cost increase. What is the result? The result is you cannot invest anymore to support a grid and to support transmission. That’s 100% obvious. That’s what happened, at least in many places. The solution is stop crazy regulations that makes no economic sense whatsoever. Then, strangely enough, you can invest again in transmission, in maintenance, and all I love this stuff. Maybe another piece, if we pick in California, if you authorize building construction in areas where fires are easy, that’s also a very costly to support from utility perspective, because then you are creating more risk. You are forced buy the state to connect these new constructions to the grid. You have more maintenance. If it fails, you can create fire. If you create fire, you have to pay billions of fees. I just want to highlight that some of this is not a technological issue, is not per se an investment issue, but it’s simply the result of very bad regulations. I hope that some will learn, and some change will be made so that utilities can do their job better. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Then last, but not the least, on the energy side, energy is becoming more and more digitally defined in some ways. It’s like the analogy to networks that they’ve become more, and more software defined, where you have, at the edge is things like smart meters. There’s a lot of things you can do around the key elements of the business model, like dynamic pricing and other elements. Demand response, one of the areas that I invested in, I invest in a company called Omconnect that’s now merged with what used to be Google Nest. Where to deploy that ability to do demand response and also pass it to consumers so that consumers can reduce their consumption at times where is the least price effective or the less green or the less good for the energy companies to produce energy. We have other things that are happening, which are interesting. Obviously, we have a lot more electric vehicles in cars, etc. These are also elements of storage. They don’t look like elements of storage, but the car has electricity in it once you charge it. Once it’s charged, what do you do with it? Could you do something else? Like the whole reverse charging piece that we also see now today in mobile devices and other edge devices, so to speak. That also changes the architecture of what we’re seeing around the space. With AI, there’s a lot of elements that change around the value chain. The ability to do forecasting, the ability to have, for example, virtual power plans because of just designated storage out there, etc. Interesting times happening. Not sure all utilities around the world, all energy providers around the world are innovating at the same pace and in the same way. But certainly just looking at the industry and talking to a lot of players that are CEOs of some of these companies. That are leading innovation for some of these companies, there’s definitely a lot more happening now in the last few years than maybe over the last few decades. Very exciting times. Bertrand Schmitt I think there are two interesting points in what you say. Talking about EVs, for instance, a Cybertruck is able to send electricity back to your home if your home is able to receive electricity from that source. Usually, you have some changes to make to the meter system, to your panel. That’s one great way to potentially use your car battery. Another piece of the puzzle is that, strangely enough, most strangely enough, there has been a big push to EV, but at the same time, there has not been a push to provide more electricity. But if you replace cars that use gasoline by electric vehicles that use electricity, you need to deliver more electricity. It doesn’t require a PhD to get that. But, strangely enough, nothing was done. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Apparently, it does. Bertrand Schmitt I remember that study in France where they say that, if people were all to switch to EV, we will need 10 more nuclear reactors just on the way from Paris to Nice to the Côte d’Azur, the French Rivière, in order to provide electricity to the cars going there during the summer vacation. But I mean, guess what? No nuclear plant is being built along the way. Good luck charging your vehicles. I think that’s another limit that has been happening to the grid is more electric vehicles that require charging when the related infrastructure has not been upgraded to support more. Actually, it has quite the opposite. In many cases, we had situation of nuclear reactors closing down, so other facilities closing down. Obviously, the end result is an increase in price of electricity, at least in some states and countries that have not sold that fully out. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Manufacturing: the return of “atoms + bits” Moving to manufacturing and what’s happening around manufacturing, manufacturing technology. There’s maybe the case to be made that manufacturing is getting replatformed, right? It’s getting redefined. Some of it is very obvious, and it’s already been ongoing for a couple of decades, which is the advent of and more and more either robotic augmented factories or just fully roboticized factories, where there’s very little presence of human beings. There’s elements of that. There’s the element of software definition on top of it, like simulation. A lot of automation is going on. A lot of AI has been applied to some lines in terms of vision, safety. We have an investment in a company called Sauter Analytics that is very focused on that from the perspective of employees and when they’re still humans in the loop, so to speak, and the ability to really figure out when people are at risk and other elements of what’s happening occurring from that. But there’s more than that. There’s a little bit of a renaissance in and of itself. Factories are, initially, if we go back a couple of decades ago, factories were, and manufacturing was very much defined from the setup. Now it’s difficult to innovate, it’s difficult to shift the line, it’s difficult to change how things are done in the line. With the advent of new factories that have less legacy, that have more flexible systems, not only in terms of software, but also in terms of hardware and robotics, it allows us to, for example, change and shift lines much more easily to different functions, which will hopefully, over time, not only reduce dramatically the cost of production. But also increase dramatically the yield, it increases dramatically the production itself. A lot of cool stuff happening in that space. Bertrand Schmitt It’s exciting to see that. One thing this current administration in the US has been betting on is not just hoping for construction renaissance. Especially on the factory side, up of factories, but their mindset was two things. One, should I force more companies to build locally because it would be cheaper? Two, increase output and supply of energy so that running factories here in the US would be cheaper than anywhere else. Maybe not cheaper than China, but certainly we get is cheaper than Europe. But three, it’s also the belief that thanks to AI, we will be able to have more efficient factories. There is always that question, do Americans to still keep making clothes, for instance, in factories. That used to be the case maybe 50 years ago, but this move to China, this move to Bangladesh, this move to different places. That’s not the goal. But it can make sense that indeed there is ability, thanks to robots and AI, to have more automated factories, and these factories could be run more efficiently, and as a result, it would be priced-competitive, even if run in the US. When you want to think about it, that has been, for instance, the South Korean playbook. More automated factories, robotics, all of this, because that was the only way to compete against China, which has a near infinite or used to have a near infinite supply of cheaper labour. I think that all of this combined can make a lot of sense. In a way, it’s probably creating a perfect storm. Maybe another piece of the puzzle this administration has been working on pretty hard is simplifying all the permitting process. Because a big chunk of the problem is that if your permitting is very complex, very expensive, what take two years to build become four years, five years, 10 years. The investment mass is not the same in that situation. I think that’s a very important part of the puzzle. It’s use this opportunity to reduce regulatory state, make sure that things are more efficient. Also, things are less at risk of bribery and fraud because all these regulations, there might be ways around. I think it’s quite critical to really be careful about this. Maybe last piece of the puzzle is the way accounting works. There are new rules now in 2026 in the US where you can fully depreciate your CapEx much faster than before. That’s a big win for manufacturing in the US. Suddenly, you can depreciate much faster some of your CapEx investment in manufacturing. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Just going back to a point you made and then moving it forward, even China, with being now probably the country in the world with the highest rate of innovation and take up of industrial robots. Because of demographic issues a little bit what led Japan the first place to be one of the real big innovators around robots in general. The fact that demographics, you’re having an aging population, less and less children. How are you going to replace all these people? Moving that into big winners, who becomes a big winner in a space where manufacturing is fundamentally changing? Obviously, there’s the big four of robots, which is ABB, FANUC, KUKA, and Yaskawa. Epson, I think, is now in there, although it’s not considered one of the big four. Kawasaki, Denso, Universal Robots. There’s a really big robotics, industrial robotic companies in the space from different origins, FANUC and Yaskawa, and Epson from Japan, KUKA from Germany, ABB from Switzerland, Sweden. A lot of now emerging companies from China, and what’s happening in that space is quite interesting. On the other hand, also, other winners will include players that will be integrators that will build some of the rest of the infrastructure that goes into manufacturing, the Siemens of the world, the Schneider’s, the Rockwell’s that will lead to fundamental industrial automation. Some big winners in there that whose names are well known, so probably not a huge amount of surprises there. There’s movements. As I said, we’re still going to see the big Chinese players emerging in the world. There are startups that are innovating around a lot of the edges that are significant in this space. We’ll see if this is a space that will just be continued to be dominated by the big foreign robotics and by a couple of others and by the big integrators or not. Bertrand Schmitt I think you are right to remind about China because China has been moving very fast in robotics. Some Chinese companies are world-class in their use of robotics. You have this strange mix of some older industries where robotics might not be so much put to use and typically state-owned, versus some private companies, typically some tech companies that are reconverting into hardware in some situation. That went all in terms of robotics use and their demonstrations, an example of what’s happening in China. Definitely, the Chinese are not resting. Everyone smart enough is playing that game from the Americans, the Chinese, Japanese, the South Koreans. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Exciting things are manufacturing, and maybe to bring it all together, what does it mean for all the big players out there? If we talk with startups and talk about startups, we didn’t mention a ton of startups today, right? Maybe incumbent wind across the board. But on a more serious note, we did mention a few. For example, in nuclear energy, there’s a lot of startups that have been, some of them, incredibly well-funded at this moment in time. Wrap: what it means for startups, incumbents, and investors There might be some big disruptions that will come out of startups, for example, in that space. On the chipset side, we talked about the big gorillas, the NVIDIAs, AMDs, Intel, etc., of the world. But we didn’t quite talk about the fact that there’s a lot of innovation, again, happening on the edges with new players going after very large niches, be it in networking and switching. Be it in compute and other areas that will need different, more specialized solutions. Potentially in terms of compute or in terms of semiconductor deployments. I think there’s still some opportunities there, maybe not to be the winner takes all thing, but certainly around a lot of very significant niches that might grow very fast. Manufacturing, we mentioned the same. Some of the incumbents seem to be in the driving seat. We’ll see what happens if some startups will come in and take some of the momentum there, probably less likely. There are spaces where the value chains are very tightly built around the OEMs and then the suppliers overall, classically the tier one suppliers across value chains. Maybe there is some startup investment play. We certainly have played in the couple of the spaces. I mentioned already some of them today, but this is maybe where the incumbents have it all to lose. It’s more for them to lose rather than for the startups to win just because of the scale of what needs to be done and what needs to be deployed. Bertrand Schmitt I know. That’s interesting point. I think some players in energy production, for instance, are moving very fast and behaving not only like startups. Usually, it’s independent energy suppliers who are not kept by too much regulations that get moved faster. Utility companies, as we just discussed, have more constraints. I would like to say that if you take semiconductor space, there has been quite a lot of startup activities way more than usual, and there have been some incredible success. Just a few weeks ago, Rock got more or less acquired. Now, you have to play games. It’s not an outright acquisition, but $20 billion for an IP licensing agreement that’s close to an acquisition. That’s an incredible success for a company. Started maybe 10 years ago. You have another Cerebras, one of the competitor valued, I believe, quite a lot in similar range. I think there is definitely some activity. It’s definitely a different game compared to your software startup in terms of investment. But as we have seen with AI in general, the need for investment might be larger these days. Yes, it might be either traditional players if they can move fast enough, to be frank, because some of them, when you have decades of being run as a slow-moving company, it’s hard to change things. At the same time, it looks like VCs are getting bigger. Wall Street is getting more ready to finance some of these companies. I think there will be opportunities for startups, but definitely different types of startups in terms of profile. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Exactly. From an investor standpoint, I think on the VC side, at least our core belief is that it’s more niche. It’s more around big niches that need to be fundamentally disrupted or solutions that require fundamental interoperability and integration where the incumbents have no motivation to do it. Things that are a little bit more either packaging on the semiconductor side or other elements of actual interoperability. Even at the software layer side that feeds into infrastructure. If you’re a growth investor, a private equity investor, there’s other plays that are available to you. A lot of these projects need to be funded and need to be scaled. Now we’re seeing projects being funded even for a very large, we mentioned it in one of the previous episodes, for a very large tech companies. When Meta, for example, is going to the market to get funding for data centers, etc. There’s projects to be funded there because just the quantum and scale of some of these projects, either because of financial interest for specifically the tech companies or for other reasons, but they need to be funded by the market. There’s other place right now, certainly if you’re a larger private equity growth investor, and you want to come into the market and do projects. Even public-private financing is now available for a lot of things. Definitely, there’s a lot of things emanating that require a lot of funding, even for large-scale projects. Which means the advent of some of these projects and where realization is hopefully more of a given than in other circumstances, because there’s actual commercial capital behind it and private capital behind it to fuel it as well, not just industrial policy and money from governments. Bertrand Schmitt There was this quite incredible stat. I guess everyone heard about that incredible growth in GDP in Q3 in the US at 4.4%. Apparently, half of that growth, so around 2.2% point, has been coming from AI and related infrastructure investment. That’s pretty massive. Half of your GDP growth coming from something that was not there three years ago or there, but not at this intensity of investment. That’s the numbers we are talking about. I’m hearing that there is a good chance that in 2026, we’re talking about five, even potentially 6% GDP growth. Again, half of it potentially coming from AI and all the related infrastructure growth that’s coming with AI. As a conclusion for this episode on infrastructure, as we just said, it’s not just AI, it’s a whole stack, and it’s manufacturing in general as well. Definitely in the US, in China, there is a lot going on. As we have seen, computing needs connectivity, networks, need power, energy and grid, and all of this needs production capacity and manufacturing. Manufacturing can benefit from AI as well. That way the loop is fully going back on itself. Infrastructure is the next big thing. It’s an opportunity, probably more for incumbents, but certainly, as usual, with such big growth opportunities for startups as well. Thank you, Nuno. Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Thank you, Bertrand.

Chuck Zodda and Marc Fandetti analyze a stronger-than-expected January jobs report that showed 130,000 new jobs added and unemployment falling to 4.3%. With wage growth running hot and GDP trending above potential, the discussion turns to whether the Federal Reserve may need to hold rates higher for longer — or even consider future hikes if labor market strength continues. Luke Kawa of Sherwood News also joined the show to explore rising investor anxiety around artificial intelligence, including whether AI could disrupt software, finance, and knowledge-based industries faster than markets expect. Later in the hour, the hosts discuss mounting federal deficits, growing consumer credit balances, and the long-term risks tied to persistent government borrowing.

Jeffrey Small explains that a resilient labor market and strong GDP forecasts are challenging the case for near-term rate cuts. While high valuations sparked recent volatility in stocks like Microsoft (MSFT) and Nvidia (NVDA), Small views the massive Mag 7 AI CapEx as a long-term investment cycle similar to Amazon's (AMZN) early days. ======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Options involve risks and are not suitable for all investors. Before trading, read the Options Disclosure Document. http://bit.ly/2v9tH6DSubscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

In this episode of The Independent, Paul Johnson is joined by economist Elliott Pollack and columnist Bob Robb for a conversation about where the U.S. economy is headed — and what could derail it.The panel breaks down Trump's Federal Reserve appointment, the importance of Fed independence, and whether interest rate cuts are coming sooner than expected. They explore why the stock market may be overvalued, how AI is reshaping productivity and GDP, and why housing affordability may not improve anytime soon.They also tackle the growing uncertainty caused by tariffs, the Supreme Court's looming decision on presidential tariff authority, and how instability is impacting business confidence, investment, and job growth.Beyond economics, the discussion expands into:Trump's strained relationships with allies like CanadaThe future of global trade and middle-power alliancesElection integrity, federal overreach, and political distractionsThe rise of the Arizona Independent Party and the legal battle challenging America's political duopoly

Valószínűleg hallgatóink is találkoztak az elmúlt hetekben azokkal, a közösségi médiában megjelent grafikonokkal, amik azt sugallják, hogy az uniós támogatások és a magyar gazdaság teljesítménye kéz a kézben jár. A leegyszerűsített üzenet szerint: ha „jön az EU-pénz”, nő a GDP, ha pedig „elzárják a csapot”, akkor megáll a növekedés vagy visszaesés jön. Csakhogy a kép ennél bonyolultabb: sok múlik azon, hogy a források mikor és milyen módon jutnak el a gazdaságba, és hogyan használják fel őket. Emiatt az EU-támogatások és a gazdasági növekedés között nem mindig van egyértelmű, automatikus kapcsolat. Műsorunk első részében erről beszélgetünk Szabó Dániellel, lapunk makrogazdasági elemzőjével. A folytatásban arról lesz szó, hogy civil és szakmai szervezetek egy közös javaslatcsomagot tettek le az asztalra Lakhatási Minimum 2026 címmel. A csomag üzenete egyértelmű: a lakhatási válság nem néhány szerencsétlen helyzetbe került ember gondja, hanem sokak számára mindennapi bizonytalanság, amire nem ad elég választ néhány gyors, eseti beavatkozás. A témáról Kovács Verát, az Utcáról Lakásba! Egyesület alapító tagját kérdezzük. Főbb részek: Intro – (00:00) Brüsszeli pénzek, magyar GDP – (02:01) Lakhatási minimum 2026 – (16:30) Kép forrása: Getty ImagesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Aaron McIntire recaps a week where the White House ramps up economic messaging, with President Trump forecasting explosive GDP growth under his anticipated Federal Reserve pick and Secretary Doug Burgum highlighting falling energy prices and broad prosperity gains. A fresh Gallup poll shows Americans growing more optimistic about economic growth and the stock market in the coming months. CBS reports on ICE arrests spark debate, but the data excludes key non-violent crimes like drug trafficking and other vile crimes. Another potential government shutdown looms over DHS funding, with Sen. John Fetterman admitting confusion over his party's priorities. Plus, viewership success for the TP USA alternative halftime show, the New York Times walking back marijuana legalization support, and Catherine Herridge detailing CBS suppression of Hunter Biden laptop stories.   A.M. Update, Aaron McIntire, Trump economy, GDP growth, mass deportations, ICE arrests, government shutdown, Hunter Biden laptop, election interference, Andy Beshear, Bakari Sellers, Wajahat Ali, Gallup poll, TP USA halftime, conservative news, daily update

At January's World Economic Forum in Davos, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney argued that the old world order is not coming back. He went on to say that we are now in an era of great power rivalry, and that middle powers, like Canada, should come together to counter the rise of great powers. So what could the new order look like, and just how much influence can middle powers wield compared to the U.S. and China? They may be smaller by GDP standards but they are not without importance geopolitically.   In this episode of Talking Geopolitics, host Christian Smith is joined by GPF Chairman George Friedman to discuss it all, to examine why the U.S. and Canada can't just decouple from one another, and what will happen to Cuba now that it has reached a tipping point in its economy and its defense. Visit www.geopoliticalfutures.com for world-class geopolitical analysis and discussion and to access our full 2026 Forecast: Re-anchoring the World.

In this week's episode of China Insider, Miles Yu covers the recent video call held between Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin to strengthen Beijing-Moscow ties and examines the current state of bilateral relations. Next, Miles provides analysis of China's evolving clean energy sector and the importance of the EV market and other clean technologies to China's GDP growth and economic trajectory. Finally, Miles reviews China's increasing domestic economic struggles, as efforts to address rising youth unemployment and the lingering affordability crisis continue to fall short, and what this might mean for the Chinese economy in 2026.China Insider is a weekly podcast project from Hudson Institute's China Center, hosted by China Center Director and Senior Fellow, Dr. Miles Yu, who provides weekly news that mainstream American outlets often miss, as well as in-depth commentary and analysis on the China challenge and the free world's future. 

In today's episode, Tyler takes a deep dive into the market's ongoing strength, despite mixed headlines and bearish sentiment. The conversation covers the broadening effect fueling all-time highs across sectors and international markets, the latest updates on GDP growth, and strong moves from the homebuilders. Tune into today's podcast to learn more.

China is expected to put boosting domestic demand — especially spurring consumption — at the core of its economic agenda this year, with policymakers likely to roll out stronger fiscal support and structural reforms to further unlock the potential of household spending, a senior expert said.资深专家表示，今年我国将把扩大内需尤其是激发消费潜力置于经济工作核心位置，预计决策层将推出更有力的财政支持政策和结构性改革举措，进一步释放家庭消费潜能。Wang Wei, senior researcher and former director of the Institute of Market Economy at the Development Research Center of the State Council, said that to ensure stable economic growth during the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-30) period, China needs to achieve a notable increase in final consumption as a share of GDP.国务院发展研究中心市场经济研究所原所长、二级研究员王微表示，为确保"十五五"时期（2026-2030年）经济稳定增长，我国需要显著提升最终消费占GDP比重。"That means China's future economic growth will need to rely more on domestic demand — particularly on the sustained, steady growth and innovation of consumption — to provide effective support for overall growth," Wang said during a recentexclusive interview with China Daily.王微日前接受《中国日报》独家专访时表示，这意味着未来中国经济增长需更多依靠内需，特别是消费持续平稳增长与创新，为整体增长提供有效支撑。She said China has finished the "from nothing to something" stage of household consumption over the past four decades, but the next phase — especially under high-quality development- must focus on improving consumption quality and expanding the space for development-driven consumer demand.她指出，过去四十年我国已走过家庭消费"从无到有"的阶段，下一阶段特别是高质量发展背景下，必须着力提升消费品质、拓展发展型消费需求空间。"Services consumption such as education, healthcare, culture, sports, entertainment and eldercare will have very large room for growth as people's living standards rise. With the impact of technological innovation, many new forms of innovative consumption are also entering daily life, forming new drivers of growth."随着人民生活水平提高，教育、医疗、文化、体育、娱乐、养老等服务消费将拥有巨大增长空间。在科技创新影响下，许多创新消费新形态也正进入日常生活，形成新的增长动能。Wang expects that during the 15th Five-Year Plan period, China's final consumption expenditure may exceed 90 trillion yuan ($12.99 trillion), accounting for around 60 percent of the country's GDP.王微预计，"十五五"期间我国最终消费支出有望突破90万亿元，占GDP比重将提升至60%左右。"The contribution of final consumption to economic growth will remain above 60 percent, and the share of household services consumption in total consumer spending will rise to 50 percent," she said.最终消费对经济增长的贡献率将保持在60%以上，居民服务性消费占消费总支出比重将升至50%。According to the Recommendations of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China for Formulating the 15th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development, over the next five years, China should achieve a notable increase in household consumption as a share of GDP.根据《中共中央关于制定国民经济和社会发展第十五个五年规划的建议》，未来五年我国要实现居民消费占GDP比重显著提升。It also emphasized that special initiatives should be advanced to boost consumption, and the supply of high-quality consumer goods and services should be expanded. China should focus on easing market access and integrating various forms of business to boost consumption of services and strive to build market-leading brands, raise standards, and apply new technologies to expand and upgrade goods consumption.规划同时强调，应实施促进消费专项行动，扩大优质消费品和服务供给。要聚焦放宽准入与业态融合促进服务消费，着力打造领军品牌、提升标准规范、运用新技术拓展升级商品消费。"To that end, in 2026, consumption should remain the priority of economic development. Special initiatives to boost consumption should be further implemented, with strengthened inclusive policies directly benefiting consumers. Supply-side structural reform and policy innovations should be continuously advanced to steadily enhance consumers' spending power and willingness, promoting a stable increase and shifting the incremental economic growth to innovation-driven forms," Wang added."为此，2026年应继续将消费摆在优先位置，深入推进促消费专项行动，强化普惠性政策直达消费者，持续推进供给侧结构性改革和政策创新，稳步提升居民消费能力与意愿，推动消费稳定增长并向创新驱动型增量转变。"王微补充道。Wang said policymakers should continue to strengthen countercyclical macroeconomic policies in 2026, provide more support for services consumption, and accelerate the establishment of an institutionalized empowerment mechanism that integrates policy support, digital empowerment and industrial funds to better support the development of micro and small enterprises.她建议决策层在2026年继续加强逆周期宏观政策调控，加大对服务消费支持力度，加快建立政策支持、数字赋能与产业基金相结合的常态化赋能机制，更好支持小微企业发展。More efforts should also be made to maintain subsidies for the goods trade-in policy, support housing rentals such as providing rental subsidies for university graduates, new urban residents and migrant workers, and capitalize on the debut economy to strengthen backing for consumption innovation.同时应延续消费品以旧换新补贴政策，支持大学毕业生、新市民、农民工等群体住房租赁补贴，借力首发经济强化对消费创新的支持。final consumption /ˈfaɪnəl kənˈsʌmpʃən/最终消费domestic demand /dəˈmestɪk dɪˈmɑːnd/国内需求exclusive interview /ɪkˈskluːsɪv ˈɪntəvjuː/独家专访eldercare /ˈeldəkeə/养老服务market-leading brand /ˈmɑːkɪt ˈliːdɪŋ brænd/领军品牌supply-side structural reform /ˈsʌplaɪ saɪd ˈstrʌktʃərəl rɪˈfɔːm/供给侧结构性改革incremental /ˌɪŋkrəˈmentl/增量的countercyclical /ˌkaʊntəˈsɪklɪkəl/逆周期的debut economy /ˈdeɪbjuː ɪˈkɒnəmi/首发经济

Our Chief LatAm Equity Strategist Nikolaj Lippmann discusses why Latin America may be approaching a rare “Spring” moment – where geopolitics, peaking rates, and elections set the scene for an investment-led growth cycle with meaningful market upside.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Nikolaj Lippmann: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Nikolaj Lippmann, Morgan Stanley's Chief Latin America Equity Strategist. If you ever felt like Latin America is too complicated to follow, today's episode is for you. It's Monday, February 9th at 10am in New York. The big idea in our research is simple. Latin America is facing a trifecta of change that could set up a very different investment story from what investors have gotten used to. We could be moving towards an investment or CapEx cycle in the shadow of the global AI CapEx cycle, and this is a stark departure from prior consumer cycles in Latin America. Latin America's GDP today is about $6 trillion. Yet Latin American equities account for just about 80 basis points of the main global index MSCI All Country World Equity benchmark. In plain English, it's really easy for investors to overlook such a vast region. But the narrative seems to be changing thanks to three key factors. Number one, shifting geopolitics in this increasingly global multipolar world. We can see this with trade rules, security priorities, supply chains that are getting rewritten. Capital and investment will often move alongside with these changing rules. Clearly, as we can all see U.S. priorities in Latin America have shifted, and with them have local priorities and incentives. Second, interest rates may very well have been peaking and could decline into [20]26. When borrowing cost fall, it just becomes easier to fund factories, infrastructure, AI, and expansion into all kinds of different investment, which become more feasible. What is more, we see a big shift in the size and growth of domestic capital markets in almost every country in Latin America – something that happens courtesy of reform and is certainly new versus prior cycles. And finally, elections that could lead to an important policy shift across Latin America. We see signs of movement towards greater fiscal responsibility in many sites of the region, with upcoming elections in Colombia and Brazil. We have already seen new policy makers in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, depart from prior populism. So, when we put all this together -- geopolitics, rates and local election -- you get to the core of our thesis, a possible LatAm spring; meaning a decisive break from the status quo towards fiscal consolidation, monetary easing, and structural reform. And we think that that could be a potential move that restores some confidence and attracts private capital. In our spring scenario, we see interest rates coming down, not rising in a scenario of higher growth to 6 percent in Brazil and Mexico, 7 percent in Argentina, and just 4 percent in Chile. This helps the rerating of the region. There's another powerful factor that I think many investors overlook, and that is a key difference versus prior cycles, as already mentioned. And that's the domestic savings. Local portfolios today are much bigger, much deeper capital markets, and they're heavily skewed towards fixed income. 75 percent of Latin American portfolios are in fixed income versus 25 percent in equity. In Brazil, the number's even higher with 90 to 95 percent in fixed income. If this shifts even halfway towards equity, it can deepen and support local capital markets; it supports valuation. For the region as a whole, sectors most impacted by this transformation would be Financial Services, Energy, Utilities, IT and Healthcare. Up until now, I think Latin America has been viewed as a region where a lot could go wrong. We asked the reverse question. What could go right? If the trifecta lines up: geopolitics, peaking rates and elections that enable a more investment friendly policy and CapEx cycle, Latin America could shift from being seen mainly as a supply of commodities and labor to far more investment driven engine of growth. That's why investors should put Latin America on the radar now and not wait until spring is already in full bloom. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen to the podcast and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

In a world that feels increasingly polarized, we explore how to use your capital as a tool for change without losing your mind or your net worth in the process. We dive into the practicalities of "voting with your dollars," acknowledging that while consumer spending drives nearly 70% of the U.S. GDP, achieving total moral purity in a global economy is nearly impossible. We share our personal guardrails for boycotting, the "one more place" rule, and why we prioritize progress over perfection when it comes to where we bank, shop, and invest. Whether you are navigating the nuances of ESG funds or just trying to find a local alternative for household essentials, we help you align your outflows with your values while keeping your financial goals on track.Get the full show notes, show references, and more information here: https://www.insideoutmoney.org/149-voting-with-your-dollars-practical-ways-to-align-your-spending-with-your-values/

Show Notes - Episode 143Recorded: 3 February 2026Released: 8 February 2026Episode DescriptionJack the Insider (Joel Hill) and Hong Kong Jack tackle the RBA's surprise interest rate hike, the coalition's post-election implosion, and dive deep into the Epstein files fallout. From Gaza peace plans to Japanese economic roller coasters, plus Carlton's dodgy pre-season training—it's all here.Timestamps & Topics00:25 - Welcome & RBA Breaking NewsThe Reserve Bank hikes interest rates by 0.25 percentage points as predicted, with markets forecasting two more increases this year in response to 3.8% inflation.01:29 - Interest Rates: The Blunt InstrumentDiscussing government spending as the inflation driver and the uneven effects of rate hikes on mortgage holders versus savers.03:35 - Trump vs The FedHow the US Federal Reserve dropped rates under pressure from Trump despite similar inflation to Australia, and the risks of economic overheating.05:22 - Blame the Barmy Army?A tongue-in-cheek theory from KO: Did England's cricket supporters spending during the Ashes tour drive up inflation to 3.8%?06:49 - Cocaine EconomicsAustralia's most expensive drugs in the world, Rugby World Cup memories, and why Western Australia pays double.08:38 - Coalition Chaos: Nationals Hold OnDavid Littleproud's leadership survives as spill motion fails, but Andrew Hastie drops out of Liberal leadership race.09:33 - The Oxford ConnectionAngus Taylor, Tony Abbott, and Australia's history of Oxford-educated prime ministers—from Gorton to Turnbull.10:09 - Angus Taylor's Shadow Treasurer StrugglesTroy Bramston's scathing assessment of Taylor's poor performance and lost economic credibility for the Coalition.11:37 - Coalition Split ContinuesLittleproud rejects reconciliation attempts while Sussan Ley remains Liberal leader, with potential "none-of-the-above" candidates waiting in the wings.12:13 - Listener Ray on Electoral MathThe great compulsory preferential voting debate: why the Nationals win 15 seats on 3% of first preferences while Greens get one seat on 12%.14:26 - Anthony Green's PatienceThe legendary election analyst educates Twitter on how Labor would have won 85 seats under first-past-the-post voting.15:26 - One Nation's Coalition TargetsAnthony Green's analysis reveals 20 Liberal and National seats at risk from One Nation, with only five Labor seats vulnerable.17:27 - Could One Nation Replace the Nationals?Exploring the possibility of a major conservative realignment, with potential Nationals MPs considering defection.19:35 - What Do the Nationals Stand For?From "agrarian socialists" to today's identity crisis—the party that used to represent farmers now struggles to define its purpose.21:05 - Anti-Semitic Abuse at Sydney UniversityFormer staff member Rose Nakard faces court on stalking and intimidation charges for allegedly calling Jewish students "fucking filthy Zionists" and "parasites."24:45 - Community Response Over LegislationWhy community rejection of hate speech matters more than criminalising phrases like "globalise the intifada," and the problems with new laws affecting police discretion.27:21 - $25 Billion Hospital and NDIS DealAlbanese and state premiers sign massive health funding package while agreeing to limit NDIS growth to 6% or less.28:21 - Autism and the NDIS DebateMoving mild forms of autism out of NDIS into schools—sensible reform or cost-shifting? Only 23% of NDIS costs despite larger recipient numbers.29:38 - The NDIS Needs a Medicare-Style RethinkComparing the transition from Medibank to Medicare: why the NDIS needs root-and-branch reform, not just tinkering.31:03 - Chronic Illness Left OutPeople with ME, CFS, MS, and fibromyalgia struggle to access NDIS support while other areas may be over-serviced.33:26 - Spain's Migrant AmnestySpain grants legal status to 500,000 undocumented migrants—stark contrast to anti-immigration sentiment across Europe.35:48 - Epstein Files: 3 Million PagesTwo million documents missing, Kevin Rudd brushes off Epstein's name-dropping, and Peter Mandelson's career implodes.36:36 - What Was Epstein's Business?Unpacking the mystery: Victoria's Secret rip-off, half-billion-dollar investment clients, and the missing financial footprint.38:22 - Mandelson in His UnderpantsThe former UK ambassador to the US photographed with young woman, now "unemployable"—very odd for a gay man.39:22 - Chomsky, Woody Allen, and Strange Dinner PartiesThe inexplicable nature of intellectuals dining with Epstein, and Brett Ratner's creepy Epstein photos despite #MeToo allegations.42:33 - Clintons Agree to TestifyBill Clinton offers four-hour congressional interview, Hillary to make sworn statement about Epstein connections.43:28 - Andrew and Mandelson Under PressurePrince Andrew pushed to testify while Mandelson faces questions about unexplained £75K payments and acting as Epstein's lobbyist while a cabinet minister.46:15 - Put Your Pants On for PhotosWhy do old blokes keep getting photographed in their underwear with Epstein? A plea for sartorial sense.48:13 - Board of Peace: Trump's $1 Billion ClubExplaining Trump's confusing Gaza oversight initiative: permanent seats cost US$1 billion paid into Trump-managed accounts, not US Treasury.50:35 - Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the StansThe "very nice countries" signing onto the Board of Peace, while Europe says no en masse and Canada gets uninvited after Carney's tariff speech.51:56 - UAE Taking Control of GazaMore important than the Board of Peace: United Arab Emirates moving to run Gaza's civilian administration with Israeli and US backing.52:24 - Spain's 500,000 Migrant AmnestySouthern European states bearing the brunt of arrivals while finding their own solutions—Italy's Albania processing reduces numbers by 60%.53:50 - France's Budget Finally PassesAfter four months of deadlock, Macron's government gets budget through with no-confidence motions failing, bringing rare stability.54:42 - Global Energy Prices: Ireland Tops the ListHousehold electricity costs compared: Ireland, Italy, and Belgium most expensive in Europe; Russia at just 7 cents per kilowatt hour versus Australia's 26 cents.56:31 - Canadian Energy: 12 Cents Per Kilowatt HourMark Carney's priority to reduce energy costs in Canada, currently lower than the US at 12.5 cents.57:50 - European GDP: Tepid GrowthGermany, UK, and France stuck around 1-1.5% growth, with Spain and Portugal outperforming at 2.5%, while Russia posts 4% driven entirely by military spending.59:59 - Russia's War Economy TrapWith 2% unemployment, 8% inflation, and 20% interest rates, Russia's 4% GDP growth masks an economy with "nothing to go for it" without the war.01:02:19 - Why Would Russia End the War?No economic incentive to stop fighting when military spending drives the economy and ending the war means economic collapse and regime change risk.01:04:22 - European Army TalkGermany and France push controversial European army concept alongside NATO—bad idea with chain of command issues, likely won't happen.01:07:38 - Japan's Liz Truss MomentPM Takeichi's tax and spending pledges spook markets: ¥5 trillion revenue shortfall, £137 billion stimulus, cash handouts, and approval ratings sliding from 75% to 58%.01:10:23 - Chagos Islands: The Deal That Won't DieBritish Indian Ocean Territory dispute: Diego Garcia military base, Mauritius sovereignty claims, and why the US and Australia oppose the UK deal.01:13:48 - France's Immigration RhetoricMarine Le Pen's inflammatory language about asylum seekers, and why "remigration" policies face huge practical and legal obstacles.01:16:28 - London Murder Prosecutions at 13-Year LowOnly 39% of murders result in charges as London's crime crisis deepens, despite accusations of two-tier policing favouring establishment figures.01:19:23 - Melania: The MovieBrett Ratner's documentary earns $8 million in the US against $40 million production costs—but it's about access to Trump, not profit.01:22:38 - Australian Open: Record NumbersWomen's final delivers 3.8 million viewers (up 30% from 2024), total tournament audience up 9.3% to 14.3 million, cementing status as global sporting event.01:26:39 - Usman Tariq's Unusual ActionPakistani spinner's legal but confounding bowling: shuffle-shuffle-stop-bowl delivery frustrates Cameron Green and raises eyebrows.01:28:58 - Should Steve Smith Play T20?Mark Waugh says yes—36-year-old leg-spinner/batsman is Australia's best player. Missing Tim David as Pakistan dominates the series.01:31:24 - Carlton's Training Video DisasterDropped marks and out-of-bounds kicks in pre-season footage—but fans' hope springs eternal until about May.01:32:07 - King Street Chair-Throwing MemeBloke throws chair at bouncers, accidentally knocks out his mate instead. Victorian government announces "toughest chair laws in Australia." Stand up, Victoria.

Mark Yusko returns with his highly anticipated "Around the World: 10 Surprises for 2026," opening with a Top‑Gun‑worthy flyby through the global macro landscape before diving straight into the turbulence ahead. He breaks down the forces that could define the year: the K‑shaped economy, AI's outsized impact on GDP, the global debt bomb, the unraveling yen carry trade, Europe's political tightrope, China's long‑game positioning, and the next phase of Bitcoin's four‑year cycle. Mark explains why the risks everyone obsesses over often aren't the ones that matter, and where real opportunity tends to emerge when liquidity, psychology, and policy collide. As Viper reminds us, "A good pilot evaluates what's happened… so he can apply what he's learned."     Want more?     Watch the "Around The World With Yusko" webinar series live by contacting us at ir@morgancreekcap.com. Watch it after the fact at https://www.morgancreekcap.com/market-commentary/#investment-themes.    Visit us on the web at https://www.morgancreekcap.com.    Legal Disclaimer  This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice or as a solicitation for the sale of any security or any advisory or other service. Investments related to the themes and ideas discussed may be owned by funds managed by the host and podcast guests. Any conflicts mentioned by the host are subject to change. Listeners should consult their personal financial advisors before making any investment decisions. 

☆歡迎大家按讚、訂閱、開啟小鈴鐺☆

The Nikkei 225 index in Tokyo, which tracks the performance of Japan's largest companies, hit a new record on Monday after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's ruling Liberal Democratic Party secured a two-thirds majority in the lower house over the weekend. Takaichi ran on an ambitious big-spending agenda, welcomed by investors, although concerns over the country's debt load –around 230% of GDP – are likely to persist.

The world economy appears to be in good shape. Global composite purchasing managers index numbers are on the rise, with US manufacturing enjoying a significant uptick in January, and Germany's factory orders have risen strongly too. All in all, says Chris Holdsworth, Chief Investment Strategist, Investec Wealth & Investment International, the numbers support expectations of global GDP growth of 3% this year. Investec Focus Radio SA

The digital economy now accounts for 17 percent of global GDP and is worth over $20 trillion, according to a new report by the International Data Centre Authority (IDCA). But growth has been uneven across the world, with more than 1 billion people having poor access to electricity. IDCA's CEO Mehdi Paryavi tells FRANCE 24 that poorer nations can develop digital economies that can empower those nations and improve energy access and education. 

欢迎收听雪球出品的财经有深度,雪球,国内领先的集投资交流交交易一体的综合财富管理平台,聪明的投资者都在这里。今天分享的内容叫美股为什么大而不能倒，来自润哥。美国作为全球经融强国，美股的地位不仅仅是资本市场，而是关系到美国经济运行、金融霸权、社会稳定和国际战略的核心支柱。以纽交所与纳斯达克为主要市场，截至目前总市值约70 万亿美元，占全球主要股市总市值 40% 以上。但是他的分布及其不均衡，当前美股市值高度集中于美股七姐妹，贡献了2023–2025年美股全部涨幅的70%以上。举个例子，腾讯是目前中国股市市值第一，约为5万亿，仅英伟达一家就相当于11个腾讯，美股七姐妹合计市值相当于48个腾讯。咱们中国股民这些年习惯了股市低迷，低迷也不影响经济蹭蹭发展，就业率数据和价格指数也和股市关系不怎么大。以前炒股作为小众爱好，股市波动对居民影响较小。跌就跌吧，又不是没跌过，大不了多吃几斤面，偶尔捡着几块肉吃吃那叫一个香。但是在美国可不是这样，美股对美国的重要性跟在中国完全不一样。居民部门来说，美国通过4 0 1 K养老基金和共同基金将美元与中产阶级牢牢绑定，美国家庭资产配置也是以股票为主，其次才是房产。通过美股上涨，带来居民财富增值，财富增值后促进消费，再传导给企业营收，带来股价上涨，形成闭环。对企业来说，虽然美股七姐妹一个个财大气粗，自由现金流表现超好，股价波动对公司经营影响可以忽略，但也有问题，这个一会再说。维持美股长期上涨还有一个神功：左脚踩右脚，企业不断砸钱回购自家的股票，带动股价上涨。美元作为作为全球主导信用货币，年复一年大水漫灌，需要一个庞大的池子来兜住这些资金，这就是美股作为核心资产池的功能。2025 年海外资本净买入美股 1.8 万亿美元，创历史新高。印钞后流出的美元，通过全球的外资购买美股，又让美元回流美国，完成外循环链路。既巩固了美元的全球流通性，又能在资产层面巩固美元霸权。股市跟选举强绑定，美股在选举中常被作为撬动民意的政治工具。让选民财富增值，是普通选民最直观的感知。川总把美股和政治捆绑的更加紧密。每次上涨创新高就喜欢发文庆祝。美股让美国富裕！这样的日子还会有很多。美国又富裕起来了，而且比以往任何时候都更加强大。一个如此关心股市的总统简直就是民心之所向。美元走弱的影响美国当前联邦债务已接近39万亿美元，占GDP比重超135%，年利息支出近1万亿美元，占财政收入约17–22%。正如桥水基金达利欧所言：“当前货币秩序正在崩溃，源于债务水平的不可持续性。”近一段时间的各种大宗价格上涨，直接原因就是美元的信用危机，全球资产去美元化加速。上周二川总称美元表现很好，并不担心美元下跌；可以让美元像一个yo-yo（悠悠球）一样波动；并不认为美元下跌太多；美元正在回归其自身应有的水平，这是合理的；日本一直都想让货币贬值。受此消息影响，美元指数一度跌超1%报95.7905，创近四年以来新低。刺激黄金白银等金属现货价格应声上涨，川总赶忙在周五宣布美联储主席人选为沃什，现在市场解读认为他倾向于降息+缩表的策略，美元指数当天上涨0.75%，而大宗期货价格集体暴跌。降息+缩表？降息+缩表，是一个非常冲突的组合，一手刺激经济，一手降低流动性，到底是要收还是要放。之前加息，提高美债无风险收益率，全球新兴经济体美元涌入美国寻求套利，目前的降息和接下来的降息，导致全球进入美国的套利美元逃离美国，回流新兴市场，这个过程中引发美元流动性紧张，作为，配套应该量化宽松来应对。这个时候不去量化宽松，反而缩表，将会导致美元流动性进一步紧张，美元流动性紧张常常发生在美联储降息周期，最严重就是2020年3月的美股四次熔断。之后，美联储紧急降息到零附近，然后重启量化宽松，直升机撒钱。美联储是美债市场的最大买方之一，缩表时会持续卖出持有的美债，同时不再续购到期的美债，导致美债市场的供给大幅增加、需求大幅减少。当前10年期美债收益率达到4%+，作为全球长期无风险利率基准，这个数字实在是太高了，市场上已经在抛售美债了，接下来你美联储难道也干这事，那到底谁来接盘这个烫手的山芋呢。利息越滚越多，不QE反而要QT，让本就不富裕的家庭雪上加霜。政府开支也不是说减就能减的，马斯克已经尝试过了，证明这条路走不通。刚才提到美股七姐妹公司赚钱能力都超强，现金流不成问题，如果降息+缩表，对他们的影响可以忽略。然而，缩表对七姐妹的影响，不是经营问题，而是估值重构的危机。受美债影响，贴现率上行之后，所有高估值股票价格都得缩水。这个事情在2022年就曾经发生过，2020年为应对疫情，应对四次美股熔断，美联储实施零利率+无限量QE，到了2022年通胀飙升，又采取加息+缩表，导致股市暴跌，七姐妹总市值蒸发5.5万亿美元；英伟达跌70%，Meta跌76%。那一次缩表造成10年期国债收益率从1.5%涨到4.3%，之后10年期国债收益率就一直在高位震荡没有下来过。虽然中短期内股市下跌，但通胀抑制住了，当时各房基本面还是好的，联邦政府债务也没有现在这么高，再加上美联储善于预期管理，让高科技、AI重新获得资本追捧。可是时间到了2026，倒霉的通胀又起来了，就业率低迷、债务越滚越高、股价在高位、美元信仰松动，每个方面都在走钢丝，这套运行了几十年的循环系统还能维持多久？如果出现油门和刹车一起踩，引发市场定价混乱，活久见的事情还要见到更多。美股的支柱地位，让美国的强国优势形成了内部循环与外部循环的美股繁荣模式，但若美股失去全球核心资产的地位，美国的金融霸权、科技领先、经济增长都会失去关键支撑，其全球强国地位也将受到根本性冲击。旧秩序已经终结，并非处于过渡阶段，而是已经崩塌。然而混乱是阶梯，各方都在探寻新的生存之道，这场沉默而深刻的大变局已然开场，我们身在局中，或许要等到过去了很久回望时，才能看清。

John Chang breaks down the economic trends set to define 2026 from tepid job growth, declining population growth, and geopolitical uncertainty to the surprising resilience of certain real estate sectors. Discover why AI investments, despite fueling GDP growth, aren't creating jobs, and what that means for commercial real estate demand. Book your free demo today at bill.com/bestever and get a $100 Amazon gift card. Visit ⁠www.tribevestisc.com⁠ for more info. Try QUO for free PLUS get 20% off your first 6 months when you go to quo.com/BESTEVER  Join us at Best Ever Conference 2026! Find more info at: https://www.besteverconference.com/  Join the Best Ever Community  The Best Ever Community is live and growing - and we want serious commercial real estate investors like you inside. It's free to join, but you must apply and meet the criteria.  Connect with top operators, LPs, GPs, and more, get real insights, and be part of a curated network built to help you grow. Apply now at⁠ ⁠⁠⁠www.bestevercommunity.com⁠⁠ Podcast production done by⁠ ⁠Outlier Audio⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our Global Head of Fixed Income Research Andrew Sheets and Global Chief Economist Seth Carpenter unpack the inner workings of the Federal Reserve to illustrate the challenges that Fed chair nominee Kevin Warsh may face.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley. Seth Carpenter: And I'm Seth Carpenter, Morgan Stanley's Global Chief Economist and Head of Macro Research. Andrew Sheets: And today on the podcast, a further discussion of a new Fed chair and the challenges they may face. It's Friday, February 6th at 1 pm in New York. Seth, it's great to be here talking with you, and I really want to continue a conversation that listeners have been hearing on this podcast over this week about a new nominee to chair the Federal Reserve: Kevin Warsh. And you are the perfect person to talk about this, not just because you lead our economic research and our macro research, but you've also worked at the Fed. You've seen the inner workings of this organization and what a new Fed chair is going to have to deal with. So, maybe just for some broad framing, when you saw this announcement come out, what were some of the first things to go through your mind? Seth Carpenter: I will say first and foremost, Kevin Warsh's name was one of the names that had regularly come up when the White House was providing names of people they were considering in lots of news cycles. So, I think the first thing that's critically important from my perspective, is – not a shock, right? Sort of a known quantity. Second, when we think about these really important positions, there's a whole range of possible outcomes. And I would've said that of the four names that were in the final set of four that we kept hearing about in the news a lot. You know, some differences here and there across them, but none of them was substantially outside of what I would think of as mainstream sort of thinking. Nothing excessively unorthodox at all like that. So, in that regard as well, I think it should keep anybody from jumping to any big conclusions that there's a huge change that's imminent. I think the other thing that's really important is the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve really is made by a committee. The Federal Open Market Committee and committee matters in these cases. The Fed has been under lots of scrutiny, under lots of pressure, depending on how you want to put it. And so, as a result, there's a lot of discussion within the institution about their independence, making sure they stick very scrupulously to their congressionally given mandate of stable prices, full employment. And so, what does that mean in practice? That means in practice, to get a substantially different outcome from what the committee would've done otherwise… So, the market is pricing; what's the market pricing for the funds rate at the end of this year? About 3.2 percent. Andrew Sheets: Something like that. Yeah. Seth Carpenter: Yeah. So that's a reasonable forecast. It's not too far away from our house view. For us to end up with a policy rate that's substantially away from that – call it 1 percentage, 2 percentage points away from that. I just don't see that as likely to happen. Because the committee can be led, can be swayed by the chair, but not to the tune of 1 or 2 percentage points. And so, I think for all those reasons, there wasn't that much surprise and there wasn't, for me, a big reason to fully reevaluate where we think the Fed's going. Andrew Sheets: So let me actually dig into that a little bit more because I know our listeners tune in every day to hear a lot about government meetings. But this is a case where that really matters because I think there can sometimes be a misperception around the power of this position. And it's both one of the most public important positions in the world of finance. And yet, as you mentioned, it is overseeing a committee where the majority matters. And so, can you take us just a little bit inside those discussions? I mean, how does the Fed Chair interact with their colleagues? How do they try to convince them and persuade them to take a particular course of action? Seth Carpenter: Great question. And you're right, I sort of spent a bunch of time there at the Fed. I started when Greenspan was chair. I worked under the Bernanke Fed. And of course, for the end of that, Janet Yellen was the vice chair. So, I've worked with her. Jay Powell was on the committee the whole time. So, the cast of characters quite familiar and the process is important. So, I would say a few things. The chair convenes the meetings; the chair creates the agenda for the meeting. The chair directs the staff on what the policy documents are that the committee is going to get. So, there's a huge amount of influence, let's say, there. But in order to actually get a specific outcome, there really is a vote. And we only have to look back a couple weeks to the last FOMC meeting when there were two dissents against the policy decision. So, dissents are not super common. They don't happen at every single meeting, but they're not unheard of by any stretch of the imagination either. And if we go back over the past few years, lots going on with inflation and how the economy was going was uncertain. Chair Powell took some dissents. If we go back to the financial crisis Chair Bernanke took a bunch of dissents. If we go back even further through time, Paul Volcker, when he was there trying to staunch the flow of the high inflation of the 1970s, faced a lot of resistance within his committee. And reportedly threatened to quit if he couldn't get his way. And had to be very aggressive in trying to bring the committee along. So, the chair has to find a way to bring the committee along with the plan that the chair wants to execute. Lots of tools at their disposal, but not endless power or influence. Does that make sense? Andrew Sheets: That makes complete sense. So, maybe my final question, Seth, is this is a tough job. This is a tough job in… Seth Carpenter: You mean your job and my job, or… Andrew Sheets: [Laughs] Not at all. The chair of the Fed. And it seems especially tricky now. You know, inflation is above the Fed's target. Interest rates are still elevated. You know, certainly mortgage rates are still higher than a lot of Americans are used to over the last several years. And asset prices are high. You know, the valuation of the equity market is high. The level of credit spreads is tight. So, you could say, well, financial conditions are already quite easy, which can create some complications. I am sure Kevin Warsh is receiving lots of advice from lots of different angles. But, you know, if you think about what you've seen from the Fed over the years, what would be your advice to a new Fed chair – and to navigate some of these challenges? Seth Carpenter: I think first and foremost, you are absolutely right. This is a tough job in the best of times, and we are in some of the most difficult and difficult to understand macroeconomic times right now. So, you noted interest rates being high, mortgage rates being high. There's very much an eye of the beholder phenomenon going on here. Now you're younger than I am. The first mortgage I had. It was eight and a half percent. Andrew Sheets: Hmm. Seth Carpenter: I bought a house in 2000 or something like that. So, by those standards, mortgage rates are actually quite low. So, it really comes down to a little bit of what you're used to. And I think that fact translates into lots of other places. So, inflation is now much higher than the committee's target. Call it 3 percent inflation instead core inflation on PCE, rather than 2 percent inflation target. Now, on the one hand that's clearly missing their target and the Fed has been missing their target for years. And we know that tariffs are pushing up inflation, at least for consumer goods. And Chair Powell and this committee have said they get that. They think that inflation will be temporary, and so they're going to look through that inflation. So again, there's a lot of judgment going on here. The labor market is quite weak. Andrew Sheets: Hmm. Seth Carpenter: We don't have the latest months worth of job market data because of the government shutdown; that'll be delayed by a few days. But we know that at the end of last year, non-farm payrolls were running well below 50,000. Under most circumstances, you would say that is a clear indication of a super weak economy. But! But if we look at aggregate spending data, GDP, private-domestic final purchases, consumer spending, CapEx spending. It's actually pretty solid right now. And so again, that sense of judgment; what's the signal you're going to look for? That's very, very difficult right now, and that's part of what the chair is going to have to do to try to bring the committee together, in order to come to a decision. So, one intellectually coherent argument is – the main way you could get strong aggregate demand, strong spending numbers, strong GDP numbers, but with pretty tepid labor force growth is if productivity is running higher and if productivity is going higher because of AI, for example, over time you could easily expect that to be disinflationary. And if it's disinflationary, then you can cut it. Interest rates now. Not worry as much as you would normally about high inflation. And so, the result could be a lower path for policy rates. So that's one version of the argument that I suspect you're going to hear. On the other hand, inflation is high and it's been high for years. So what does that mean? Well. History suggests that if inflation stays too high for too long, inflation psychology starts to change the way businesses start to set. Andrew Sheets: Mm-hmm. Seth Carpenter: Their own prices can get a little bit loosey-goosey. They might not have to worry as much about consumers being as picky because everybody's got used to these price changes. Consumers might be become less picky because, well, they're kind of sick of shopping around. They might be more willing to accept those higher prices, and that's how things snowball. So, I do think that the new chair is going to face a particularly difficult situation in leading a committee in particularly challenging times. But I've gone on for a long, long time there. And one of the things that I love about getting to talk to you, Andrew, is the fact that you also talked to lots of investors all around the world. You're based in London. And so when the topic of the new Fed chair comes up, what are the questions that you're getting from clients? Andrew Sheets: So, I think that there are a few questions that stand out. I mean, I think a dominant question among investors was around the stability of the U.S. dollar. And so, you could say a good development on the back of Kevin Warsh's nomination is that the market response to that has been the price action you would associate with more stability. You've seen the dollar rise; you've seen precious metals prices fall. You've seen equity markets and credit spreads be very stable. So, I think so far everything in the market reaction is to your; to the point that you raised, you know, consistent with this still being orthodox policy. Every Fed chair is different, but still more similar than different now. I think where it gets more divergent in client opinions is just – what are we going to see from the Fed? Are we going to see a real big change in policy? And I think that this is where there are very different views of Kevin Warsh from investors. Some who say, ‘Well, he's in the past talked about fighting inflation more aggressively, which would imply tighter policy.' And he's also talked more recently about the productivity gains from AI and how that might support lower interest rates. So, I think that there's going to be a lot of interest when he starts to speak publicly, when we see testimony in front of the Senate. I think the other, the final piece, which I think again, people do not have as fully formed an opinion on yet is – how does he lead the Fed if the data is unexpected? And you know, you mentioned inflation and, you know, Morgan Stanley has this forecast that: Well, owner's equivalent rent, a really key part of inflation, might be a little bit higher than expected, which might be a distortion coming off of the government shutdown and impacts on data. But there's some real uncertainty about the inflation path over the near term. And so, in short, I think investors are going to give the benefit of the doubt. For now, I think they're going to lean more into this idea that it will be generally consistent with the Fed easing policy over time, for now. Generally consistent with a steeper curve for now. But I think there's a lot we're going to find out over the next couple of weeks and months. Seth Carpenter: Yeah. No, I agree with you. Andrew, I have to say, I'm glad you're here in New York. It's always great to sit down and talk to you. Let's do it again before too long. Andrew Sheets: Absolutely, Seth. Thanks for taking the time to talk. And to our audience, thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

CNBC's Sara Eisen joins the RenMac Off-Script team to unpack why Big Tech's AI spend is suddenly spooking markets, cracking momentum trades, and pressuring software stocks. The team breaks down softening labor signals beneath solid GDP growth, Bitcoin's risk warning, FX stress abroad, the views of the Davos elite and what a potential Kevin Warsh Fed chair could mean for markets.

- Dividend Cancelled: Stellantis Resets as EV Strategy Crumbles - Stellantis Abandons Tavares' EV Goals with Massive $26B Write-Off - EV Write-Offs Now Bigger Than the GDP of Entire Countries - BYD's $60 Billion Wipeout: Is the Chinese EV Profit Engine Stalling? - U.S. Rare Earth Revolution: Recovering Metals from Mining Waste - The Race to Purge Chinese Code: Automakers Scramble Ahead of March Ban - Tesla's China Pivot: Training AI Locally Despite U.S. Tech Restrictions - Toyota Leadership Shakeup: Koji Sato Moves to New "Chief Industry" Role - Fixing the Tech Shortage: Ford and NADA Launch Apprenticeship Program - Ford's Universal Platform Peek: New Gigacastings To Replace 146 Parts

- Dividend Cancelled: Stellantis Resets as EV Strategy Crumbles - Stellantis Abandons Tavares' EV Goals with Massive $26B Write-Off - EV Write-Offs Now Bigger Than the GDP of Entire Countries - BYD's $60 Billion Wipeout: Is the Chinese EV Profit Engine Stalling? - U.S. Rare Earth Revolution: Recovering Metals from Mining Waste - The Race to Purge Chinese Code: Automakers Scramble Ahead of March Ban - Tesla's China Pivot: Training AI Locally Despite U.S. Tech Restrictions - Toyota Leadership Shakeup: Koji Sato Moves to New "Chief Industry" Role - Fixing the Tech Shortage: Ford and NADA Launch Apprenticeship Program - Ford's Universal Platform Peek: New Gigacastings To Replace 146 Parts

Hello, all you and the Relentless Health Tribe trying to figure out how to do right by patients and the folks footing the bill. Welcome to it. This is episode 499, one episode before episode 500. So, come back next week for that one. For a full transcript of this episode, click here. If you enjoy this podcast, be sure to subscribe to the free weekly newsletter to be a member of the Relentless Tribe. All right, so today, let's talk about the inches that are all around us. Let's find some. Musculoskeletal spend, otherwise known as MSK spend, for any given plan sponsor adds up to the tune of something like 20% or 30% of total plan spending, depending on the member demographic. MSK rolls in at $16 PMPM, I just saw, according to a report Keith Passwater sent me a couple of weeks ago. It's the third most costly spend apparently overall. And it's easy to see why, right? On any given day, odds are good any given plan member is gonna do something that, in hindsight, was fairly obviously a bad idea and wind up getting hurt in some low-acuity way. For example, I remember that one time I twisted my ankle on a curb getting outta my car. Given the right space, enough time, and concentration, I can do the worst parking job you've ever seen in your life and manage to twist my ankle in the process. But I digress. Here's the point. MSK spend adds up really fast. Add to that something like 50% of spine surgeries are said to be unnecessary. The same thing goes true from injuries like twisted ankles, for example, that would have healed themselves without an ER visit, without any intervention aside from ice, rest, and elevate. Because it turns out that something like 80% of those twisted-ankle, banged-up-the-back types of MSK injuries are actually low acuity, and a huge percentage of those will heal by themselves. On that point, let me bring in some context here, some late-breaking news. I was reading Dana Prommel's newsletter. She wrote, and I'm reading this, she wrote, "The 2026 National Healthcare Expenditure data reports are out, and it is another sobering reflection of our current system. Personal healthcare spending has surged by over 8%, and our healthcare spend as a share of the GDP has followed that same aggressive trajectory." Then Dana writes, "The most troubling takeaway from the 2026 report is the lack of a 'health dividend.' Despite [this] 8% increase in spending, we aren't seeing a corresponding 8% increase in longevity, wellness, or chronic disease management. People aren't getting significantly healthier; they are just getting more 'care.' And that 'care' isn't always good care, or the right care, or care by the right type of clinician, at the right time, in the right setting." Is that not the perfect segue or what? Because this is what we're talking about on the show today in regard to, again, MSK care—care that can wind up costing millions of dollars across plan members, and it might be unnecessary because, again, the twisted ankle or the pain in the lower back would have healed itself without any care, without an ER visit. But if an ER visit was had, that patient probably is gonna wind up with a bunch of imaging. Probably is gonna wind up with a referral to a surgeon. And now there's a surgery scheduled, and the patient has been off work for however long all that took. There's a lot of direct and indirect costs that may or may not add up to any given health dividend or health span or whatever you wanna call it—better quality of life.   Why does all this happen? How does it happen? One reason is what Dr. Jay Kimmel calls the white space of MSK care. This is where a patient does a truly breathtaking job parking the car, twists her ankle, starts to swell up, and now a decision has to be made: Go to the ER. Go to urgent care. Go home. Or what if it's a parent making this choice for a kid? In the olden days, maybe that patient would've called up his or her longtime family doctor and asked what to do, and maybe if that longtime family doctor didn't know, he or she would have called up the local ortho and gotten their opinion. Or maybe the two were sitting together in the doctor's lounge at the time, or maybe they rounded together in the hospital and, and, and … There used to be lots of opportunities for spontaneous questions and answers and curbside consults. But not today most of the time, really, unless you're a patient with a doctor in the family. But even for a PCP, who wants an ortho consult? Amy Scanlan, MD, and I discussed this quite a bit in an earlier episode (EP402). There's no doctor lounges anymore. There's no coffee klatch down in radiology either. There's just a lot of cultural shifts, in other words. But all of this, everything I have said thus far, all adds up to one big takeaway: These excess costs that don't have commensurate improved clinical outcomes, they happen because patients are on their own to triage themselves. They look at their black-and-blue whatever, or they're standing there listening to their kid cry and they are deciding what to do. And the thing is, if they choose the ER—because, again, they don't have a doctor, anybody they can just call with the right kind of clinical background—once they head into that ER and sit there for six hours and demand an MRI because now it has to be worth their time because they sat there for six hours; but now there's a false positive and the ER docs are being conservative because of malpractice or whatever and they refer them to some sort of surgeon … Look, everybody's doing their best with the information that they have at the time, but you can see how easy it is for a person to avoidably wind up costing a lot of money for a musculoskeletal injury that would have healed by itself. So, yeah, let's talk about how we can get patients some help in that so-called white space. How can we get them, triage before the triage, as I managed to say more than once in the conversation that follows? Let's get them on a good trajectory to start. Today, my guest is Dr. Jay Kimmel. Dr. Kimmel is an orthopedic surgeon, and he's been in practice in Connecticut for over 35 years. He and Steve Schutzer, MD, co-founded Upswing Health. I talked with Dr. Steve Schutzer about Centers of Excellence in an earlier episode (EP294). Upswing Health provides members with the opportunity to talk with an athletic trainer within 15 minutes and an orthopedic specialist within 24 hours. So, instead of having a panic attack of indecision and ultimately winding up in the ER, getting coughed on in the waiting room, members have somebody helping them in this white space so they can get triaged before the triage. I need to thank Upswing Health. I am so appreciative they donated some financial support to cover the costs of this episode. This podcast is sponsored by Aventria Health Group with an assist from Upswing Health. Also mentioned in this episode are Upswing Health; Keith Passwater; Dana Prommel; Amy Scanlan, MD; Steve Schutzer, MD; Eric Bricker, MD; Al Lewis; Nikki King, DHA; Matt McQuide; Christine Hale, MD, MBA; and Chris Deacon. For a list of healthcare industry acronyms and terms that may be unfamiliar to you, click here.   You can learn more at upswinghealth.com and follow Dr. Kimmel on LinkedIn.   Jay Kimmel, MD, is the president and co-founder of Upswing Health, the country's first virtual orthopedic clinic. He founded Upswing with Steve Schutzer, MD, to rapidly assess, triage, and manage orthopedic conditions in a cost-effective, high-value manner, helping patients avoid unnecessary imaging, procedures, and delays in care. Dr. Kimmel had a long and distinguished career as a practicing orthopedic surgeon with Advanced Orthopedics New England. He earned his undergraduate degree from Cornell University and his medical degree from the University of Rochester. He completed his orthopedic residency at Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, where he trained with leaders in shoulder surgery, followed by a sports medicine fellowship at Temple University Center for Sports Medicine, where he participated in the care of Division I collegiate athletes. He is board-certified in orthopedic surgery and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. Dr. Kimmel specializes in sports medicine with an emphasis on shoulder and knee injuries and holds a subspecialty certificate in orthopedic sports medicine from the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery. He is also a member of the American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine. Dr. Kimmel co-founded the Connecticut Sports Medicine Institute at Saint Francis Hospital, a multidisciplinary center dedicated to providing high-quality care for athletes at all levels, and served as its co-director for many years. He has a strong commitment to education and served for over 20 years as an assistant clinical professor in both family medicine and orthopedics at the University of Connecticut. He has also served as a team physician at the professional, collegiate, and high school levels.   07:49 EP472 with Eric Bricker, MD, on high-cost claimants. 08:01 What is the "white space" in MSK spend? 10:43 Statistics on Connecticut's spending on plan members with low-acuity MSK injuries. 13:30 How back pain also easily transitions from a low-acuity issue to a high-acuity problem. 15:11 How plan sponsors can detect their white space downstream spend. 16:58 EP464 with Al Lewis. 17:02 EP470 with Nikki King, DHA. 18:15 Why where patients start their journey often dictates where they wind up and how costly that medical pathway is. 20:48 Where PCPs fit into this MSK spend issue. 25:26 EP468 with Matt McQuide. 25:34 EP471 with Christine Hale, MD, MBA. 25:39 Why access is key.   You can learn more at upswinghealth.com and follow Dr. Kimmel on LinkedIn.   Jay Kimmel, MD, of @upswinghealth discusses #MSKspend on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #financialhealth #patientoutcomes #primarycare #digitalhealth #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation #musculoskeletal   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Mark Noel, Gary Campbell (Take Two: EP341), Zack Kanter, Mark Newman, Stacey Richter (INBW45), Stacey Richter (INBW44), Marilyn Bartlett (Encore! EP450), Dr Mick Connors  

Broadcasting from Dubai while speaking at the World Government Summit, John O’Bryant delivers one of the most important episodes of Money and Wealth yet — a deep, practical breakdown of how wealth is really built in America. In this episode, John explains why most millionaires aren’t made in flashy industries like tech, crypto, or Hollywood, but quietly — by understanding how cities actually work. Cities are economic machines, responsible for the vast majority of GDP, and they create guaranteed, recurring demand for essential services year after year. John pulls back the curtain on:• How city budgets, contracts, and procurement fuel long-term wealth• Why boring, essential businesses beat hype every time• How small and mid-sized cities create easier paths to ownership• The real “Millionaire Next Door” formula• Why consistency, reliability, and specialization win at scale From sanitation and infrastructure to cybersecurity, childcare, real estate, and compliance, this episode challenges listeners to stop chasing what’s hot and start owning what’s essential. John shares lessons from building and selling nine-figure companies, scaling businesses quietly, and turning local demand into generational wealth. If you want to build wealth that lasts, this episode is a blueprint: find what your city can’t live without, master it, and own it.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Trade - A Scrap Life, Brett is joined by Chad to analyze the February 2026 scrap metal market, highlighting copper as a potential "trade of the year" and discussing how small businesses can navigate current market volatility. This episode explores the impact of macroeconomic trends, such as GDP growth and energy costs, on ferrous and non-ferrous positioning to help operators maximize their margins. Produced by Recycled Media.

Welcome to another episode of Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different, featuring the legendary Ray Wang. In this memorable conversation, Christopher and Ray dive deep into the latest developments shaping the world of technology, business, and careers. From dissecting recent tech earnings from giants like Apple, Meta, Tesla and Microsoft to sharing insights from Davos and contemplating the implications of AI for the future of work and entrepreneurship. This episode delivers high-caliber analysis and practical takeaways for anyone navigating today’s rapidly evolving landscape. You're listening to Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different. We are the real dialogue podcast for people with a different mind. So get your mind in a different place, and hey ho, let's go. Lessons from Davos and the New Economic Realities Returning from a bustling Davos, Ray Wang shares his observations on how global leaders and executives are tackling an era defined by uncertainty, rapid technology adoption and a relentless pursuit of efficiency. One of Ray's core takeaways is the prevailing theme of “margin compression,” where even the world's largest corporations are working harder than ever just to achieve modest growth. Companies are now measured by their ability to scale exponentially, as illustrated by India's ISRO launching rockets at a fraction of NASA's cost, fundamentally altering competitive dynamics across industries. Ray explains that the rise of AI turbocharges this transformation by opening up “infinite possibilities.” Companies no longer just compete on physical or financial assets, but on their ability to harness vast data resources, quickly innovate and make sharp strategic choices about what problems to solve—and, crucially, what not to do. Privacy challenges, especially for companies like Apple, arise in this new era, making it difficult to deliver world-class AI solutions while maintaining rigorous data protection standards. Both Christopher and Ray emphasize that managing growth, inflation and investment are more complex than ever, with the U.S. outpacing much of the world in GDP growth, yet operating in a global environment rife with policy and market uncertainties. AI, Tech Earnings, and the Rise of the New IPO Era The conversation pivots to the massive investment and exuberance surrounding generative AI and tech infrastructure. Ray points out that while there are fears about overbuilding capacity or creating a circular funding loop among AI companies, there is still significant real opportunity. The current phase has seen enormous capital pour into building data centers and scalable AI platforms. Landmark IPOs from OpenAI, Databricks and others are expected to reshape the tech landscape. Despite market fluctuations and some outsized reactions to earnings, the fundamentals for big tech remain robust. Companies like Apple have solidified their status as luxury brands, even as others like Tesla and Meta retool and pivot to sustain long-term relevance and unlock new revenue streams such as robotics and energy. At the structural level, venture capital itself is in flux. Many VC firms have become indistinguishable from private equity, constrained both by too much and too little available capital relative to the demands of today's tech startups. The gap between small angel, family office, or solo GP funds and the mega funds has widened so much that the “middle” has all but disappeared. It is now entirely possible for one-person companies, through the leverage of AI and autonomous agents, to achieve scale and revenues previously thought impossible. Ray predicts it is likely we will see a single founder build a billion-dollar annual revenue company within the next five years, echoing the democratization and disruption that generative AI promises. Building Legendary Companies and Careers in the Age of AI Christopher and Ray close their discussion by exploring what all these rapid changes mean for leaders and individuals. For CEOs and entrepreneurs, the formula for thriving is clear but audacious. Leaders must design their companies to be fully autonomous and authentic, constantly reinventing their business as if they were attempting to disrupt themselves. Boards need to be stacked with people who grasp the new fundamentals: margin compression, exponential scale, and infinite possibilities brought by AI. Combining domain expertise with technical agility is more critical than ever, as the fusion of seasoned judgment and lightning-fast, innovative execution is where breakthroughs occur. On a personal level, Ray stresses that knowledge and execution are becoming commodities, rapidly automated by advances in AI. To stay relevant, individuals must become “macro analysts,” adept at synthesizing big ideas and patterns, deeply immersed in experimenting with new technologies and surrounded by others who are passionate about their own crafts. The traditional playbooks for career building, education, and even family strategies are being rewritten in real-time. The U.S. faces global competition for talent and innovation, and entrepreneurial energy is no longer confined to Silicon Valley or New York. The nature of immigration, investment and even educational choices must be reconsidered for new generations. In a world where the location and structure of opportunity are shifting, only those who embrace change, foster diverse collaborations and pursue purpose will continue to define the next era of legendary achievement. As both Christopher and Ray reflect, living and leading like Rob Burgess—embracing boldness, curiosity and authenticity—remains the path to being truly legendary in this rapidly changing world. To hear more from Ray Wang and his updates on the world of Tech and AI, download and listen to this episode. Bio R “Ray” Wang (pronounced WAHNG) is the Founder, Chairman, and Principal Analyst of Silicon Valley based Constellation Research Inc. He co-hosts DisrupTV, a weekly enterprise tech and leadership webcast that averages 50,000 views per episode and authors a business strategy and technology blog that has received millions of page views per month.  Wang also serves as a non-resident Senior Fellow at The Atlantic Council's GeoTech Center. Since 2003, Ray has delivered thousands of live and virtual keynotes around the world that are inspiring and legendary. Wang has spoken at almost every major tech conference. His ground-breaking bestselling book on digital transformation, Disrupting Digital Business, was published by Harvard Business Review Press in 2015.  Ray's new book about Digital Giants and the future of business titled, Everybody Wants to Rule the World will be released July 2021 by Harper Collins Leadership. Wang is well quoted and frequently interviewed in media outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Fox Business News, CNBC, Yahoo Finance, Cheddar, CGTN America, Bloomberg, Tech Crunch, ZDNet, Forbes, and Fortune.  He is one of the top technology analysts in the world. Links Follow Ray Wang! Website | Twitter | LinkedIn | Constellation Research | DisrupTV We hope you enjoyed this episode of Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different™! Christopher loves hearing from his listeners. Feel free to email him, connect on Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and subscribe on Apple Podcast / Spotify!

WORST DAY EVER for SILVER Cold Snap in Florida – Massive Critter Drop New Fed Chair named Pausing on space PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter Interactive Brokers  Warm-Up - WORST DAY EVER for SILVER - Cold Snap in Florida - Massive Critter Drop - New Fed Chair named - Pausing on space Markets - Bitcoin plunges - Crypto "winter" - Deep dive into January economic results - USD rises from multi-month low - EM still powered ahead - ELON - PT Barnum move Cold Snap - On February 1, 2026, Florida faced a significant drop in temperatures, reaching a record low of 24°F (-4°C) in Orlando. This marked the lowest temperature recorded in February since 1923. - Iguanas dropping from tress all over the streets - Iguanas can survive temperatures down to the mid-40s Fahrenheit (around 7°C) by entering a "cold-stunned" state, where they appear dead but are just temporarily paralyzed and immobile; however, prolonged exposure to temperatures in the 30s and 40s, especially below freezing, can be lethal, particularly for smaller individuals, leading to tissue damage and organ failure. - They get sluggish below 50°F (10°C) and fall from trees as they lose grip. - The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) issued Executive Order 26-03 on Friday, allowing residents to collect and surrender cold-stunned green iguanas without a permit during an unprecedented cold weather event. Right on Schedule - Remember we talked about how the Nat Gas price was going to reverse, just as quickly as it spikeed? - Nat gas down 25% today - down about 28% from recent high - Still about 50% higher than it was before the spike. THIS! - Nvidia Corp. Chief Executive Officer Jensen Huang said the company's proposed $100 billion investment in OpenAI  was “never a commitment” and that the company would consider any funding rounds “one at a time.” - “It was never a commitment,” Huang told reporters in Taipei on Sunday. “They invited us to invest up to $100 billion and of course, we were, we were very happy and honored that they invited us, but we will invest one step at a time.” Then Oracle announced that it will do a fundraiser in the form of equity and debt - needs to fund more datacenter build-out. - What happened to the OpenAI $300 Billion committment? - Or is the money that NVDA "committed to OpenAi, that they must have committed to Orcle, not a committment - GIGANTIC CIRCLE JERK Fungus - -Interesting - Did you know? Botrytis cinerea, a fungus causing grey mold, affects grapes by causing bunch rot, ruining fruit in high humidity. - While it often destroys crops, specific dry, warm conditions can transform it into "noble rot," concentrating sugars and creating high-value dessert wines (e.g., Sauternes, Tokaji) with honeyed, raisin-like, and apricot flavors. January Economic Review Employment — Job growth was nearly flat in December, with 50,000 new jobs added and earlier months revised lower. — Unemployment dipped slightly to 4.4%, but it's still higher than it was a year ago. — Long-term unemployment didn't change and remains high, and the labor force participation rate slipped to 62.4%. — Average hourly earnings rose 0.3% in December and are up 3.8% over the past year. — Weekly jobless claims stayed close to last year's levels, showing a labor market that is cooling but not weakening sharply. FOMC / Interest Rates — The Federal Reserve kept interest rates unchanged at 3.50%–3.75%. — Most policymakers agreed the economy continues to grow at a solid pace, though job gains are slowing and inflation remains above target. — Two committee members supported a small rate cut, but the majority preferred to wait. - Fed Chair Powell: Clearly, a weakening labor market calls for cutting. A stronger labor market says that rates are in a good place. It isn't anyone's base case right now that the next move will be a rate hike. - The economy has once again surprised us with its strength. Consumer spending numbers overall are good, and it looks like growth overall is on a solid footing. - Upside risks to inflation and downside risks to employment have diminished, but hard to say they are fully in balance. We think our policy is in a good place. - Overall, it's a stronger forecast since the Fed's last meeting. Haven't made any decisions about future meetings, but the economy is growing at a solid pace, the unemployment rate is broadly stable and inflation remains somewhat elevated, so we will be looking to our goal variables and letting the data light the way for us. - Most of the overrun in goods prices is from tariffs. We think tariffs are likely to move through, and be a one-time price increase. - Dissent: Miran and Waller (Miran is a admin shill and Waller wanted job as Fed Chair) GDP & Federal Budget — Economic growth remained strong in Q3 2025, with GDP rising at an annualized 4.4% driven by strong spending, higher exports, and reduced imports due to tariffs. — Investment was mixed, with business spending increasing while housing activity declined. — The federal deficit for December rose to $145 billion, though the fiscal year-to-date deficit is slightly smaller than last year. Inflation & Consumer Spending — Personal income and consumer spending rose moderately in October and November. — Inflation, measured by the PCE index, increased 0.2% in both months and roughly 2.7% year-over-year. — The Consumer Price Index rose 0.3% in December, with shelter, food, and energy all contributing. — Producer prices also increased, though 2025 producer inflation slowed compared to 2024. Housing — Existing home sales rose in December, but the number of homes for sale is still low. — Prices dipped a bit from November but remain higher than they were a year ago. — New-home sales in October were steady compared with the prior month but much higher than last year. — New-home prices fell compared to 2024, though they are still high relative to long-term norms. Manufacturing — Industrial production rose 0.4% in December and was up 2.0% for the year. — Manufacturing output increased, while mining activity declined and utility output jumped. — Durable goods orders grew sharply in November, driven by a big increase in transportation equipment, pointing to strong demand in key industries. Imports & Exports — Import and export prices rose slightly through November 2025. — The goods trade deficit widened in November because exports fell while imports increased. — For the year so far, both exports and imports are running above 2024 levels, though the overall trade deficit remains larger. Consumer Confidence — Consumer confidence fell sharply in January after improving in December. — Both views of current conditions and expectations for the future weakened, with expectations dropping well below the level that often signals recession risk. Earnings — Roughly one-third of S&P 500 companies have reported Q4 earnings, and overall results are strong. — 75% of companies have beaten EPS estimates, though this is slightly below long-term averages. Revenue beats remain solid at 65%. — Companies are reporting earnings 9.1% above estimates, which is well above the 5-and 10-year surprise averages. — The S&P 500 is on track for 11.9% year-over-year earnings growth, marking the 5th straight quarter of double-digit earnings growth. — Eight of eleven sectors are showing positive year-over-year earnings growth, led by Information Technology, Industrials, and Communication Services. — The Health Care sector shows the largest earnings declines among lagging categories. — The forward 12-month P/E ratio sits at ~22.2, elevated relative to 5-and 10-year averages, signaling continued optimism despite tariff and cost concerns. — FactSet also notes the S&P 500 is reporting a record-high net profit margin of 13.2%, the highest since 2009. INTERACTIVE BROKERS Check this out and find out more at: http://www.interactivebrokers.com/   S3XY No More - Tesla is ending production of the Model S sedan and Model X crossover by the end of Q2 2026 to focus on autonomous technology and humanoid robots (Optimus). - Do we have any idea with the TAM for either of these are? - Huge assumptions that Robotaxi will be a bug part of the global transportation. But, what if it isn't? - Unproven being built, taking out the proven - investors were not too happy about this...Stock was down after earnings showed continued sluggish EV sales and BIG Capex for Robotaxi refit, robots and chip manufacturing. But... - Friday - not to allow TESLA stock to move down tooo much. - With SpaceEx looking for an IPO in June - valuations have moved from $800B to 1.5T supposedly. - Now there is discussion of merging in xAI and possibly Tesla - Tesla shares dropped after earnings FED CHAIR PICK - Drumroll: Kevin Warsh - Seems like a good pick from the aspect of experience and ability - Deficit reducer? - More hawkish than market expected? - Announce Friday after several leaks in the morning And then... - Silver futures plummeted 31.4% to settle at $78.53, marking its worst day since March 1980. -It was down 35% during the day - the worst daily plunge ever on record. - It was the worst decline since the March 1980 Hunt Brothers crash. - The sharp moves down were initially triggered by reports of Warsh's nomination. - However, they gained steam in afternoon U.S. trading as investors who piled into the metals raced to book profits.- USD Spiked higher - Gold was down 10% - GOLD saw a drop of 10% to the close - 12% intraday - this was also a record - Bitcoin is down 25% from its recent level 2 weeks ago - ALL BEING BLAMED ON THE FED CHAIR PICK -- QUESTION - Will Trump back-peddle this OR talk to supporters in congress or tell them not to confirm him if markets continue to act squirrely? Fed Statement and Rates - Fed out with statement - no change on rates - Changes: Inflation up, employment steady, economy strong - Does not bode for much in the way of cuts - probably on hold though end of Powell term Apple Earnings - Apple reported blowout first-quarter earnings on Thursday, and predicted growth of as much as 16% in the current quarter, matching the period that just ended. - Sales could be even better, Apple said, if the company just secure enough chips to meet its customers' iPhone demands. - The company reported $42.1 billion in net income, or $2.84 per share, versus $36.33 billion, or $2.40 per share, in the year-ago period. - Apple saw particularly strong results in China, including Taiwan and Hong Kong. Sales in the region surged 38% during the quarter to $25.53 billion. - “The constraints that we have are driven by the availability of the advanced nodes that our SoCs are produced on, and at this time, we're seeing less flexibility in supply chain than normal,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said. - Stock up slightly - no great moves.... Blue Origin - Blue Origin will pause tourist flights to space for “no less than two years” to prioritize development of its moon lander and other lunar technologies. - The decision reflects Blue Origin's commitment to the nation's goal of returning to the Moon and establishing a permanent, sustained lunar presence. - The pause in tourist flights grounds the company's reusable New Shepard rocket, which has sent more than 90 people to the edge of space and back to experience brief periods of weightlessness. - Datacenters on the Moon? (sounds like a Pink Floyd album)     Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? ANNOUNCING THE WINNER OF THE THE CLOSEST TO THE PIN CUP 2025 Winners will be getting great stuff like the new "OFFICIAL" DHUnplugged Shirt!     FED AND CRYPTO LIMERICKS   See this week's stock picks HERE Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter

We've all come to accept the US is now a K-shaped economy.The rich are at the top, living large off of their asset appreciation.And everyone else - the vast majority -- is in the bottom leg. Feeling increasingly left behind.But the rich have been spending so amply that they've kept the averages for retail spending -- which drives the majority of our GDP -- in "healthy" territory.But what will happen if the rich start to stumble?Analyst Danielle DiMartino Booth thinks we are seeing signs they're starting to. And she's concerned they could pull down the economy along with them.To find out why, and what the repercussion will be, watch this video.WORRIED ABOUT THE MARKET? SCHEDULE YOUR FREE PORTFOLIO REVIEW with Thoughtful Money's endorsed financial advisors at https://www.thoughtfulmoney.com#marketcorrection #deflation #economy _____________________________________________ Thoughtful Money LLC is a Registered Investment Advisor Promoter.We produce educational content geared for the individual investor. It's important to note that this content is NOT investment advice, individual or otherwise, nor should be construed as such.We recommend that most investors, especially if inexperienced, should consider benefiting from the direction and guidance of a qualified financial advisor registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or state securities regulators who can develop & implement a personalized financial plan based on a customer's unique goals, needs & risk tolerance.IMPORTANT NOTE: There are risks associated with investing in securities.Investing in stocks, bonds, exchange traded funds, mutual funds, money market funds, and other types of securities involve risk of loss. Loss of principal is possible. Some high risk investments may use leverage, which will accentuate gains & losses. Foreign investing involves special risks, including a greater volatility and political, economic and currency risks and differences in accounting methods.A security's or a firm's past investment performance is not a guarantee or predictor of future investment performance.Thoughtful Money and the Thoughtful Money logo are trademarks of Thoughtful Money LLC.Copyright © 2026 Thoughtful Money LLC. All rights reserved.

CleanSpark's Rory Murray joins us to explain the macro forces driving bitcoin's price and how the options market may be suppressing bitcoin. Subscribe to the Blockspace newsletter! Welcome back to The Blockspace Podcast! Today, CleanSpark's VP of Digital Asset Management Rory Murray joins us to talk about the latest macro shocks hitting the market and how they are driving bitcoin's price. Rory breaks down how the options market may have been weighing on bitcoin's price in Q4, and how the options market has changed bitcoin's market. We also dive into the six sigma move in Japanese rates, the unraveling of the yen carry trade, and how geopolitical tensions over Greenland are affecting global liquidity. Rory explains why bitcoin is being buffeted by noise while gold and silver take the lead in the debasement trade, plus the intersection of AI energy demand and Bitcoin mining as we head into 2026. Subscribe to the newsletter! https://newsletter.blockspacemedia.com Notes: * Japan 40-year bond yields topped 4% first time. * Japan has world's highest debt-to-GDP ratios. * Korean equity index rose 70% last year. * Yen carry trade has driven trillions in flow. * Gold crossed USD as top central bank reserve. Timestamps: 00:00 Start 03:20 Bitcoin & macro 06:45 Japan 17:08 Carry trade & liquidity drying up 18:08 Debasement trade 18:47 Hypercycle 22:50 Silver rally 23:18 Energy is the value creator 26:59 Options suppressing Bitcoin price? 41:10 Dampening volatility 42:35 Next 90 days 46:07 Cleanspark's BTC stack 48:14 Easier or harder to manage stack

This week we talk about the European Union, India, and tariffs.We also discuss trade barriers, free trade, and dumping.Recommended Book: The Kill Chain by Christian BroseTranscriptA free trade agreement, sometimes called a free trade treaty, is a law that reduces the cost and regulatory burden of trading between two or more states.There are many theories as to the ideal way to do international trade, with some economists and politicians positing that complete free and open trade is the way to go, because it allows goods and services to cross borders completely unencumbered, which in turn allows businesses in different countries to really lean into whatever they're good at, selling their cars to countries that are less good at making cars, while that recipient country produces soy beans or computer chips or whatever they're good at making, and sending those in the other direction, likewise unburdened by stiff tariffs or regulatory hurdles. Each country can thus produce the best product cheapest and sell it to the market where their products are in high-demand, while they, in turn, benefit from the same when it comes to other products and services.This theory leans on the idea that everyone is better off when everyone does what they're best at, rather than trying to do everything—specialization. But those who oppose this conception of international trade argue that this creates and reinforces asymmetries between different nations and businesses: a country that's really good at producing soybeans may be at a substantial disadvantage if the country that makes cars ever decides to go to war, because they won't have the existing infrastructure to build tanks or drones or whatever else, while the country that specializes in computer chips might hold all the cards when it comes to generating economic pressure against its enemies or would-be enemies, because such chips are in everything these days, from military hardware to kitchen appliances.This also creates potential frailties for countries that specialize in, say, buggy whips, only to have a new technology like the automobile come around and put a significant chunk of their total economy out of business.This theory may also leave local businesses that don't lean into a regional strength kind of in the lurch. If a country with a decent-sized automobile industry decides leaves their borders completely open to international competition, there's a chance that could light a fire under those local producers, forcing them to become more competitive, but there's also a chance it could collapse the market for local offerings—their cars might no longer be desirable, because the international stuff flooding across the borders from a nation that has heavily prioritized making cars are just so much better and cheaper, whether naturally or artificially, because of subsidies by that foreign government meant to help them take out international competition.This is why most nations have all sorts of tariffs, regulations, and other trade barriers erected between them and their trading partners, and why those trade barriers are ultra-specific, different for every single possible trade partner. The goal is to make international options less appealing by making them more expensive, or making it trickier for foreign competition to smoothly and quickly get their products on your shelves, while still making those things available in a volume that aligns with local consumer demands. And then ideally making it easier and cheaper for your stuff to get on their shelves.The negotiation of all this is massively complicated because Country A might want to favor their soybean farmers, who are an important voting bloc, and Country B might want to do the same for their car industry, because tax income from that industry is vital, and these two governments will thus do what they can to ensure their favored local industries and businesses have the biggest leg-up possible in as many foreign markets as possible, without giving away so much to their trade partners that they create worse situations for other industries and businesses (and the people who run them) on the home-front, as a consequence.What I'd like to talk about today is a recent, massive and potentially quite vital trade deal that was struck in early 2026, and what it might mean for global trade.—At the tail-end of January 2026, the European Commission announced that they had struck what they called “the mother of all deals” with India, this deal the culmination of two decades worth of negotiation, its tenets impacting about 2 billion people and around a quarter of the world's total GDP.The agreement, as is the case with most such agreements, is fairly complex. But in essence it reduces or eliminates tariffs on 96.6% of all EU goods exported to India, which means about 4 billion euros of annual duties that would have otherwise been paid on European products in India will disappear—a savings for Indian consumers, and a boon for European producers whose products will now be cheaper in India.This is expected to be especially beneficial for European automakers like Volkswagen, Renault, and BMW, which have long been weighed down by a 110% tariff in India; that tariff will be reduced to as little as 10% on the first 250,000 vehicles sold, following this agreement. Lower priced vehicles will still face higher tariffs, to help protect India's local carmakers, but electric vehicles will benefit from a five-year grace period, as India has been focusing on allowing as many cheap, renewable energy assets and infrastructure into the country as possible, regardless of where they come from.Tariffs on machinery, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals coming from the EU will be almost entirely eliminated, down from tariff rates of 44, 22, and 11%, respectively. Wine, which has long been tariffed at a rate of 150%, will be cut to between 20-30% for many varieties, and spirits from the EU coming into India will see 150% tariffs cut to 40%.On the other side of this deal, the EU will also open its market to Indian goods, reducing tariffs on about 99.5% of all such goods, including seafood, textiles, gems and jewelry, leather goods, plastic products, and toys. Several of these categories, like Indian seafood, textile-making, and other labor-intensive industries, have had a rough time of late, because of high US tariffs enforced by President Trump's second administration, so this is being seen as a significant win for them in particular.Interestingly, while the reduction in trade barriers is substantial here, and the number of people and industries, and amount of money that's involved is massive, this deal doesn't include, and in some cases explicitly excludes, any agreements related to labor rights, climate commitment, or environmental standards.This means that while the European Union has thus far been pretty strict in terms of ensuring incoming products align with their policies and values regarding things like carbon emissions and ensuring goods aren't produced by people laboring in slave-like conditions, this deal falls short of such enforcements, allowing India to operate with relative impunity, with regards to those issues, at least, and still sell with dramatically reduced barriers, on the European market. That's a big deal, and is perhaps the biggest indicator of just how badly the EU wanted to make this deal work.The EU was also able to keep significant protections in place for important local sectors like beef and chicken, dairy, rice, and sugar—all industries in which India would have liked to compete in the EU, but which, because of those maintained barriers, they practically can't. That would likely have been a feverishly negotiated topic, and it's likely an indicator of how much India wanted this to work, too.On that note, both India and the EU were apparently especially interested in making this multi-decade deal work, now, because of increasing pressure from China on one side and the US on the other.China has been rerouting many of its cheap products that would have previously gone to the US market, elsewhere, engaging in what's often called ‘dumping' which slowly but surely puts businesses that produce comparable products at a profit in those local target markets out of business, at which point these Chinese companies can then ratchet up their prices and profits, operating without real competition.The EU and India have both been targeted by Chinese companies taking this approach, because they're still producing at a feverish pace and because of US tariffs and the general unpredictability and irregularity of US policy overall under the second Trump administration, they've been firing that cheap product cannon more intensely at other large markets, instead—and India and the EU are the next two big markets in line right now, after the US and China.On the US side of things, those same tariffs have been hurting companies in both the EU and India that would otherwise been shipping their goods to the rich and spendy US market, and in many cases these tariffs have been fine-tuned to hurt important local industries as much as possible, because that's one of Trump's main negotiating tactics: lead with pain and then negotiate to take some of the pain away.This deal, then, serves multiple purposes in that it creates a valuable, newly polished trade relationship between a rich and powerful existing bloc and the newly most-populous country on the planet, which is also rapidly expanding economically and geopolitically.One last point to note, here, though, is that the European Union has been trying to create these sorts of mutually beneficial deals with non-US partners for a while, now, and the two most recent wins, trade deals with a South American trade bloc and with Indonesia, in early January 2026 and in September of 2025, respectively, have borne mixed results.The deal with Indonesia seems to be moving forward apace, and while it's a heck of a lot smaller than the India deal, only worth about 27 billion euros, that's still important, as Indonesia is increasingly important, both economically and geopolitically, especially in a Southeast Asia that's slowly reinforcing itself against China's economically and potentially militarily expansionist tendencies.The deal with that South American bloc, however, was referred to the EU Court of Justice in mid-January for legal review due to its lack of alignment with other EU treaties, and that could delay or prevent its ratification.This new mother of all deals with India could likewise face holdups, or could fizzle before being implemented—though most analysts who are keeping eyes on this are seeing it not just as an economic agreement, but a gesture of solidarity at a moment in which China and the US are signaling their intent to carve up the world into hemispheric hegemonies, when those who might otherwise be forced into subordinate positions are scrambling to figure out who they can team up with and create counter-balancing forces capable of standing up against current and future aggression and coercion.There's a chance that even if politics and propriety threaten to get in the way, then, India and the EU will figure out a way to work together, on this and potentially other matters of global import, as well.Show Noteshttps://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/27/eu-and-india-sign-free-trade-agreementhttps://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/eu-india-trade-deal-leaves-blocs-carbon-border-tariff-intact-2026-01-27/https://archive.is/20260127162349/https://www.ft.com/content/b03b1344-7e92-4d0d-b85e-5ed92fc8f550https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade_agreementhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_barrierhttps://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_184https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_26_184/IP_26_184_EN.pdfhttps://www.ndtv.com/world-news/how-indias-mother-of-all-deals-with-eu-wipes-out-pakistans-trade-advantage-10921011https://theconversation.com/what-the-mother-of-all-deals-between-india-and-the-eu-means-for-global-trade-274515https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/economic-impact-us-tariff-hikes-significance-trade-diversion-effectshttps://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260116IPR32450/eu-mercosur-meps-demand-a-legal-opinion-on-its-conformity-with-the-eu-treatieshttps://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2026/1/27/mother-of-all-deals-how-india-eu-trade-deal-creates-27-trillion-markethttps://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/27/trump-reaction-eu-india-trade-deal-fta.htmlhttps://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/inflection-points/the-mother-of-all-trade-deals-in-the-time-of-trump/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/foreign-trade/with-mother-of-all-deals-in-bag-minister-piyush-goyal-says-mother-will-be-compassionate-fair-to-all-28-children/articleshow/127821015.cmshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93European_Union_Free_Trade_Agreementhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93European_Union_relations This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

This week's episode of Wealth Formula features an interview with Claudia Sahm, and I want to share a quick takeaway before you listen — because she's often misunderstood in the headlines. First, a quick explanation of the Sahm Rule, in plain English. The rule looks at unemployment and asks a very simple question:Has the unemployment rate started rising meaningfully from its recent low? Specifically, if the three-month average unemployment rate rises by 0.5% or more above its lowest level over the past year, the Sahm Rule is triggered. Historically, that has happened early in every U.S. recession since World War II. That's why it gets cited so much. And to be clear — it's cited a lot. The Sahm Rule is tracked by the Federal Reserve, Treasury economists, Wall Street banks, macro funds, and economic research shops globally. When it triggers, it shows up everywhere. That's not by accident. Claudia built one of the cleanest early-warning indicators we have. But here's the part that often gets lost. The Sahm Rule is not a market-timing tool and it's not a prediction machine. Claudia emphasized this repeatedly. It was designed as a policy signal — a way to say, “Hey, if unemployment is rising this fast, waiting too long to respond makes things worse.” In other words, it's a call to action for policymakers, not a command for investors to panic. What makes this cycle unusual — and why talking to Claudia directly was so helpful — is what's actually driving the data. We're not seeing mass layoffs. Layoffs remain low by historical standards. What we're seeing instead is very weak hiring. Companies aren't firing people — they're just not expanding. That distinction matters. And this is where I think the big picture comes in — not just for understanding the economy, but for investing in general. When you step back, the big picture includes a government with massive debt loads that needs interest rates to come down over time. It includes fiscal pressures that make prolonged high rates politically and economically painful. And it includes the reality that if the current Fed leadership won't ease fast enough, future leadership will. History tells us that governments eventually get the monetary conditions they need — even if it takes time, even if it takes new appointments, and even if it takes a shift toward a more dovish Federal Reserve. That doesn't mean reckless money printing tomorrow. But it does mean that structurally high rates are unlikely to be permanent. And when you combine that with investing, the question becomes less about this month's headline and more about what's positioned to benefit when the environment normalizes. That's why I continue to focus on real assets that are already deeply discounted — things like multifamily real estate — assets that were repriced brutally during the rate shock, but still sit at the center of a growing, rent-dependent economy. This conversation with Claudia reinforced something I've been talking about for a long time:The biggest investing mistakes usually happen when people zoom in too far and forget to zoom back out. I've made this mistake myself. If you want a thoughtful, non-sensational, data-driven discussion about where we actually are in this cycle — and what the indicators really mean — I think you'll get a lot out of this episode. 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. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Well Formula Podcast coming to you from Montecito, California. Before we begin today, I wanna remind you, uh, listen, we’re back in, uh, back in the saddle in here in, uh, 2026. I know it’s takes some time to get used to it, but we’re, gosh, we’re at the end of the month actually by the time this plays. I think we’re in February. It’s time again to start thinking about investing. And so if you are interested in potentially using this year, which I believe and which many believe to potentially be the last year, uh, big discounts, uh, in real estate and, uh, various other types of offerings. Make sure. To sign up for the Accredit Investor group, our investor club, as we call it wealthformula.com. You do need to be an accredit investor and then you get onboarded. An accredit investor is just defined by who you are. If you make over $300,000 per year filing jointly, or 200 by yourself, every reasonable expectation to do so in the future. Or you have a net worth of a million dollars outta your personal, outside of your personal residence, you’re an accredit investor. Congratulations. Join the club wealthformula.com. Interesting podcast. Today we have, uh, Claudia Sahm She’s a Big Deal, Claudia Sahm. You may recognize that last name som, for this som rule. And what is a som rule in plain English. You actually have heard of the som rule multiple times from other economists who’ve been on the show. The som rule looks at unemployment. And asks a very simple question. Now, has the unemployment rate started rising meaningfully from its recent low? So specifically, if the three month average unemployment rate rises 0.5% or more above its lowest level, over the past year, this som rule is triggered. Now, historically, that has happened early in every US recession since the World War ii. That’s why it gets cited so much. It gets cited a lot. By the way, the sum rule is tracked by the Fed treasury economists, wall Street Banks, macro funds, economic research shops globally, and when it triggers, it shows up everywhere, and that’s not by accident. Uh, Claudia has built one of the cleanest early warning indicators we have, but here’s the part that often gets lost. The som rule is not a market timing tool, and it’s not a prediction machine. Claudia, uh, emphasized that repeatedly. It was designed as a policy signal, a way to say, Hey, if unemployment’s rising this fast, wait, waiting too long to respond makes things worse. In other words, it’s call to action for policy makers, not a command for investors to panic per se. So what makes this cycle unusual and why talking to Claudia directly was so helpful? Well, it’s what’s actually driving the data. We’re not seeing mass layoffs. Layoffs remain low by historical standards. Um, what we’re seeing instead is very weak. Hiring companies aren’t firing people, they’re just not expanding, and that distinction matters. This is where the big picture comes in, not just for understanding the economy. For investing in general and when you step back, the big picture includes a government with massive debt loads that need interest rates to come down over time. It includes fiscal pressures that make prolonged high rates politically and economically painful. I’ve mentioned this before and it includes the reality that have to fed, fed, uh, if the current Fed leadership won’t ease fast enough. I am likely the case that future leadership appointed by. Donald Trump himself, uh, will, so history tells us that governments eventually get the monetary conditions they need, even if it takes time, even if it takes new appointments. And even if it takes a shift towards a more dovish federal reserve. Uh, that doesn’t mean, uh, reckless money printing tomorrow, but it does mean that structurally. High interest rates are unlikely to be permanent. Okay? And when you combine that with investing, the question becomes less about this month’s headline and more about what’s positioned to benefit when the environment normalizes. Okay? That’s really, really important, and that’s why I continue to focus on things like real estate, right? Real estate is currently. Not for long, in my opinion, but deeply discounted things like multifamily real estate, um, that were repriced brutally during the rate shot, uh, but are still at the center of a growing and, and rent dependent economy. And again, uh, this conversation with Claudia reinforced something that I’ve been talking about a long time, which is the biggest investing mistakes usually happen when people zoom in too far and forget to zoom back out. I’ve made that mistake myself. I am not immune. I have made lots of mistakes, and that’s one of them. So this is a great conversation. Hopefully you’ll enjoy it, especially if you want a thoughtful, nons sensational data-driven discussion. Where we are actually at in this cycle and what these indicators really mean. I think you’ll get a lot of this episode and we will have this conversation 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 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 backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealthformulabanking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show, everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Dr. Claudia Sahm. Uh, she’s an American, uh, macroeconomic expert, uh, known for her work, uh, on monetary and fiscal policy and real-time economic indicators. She developed this som rule, which I think, uh, people have mentioned on this show before, so this is a great opportunity to talk to her about that. Uh, it’s a widely, uh, followed recession signal based on unemployment. She’s also a former Federal Reserve economist and senior policy advisor in government. Um, so welcome, uh, Dr. Sahm. Great. Happy to be here. Thank you. Well, let’s, let’s kind of start out with this som rule because, uh, you know, it’s funny, we, we have had a few different people, uh, at various times bring up the SOM rule, and I think one had actually said that it was triggered, but I don’t don’t think it was at any rate, let’s, let’s start with that. What is the som rule? Lemme start with why is there a som rule, and then we’ll then we’ll get to specifically what the, what the rule is itself. So when I started out on the project, it wasn’t so much about. Calling a recession, like there are some really fancy technical ways that economists like look at the tea leaves and the data and either try to forecast a recession, which is incredibly hard, or even just say we’re in a recession in real time. So like that’s a useful endeavor. But what actually was behind the development of my recession indicator was more of a call to action. How do we develop policies that, that the Congress can put into place very quickly if a recession comes? So these kind of what are referred to as automatic stabilizers, so they’re decided upon ahead of time, but then you do need a trigger that says a recession is here. So now that enhance the unemployment benefits, send out the stimulus checks, whatever it is that we kind of have as our typical tools that are used in recessions, we could have those ready to go as kind of guardrails. Then like you, you turn the policy on. So that was really my emphasis was on how do we do better policy and recessions, get the support out quickly. ’cause that’s the best chance of kind of stabilizing the situation. And then it’s like, well it was in a, it was in a policy volume that they asked for, like a really concrete proposal. So if I’m gonna say an automatic stabilizer, I need to have a proposal for what a trigger could be. So that’s really where the som rule came. So I think it is important. It’s definitely important to me to, I always remember like what the kind of reason for it’s sure. Now that also guided what the indicator itself looks like. So again, it was gonna be in, in fiscal policy. It needs to be simple, it needs to be something that we track it and it needs to, I felt it was important that it capture the reason that we. Fight recessions, why there’s such a bad, uh, you know, outcome. And so it looks at the, the unemployment rate. I use the national unemployment rate, take a three month average. ’cause we wanna smooth out, like there’s bumps and wiggles in the data from month to month. So you kind of, you know, three month average. One way to smooth it out. So you take that series of three month averages, you look at the current value, you compare to the lowest value over the prior 12 months, if you’ve seen an increase of a half, a percentage point or more. Which is really pretty modest, but half a percentage point or more. Historically, we have been in the early months of a recession, so it’s not a forecast. It’s supposed to be like we’re in it. Let’s go. It’s an empirical pattern. It’s one that’s worked in the United States. It reflects kind of our labor market institutions, the way unemployment rate moves and recessions. It historically is the case that once you get past a certain threshold of increased unemployment rate, it tends to build on itself. And in a typical recession, we see increases of. Two, three or more percentage points in the unemployment rate. Uh, so that’s, that’s what the summer rule is. And in fact, it did trigger in the summer of 2024. At that time I had said like, look around, we are not in a recession. GP is still expanding. Job creation is still happening. We don’t see the other hallmarks of a recession. And pointed to the fact that we’d had a very disrupted labor market after the pandemic in particular. You know, there had been a lot of immigration at that point. The unemployment rate is the total number of unemployed. So people who don’t have a job but are actively looking for one out of the labor force, right? And so these people that have to either be employed or looking for jobs, and so we actually saw from the pandemic. Both with the pandemic and then later with the surge and now the reversal in immigration. We’ve seen a lot of movement in the, in the labor force, which makes unemployment rate a little tricky to interpret. And then I’d also argue, we saw early in the pandemic, the unemployment rate dropped very rapidly. We even had labor shortages. So in some ways unemployment rate rising and it has risen over. I mean, it continued to rise last year in 2025. A lot of that’s also normalization. We’d had a very low unemployment rate. So I think the, the pandemic recession has a lot of features that were very unusual. We’ll talk probably more about the labor market continued to be kind of unusual. So the, you know, the somal was not the only recession indicator to fall flat on its face in the cycle. Um, but I think it’s still a useful, useful guide and I, and. You know, even if it’s not a recession, the, the unemployment rate is a full percentage point above, its low in 2023. So, I mean, that, that could, that could be a reason for policymakers to respond, even if it’s not responding to a recession. Right. That was the first time that it, that triggered and, and actually didn’t. End up in a recession, right? There’s some back in the 1950s, earlier, but it’s, it’s the first time where there’ve been some false positives in the past or, or near false positives. Like in 2003. It was kind of close, uh, is like the unemployment rate rises a little bit and then it falls back down. What we saw after it triggered in 2024 is it stabilized. Then last year it continued to rise. So this the pattern that we’ve seen since the pandemic of rapid recovery dropping unemployment rate and then it’s like gradually rising and yet has risen a full percentage point that you go all the way back in the post World War II period. We don’t see anything that looks like that. So that is a very unusual. Paris. So something’s more is going on in the labor market than just our typical business cycle, boom, bust, recession type dynamics. So what is that? What is the thing that’s happening that’s unusual right now in the labor market? Right? So the thing that is driving the unemployment rate up, I think this is a good lesson, a reminder to all of us. It’s not about layoffs. The rate of layoffs in the United States is really quite low. You look at unemployment insurance claims, they’re also quite low. What’s been pushing the unemployment rate up over the last two and a half years has been a very low rate of hiring and, and it’s, and it is something that over time will at least gradually put upward pressure on the unemployment rate and frankly. Until hiring picks up and we really don’t have many signs of it. Even as we enter 2026 unemployment rate’s gonna probably keep drifting up ’cause we’re not keeping job creation’s, not keeping up with, you know, people coming into the, into the labor market and, and that what’s, I think the puzzle right now is that hiring has been very low. But what we’ve seen in terms of consumer spending, business investment, so the kind of the big pieces of GDP, they’ve really held up pretty well, so. Business. It’s not, again, not that recession of the customers have disappeared. And so we’re not hiring, or we may even be firing workers. The customers are there for the businesses, but they’re choosing in this environment not to add, uh, to their payrolls. And that’s slowly pushing up down point rate. Yeah. Um, you know, it, it’s interesting what you’re, you’re talking about, but essentially you’re, people aren’t getting fired. They’re just, when they retire or leave, they’re just not replacing those. Individuals, you know, makes me think a little bit about what’s going on in the big, you know, in the tech push with artificial intelligence and that kind of thing, and increased in efficiency. Certainly you see that in the larger companies like Amazon and all that, where they’re just becoming massively more productive and cutting expenses essentially by, you know, using tech. Do you think that this is sort of an early indication, potentially of that kind of movement? So it. It’s possible, but I think we’re at the very front end of AI disrupting the labor market. This low hiring rate that we’ve talked about. You see this across all kinds of industries, including ones that don’t show high levels of AI adoption, and frankly, a AI adoption is pretty low. I mean, there are some sectors like tech and increasingly finance and some professional services have higher adoption rates. Uh, but in terms of it being able to explain the low hiring. I think it’s pretty tough ’cause the low hiring is such a, such a broad based, um, phenomenon. Now, AI might be, I think, indirectly contributing in that one of, one of the hypotheses about why, um, businesses have been, uh, not hiring despite, you know, economic activity. Continuing to push ahead could be that there’s a lot of uncertainty. Now there is a long list that we could draw of, of factors that might be causing businesses to be uncertain and hesitant to add to their payrolls. Uh, a lot of times you talk about things with tariffs or, you know, economic policy, regulations changing, you know, so there’s a lot going on there. But it could also be, there’s a lot of uncertainty about what this technology means for the future. Maybe you don’t need to bring on more workers because your ability to kind of use and adapt this technologies coming online. And so like that could be part of it. I think there’s another piece, you know, we have a lot of discussion about ai, but I do think that there’s, there could be a, a technology angle to this that’s, that is. Not in the AI technologies, but maybe just some of the more basic kind of automation is again, right after, you know, the, the pandemic recession as we came out of a, you know, very rapid recovery, uh, there was, there was a lot of hiring or that, ’cause businesses had done a lot of firing and they needed to bring back workers really rapidly and we actually had a period of labor shortages. There were workers moving around a lot and there were, that also put a lot of pressure on some employers, particularly in service sector, to automate more ’cause they just couldn’t get the workers, so they needed to bring technology. Online to help, you know, fill the gap. And over time, you know, businesses though, they haven’t done as much hiring, they have been firing. So the workers, they have longer tenures, have more experience, they’re probably more productive. So maybe businesses can kind of, you know, get away with not doing more hiring. ’cause the people they have there can kind of keep up with it. Um, and they’ve done some more automation. I don’t think those are sustainable. I think we’re going to need to see hiring pickup in terms of, of staying with, um, you know, as expanding, uh, demand from customers. But I won’t pretend to know what AI means for the future of the labor force. Right. So like there could be, I think that’s a big conversation about we’re headed, where we’re headed. I think it’s probably a pretty small slice of explaining. Where we’re at right now. You know, it’s interesting because obviously there was a lot of concerns about rising inflation, and particularly in the context of, you know, tariffs and, and among those types of things that were, were, um, coming down the pipe. And as it turns out, inflation seems to be coming down. How do you explain that from where you sit? Because it, it, it seems sort of to contradict a lot of what, you know, many economists believe to be likely. So when thinking about the effects of tariffs on inflation and this, this idea that it didn’t end up being as much of a factors we had really feared, uh, you know, a year ago. I think there’s a few things to keep in mind. One, the announced tariffs, uh. Didn’t come to pass fully. Right? So there’s a big difference between some of the, the, the initial announcements, whether it was on Liberation Day, April 2nd, or the initial kind of retaliation tit for tat with China, where we ended up with some triple digit, uh, tariff numbers. Those didn’t end up being where we, we ended now tariff, the effect of tariff rate. Is much higher than it was before. Right. Uh, president Trump came into office for the second time, so like, I don’t wanna minimize the, the, the increase in tariffs and the US government collected about $200 billion last year in, in additional tariffs. But there is a, there’s a good bit of daylight between what was announced and where we actually ended up. Businesses also proved very capable of trying to avoid those tariffs and not in like a. Illegal kind of way of avoiding them, but, but using inventories like trying to get ahead of them. We know the tariffs are tariffs. There’s been some evidence that, that it’s businesses are gonna start passing on the tariff cost increase when it’s actually tied to the inventories that they’re putting out in front of customers. And for some of our goods, like say apparel or things that have long seasons or come from, you know, all across the world, it actually takes quite a bit of time from the inventories being what actually shows up in front of customers. So there’s been the ability to. Kind of get around the tariffs ’cause they were rolling in. And so do be smart in terms of your inventories. And then it just takes time for those inventories to be, you know, um, to come down. Mm-hmm. By, there’s been several studies at this place, at this point that, that demonstrate that the, the tariffs, the cost of the tariffs is coming into the us. So the, it’s always the importer that pays the tariff, like literally writes the check to the US government. But it’s possible that the foreign producer could say, reduce their prices on what they’re, you know, paying or what they’re asking to be paid for that, uh, imported good. And then that would be a way of the foreign producer sharing the cost of the tariff. But everything that we see from the M Court data suggests that a very small fraction, probably less than 10%. Of the total tariff burden is being born by, at least at this point, born by the foreign producers. So it’s coming into the us. It’s sitting with either US businesses that are importing the goods or have the goods at some point in their, you know, in their supply chains and, and with us customers, the consumers we have, we’ve seen. I think you can really look at the inflation data. You can see the goods prices, which often are kind of a drag on inflation that they did turn around. They’re, they’re putting upward pressure on inflation. It’s not massive. It doesn’t explain all of these, you know, 200 billion in tariff costs, but then it is, it’s sitting with businesses. The effects still, it’s still just not that long enough to really understand. You know what, what the implications. It’s possible. I, I think that’s true with any, with any big policy change. Like it doesn’t happen overnight. I think that’s one thing that a lot of, a lot of economic models that, like, they’re, they’re very sensitive, right? Like as soon as a policy change happens, the models will kind of tell us something pretty dramatic in terms of adjustments. But this last year was a reminder, like when there’s, when there’s a big cost, there’s gonna be a lot of attempts to adjust around it to try to minimize that cost and then. It takes time, like in the real world, like the interactions are much more complex. You know, inventory lags all of the, like, it takes time to move its way through. So I think we’re not done with the pass through. I think we’ll probably still see more come to consumers, but businesses could decide to bear that cost. They, they could, you know, with profit margins. I mean some of, some of the inflationary environment in the pandemic did allow. There were very broad base increases in prices. You did see some companies be profitable from that because it was, there was a, you know, some of the costs were more targeted, but the, you know, the, the price increases were broad. So it could be a time where businesses see that, you know, consumers are more price sensitive now than they were in 21, 20 21, 20 22, so they’re not passing as much on it. Could be that that’s part of where. Like the cost businesses are dealing with that cost by maybe doing less hiring as opposed to passing it on to consumers. Uh, you know, they could be taking a hit with their profits. They, you know, so like, it doesn’t have to go all the way through to consumers. There are different levers that can be pulled. I do think we’ll still see some pass through in the, in probably the first half of this year, and that’s assuming that our whole tariff regime. Sit still, right? It looks like once again we might be, uh, increasing those tariffs, but, um, so yeah, I think it’s just tracing, you know, the tariffs through the system is really complicated. And one last thing I’ll say about the tariffs is they’re not just tariffs on goods that go to consumers. These tariffs have been broad enough that we’re also taring imported goods that are used by our manufacturers used for our, by our businesses in their production. So then it can take a really long time for that to end up with the, you know, the end customer could be a business to start with, and then it moves its way down. So I think these are just, you know, the costs are real. We can see the tariffs have been collected, the costs are there. We can see in the import data, there haven’t been import price data, there haven’t been a lot of adjustments by the foreign suppliers. So then it’s just a question of, we have these costs. Where did the cost go? I believe the last GEP was 4.3% and, uh, inflation was around 2.6, 2.7, or at least core. You’ve obviously, uh, worked at the Fed. Um, give us a sense of the situation that the Fed is trying to figure out here. Like what do they do with these numbers and, you know, all of the issues that surround them. The work at the Fed, I mean, it, it’s laser focused on the, the response, the mandates that the Fed has. So with maximum employment and price stability and with maximum employment, that’s not something that can be easily defined. It’s not like it’s a particular unemployment rate, it’s not a particular payroll number. But I mean, broadly speaking, it’s, you know, do, are, you know, the people who wanna work, are they working? In such a way that it’s not putting pressure on inflation, right? Like labor shortages that end up with wage increases that just, you know, end up with inflation. Like that would be a situation where the Fed would actually want to kind of help restrain some of the. Uh, employment growth. And we, we saw that in this cycle. I mean, the Fed raised rates a lot in 2022 and 2023. Uh, so that’s the maximum employment on the stable prices. The Fed has set a target of the 2%, uh, year over year PCE inflation. So a little different than the CPI inflation, but very much related. And, and it’s one, I mean, that’s, that’s the goal, right? And it, uh. So it starts with those two pieces and, and what’s been, I think what’s been challenging in say the last year as the Fed was, you know, trying to figure out what it was gonna do with interest rates was the fact that it, there was pressure on both sides of the mandate. Mm-hmm. Um, and not necessarily the, well, I mean, inflation itself has, was above the 2%. It continues to be above the 2%. Target has been. Since 2021. Now the Fed’s policy doesn’t have a look back, but I mean, they do worry that the longer inflation stays closer to three than two businesses. Consumers are gonna start to kind of embed three into their actions, their expectations. Then you kind of get stuck there. So like that, that both, you know, they were missing on the inflation mandate and there were, there were concerns that the, that we might see inflation get stuck above the mandate and the way you dislodge it if it gets stuck. Could end up risking a recession, right? So the Fed doesn’t want that to happen. So that’s a real concern. But then on the employment side, you know, we started out talking about the small rule, the rising unemployment rate. We’ve seen the unemployment rate rising. And then last year in particular, it wasn’t just the unemployment rate rising, we saw job creation just really take a leg down. Um. Some of that probably is less immigration population aging, so less supply of workers, which isn’t something the Fed would react to. ’cause that, I mean, if you don’t have as many people that wanna work, you don’t need to create as many jobs. But the unemployment rate was rising, so it’s clear, like there just wasn’t, there wasn’t enough job creation to keep up with, um, the workers who were there, uh, to work. And, and there was a concern that this could, could spiral out. Those small increased unemployment rate that, that very low level of job creation. And frankly, if you look at, I mean the, I mean, we have multiple months and probably more after revisions of declines in payroll employment. Mm-hmm. Like if you looked at the labor market data, you’d be like, aren’t we in a recession or like on the edge of one? Again, that’s not where we’re at, but it, it certainly gave that, that risk. Things could be slowing down. And, and the, the last piece that was really important in the Fed’s decisions was where, where’s the federal funds rate? Where are the interest rate, the policy interest rate they control? And it was still relatively high. For, for recent history, right. Not in the long history of the Fed, but mm-hmm. And so, like the Fed had raised, they’d raised interest rates quite aggressively to fight the inflation in 2022. They’d very gradually lowered it. Some was taken out in 2023 because made some pro, made quite a bit of progress on inflation in, or in 2024, they lowered the rates in 2025, the 75 basis points of cuts that the Fed did. It was out of concern. Of the labor market unraveling a risk, not a, not saying, hey, the labor market is unraveling, but saying the risk that the downside risk to employment are larger and more worrisome than the upside risk to inflation. So this inflation getting stuck, is that still the case as a going into 2026 here? So, you know, even, even last year we saw, we listened to Fed officials, there’s quite a bit of disagreement. Because it was a tough situation to read. There are some Fed officials that were more focused on inflation, some that were more focused on the employment side. Uh, and it really was just a matter of kind of reading the economy and trying to figure out this, a very unusual situation, like where, where was this headed? What did the Fed need to do? In the end, the consensus on the Fed was to do the rate cuts, kind of front load them. They talked a lot about it as insurance. They’re taking out insurance against the labor market deteriorating. And I think with that approach, in all likelihood, and there’s been certainly signaling of this, that when they meet at the end of January, it’ll, they’re unlikely to move again. That this is, this will be an opportunity to hold steady, be patient the Fed has, has taken out their restriction. So they don’t have the higher rates, so they’ve pulled rates down. We also know that early this year there’s various kinds of fiscal support that are coming online or tax cuts to households and to businesses that should give a little extra lift, uh, to the economy. So I think it’s a period of the Fed waiting to see what the effects of their policy changes are, seeing what the effects of the fiscal policy with the expectation this will be enough to stabilize the labor market. Even help get it back on track and really what the Fed would like. I mean, we’ll see what they get, but they’d really like the next cut to be a good news cut. Like inflation. Oh look, it’s moving back down again. We’re making clear progress back to 2%. I think that’s probably gonna take maybe even till the middle of this year to build that case. A strong case for the disinflation. Mm-hmm. But that’s, that’s what they would, would like to do. But they’re gonna keep an eye on the labor market. But nothing we’ve seen in the most recent data suggests that they gotta get moving like that. There’s some, you know, real pressure building. Um, in fact, the labor market looks a little bit better probably than when they met in December and inflation. Showing some signs of progress, but it, it’s pretty bumpy in terms of, there’s a lot of noise in the data at the moment. You mentioned, um, the Fed’s mandate and you know, certainly that’s something, um, that, uh, you know, that, that we know the Fed looks at these unemployment numbers that look at inflation. I’m curious though, that there’s, you know, there is this push and pull with the treasury. In particular, you know, looking at the amount of, of, of, of bonds that need to be refinanced, that kind of thing. I mean, presumably that’s one of the reasons why the Trump administration is pushing so hard, uh, on the Fed to reduce, um, you know, to reduce rates so that you know, this sovereign debt can be refinanced at a, something a little bit more palatable. How much of that actually. I know it’s not supposed to play a part in the Federal Reserve’s actions, but in reality is there, is there that kind of, you know, thinking that, you know, they have to, they, they may try to play ball a little bit with the, with the situation, with the debt. Yeah. There, the, the Fed is not playing ball right now with the administration. Uh, but, but there have been, there have been times in our past. So during World War II, there was an explicit cooperation between the Fed and the Treasury. The Fed kept interest rates low. Both the federal funds rates, so the short term interest rates, they also did, uh, some purchases of longer term to help keep longer term rates down. Right. So I mean, the, the Fed really, they, their policy was oriented exactly on this objective, keeping the borrowing cost of the US government low because it was financing the war effort. So, so there have been times where the Fed has cooperated with treasury. Now, when they came out of World War ii. What happened is, you know, treasury wants to keep interest rates low. This is good for, you know, the economy, good for growth, but it was, it really was creating a lot of inflationary pressures and it took until the early 1950s for the Fed to kind of regain its kind of operational independence from treasury and then go back to pursuing, you know, inflation as a key goal. And then also in the late seventies and maximum employment was added as an explicit goal. So we’re in a place now where. It’s employment, it’s inflation, it, there was quite, um, I mean, president Trump and some other officials have been, you know, very open about saying rates should be low to help with the deficit, with funding the gov. So like, it’s, it’s been in the discussion in the air. But that’s not, that’s not a mandate that Congress has given the Fed. That’s not what they’re pursuing. It does, you know, but things can change at the Fed. We’re gonna see a change in leadership this year with a new Fed chair. Um, the Fed always, I mean, Congress created the Federal Reserve. It’s changed its abilities, its responsibilities over time. I don’t wanna say that we’ll never get back to a place where the Fed thinks about. Its effect on the deficit. I mean, they’re watching it, they know, right? They’re tracking all these aspects of the economy. But in terms of what’s driving the Fed’s decisions about what the, the federal funds rate should be, that’s not part of the calculus right now. Yeah. Um, you know, another, just another question is for clarity. You know, the, the, um, officially right now there’s, there’s no quantitative easing. However, there is. Uh, you know, I’ve been reading, uh, about even, I think even today, there was a, a fair amount of liquidity, uh, being injected in by the Fed. Can you, for people who don’t understand the mechanics of this and what the difference in terminology is, can you explain to us maybe what the difference is between quantitative easing and what’s being done right now? So just as for context, where quantitative easing even came from. So if we go back to the global financial crisis in 2008, the Federal Reserve, in response to that recession, pulled the federal funds rate all the way to zero. Cut rates to zero And as sure many of us remember that that recession was a very deep and long recession. So, and the unemployment rate was, you know, 10% and inflation was not a problem. So the, the Fed would want in that environment to do more to support the economy. But when the federal funds rate is at zero, that’s, its, that has been its primary tool. Well, that’s, that’s. Stepped out. So then as a question of, well, what else could we do to help support the economy? And, and there, there were. Different possibilities. Uh, some European central banks looked at, you know, they actually did negative interest rates or tried to pull their policy rates, and that’s not what the US did. What was done was to do purchases of, uh, treasuries. Uh, there’s also been purchases of mortgage backed securities, and this is where the Fed is. I mean, and, and they’re creating reserves. So the fed, I guess, secretary, uh. Treasury doesn’t refer to it as magic money. Um, you know, they create reserves and then they’re going out and they’re buying tr so they’re pushing that liquidity, that demand into markets. And if you’re, if there’s a lot more demand for treasuries, well, the price of the treasuries will go up. The yield comes down. Interest rates go down. Yep. Interest rates go down. So they. They were, the Fed wanted to support the economy more. That was the tool that they used to do it. So when, when the Fed talks about quantitative easing, it’s not just the tool, the asset purchases, it’s also the intent, right? They wouldn’t do quantitative easing right now. ’cause if the Fed thought they really need to stimulate the economy more, they’ve still got like. More than three percentage points they could cut from the federal funds rate. Like if the issue were right now, we need to like get the economy going, they’re gonna like cut the funds rate and do it that way. They wouldn’t be pur like purchasing assets, purchasing treasuries to do that. But what what happened is between the global financial crisis, the Great recession, so all the asset purchases done then. There was some, some runoff of the balance sheet, but then again, in the pandemic there were a lot of asset purchases. Uh, the Fed has a really big balance sheet, and it has, uh, it, it kind of changes the way that the Fed can even just move around the federal funds rate. Like, I don’t wanna get too much into the, the technicals, but it’s, it’s just, you know, when the Fed says, well, we wanna lower the, the funds rate to 3.5%. In the old days, they could kind of do, you know, with the bank reserves and they could like, make these small purchases and it would, it would make that stick. Now with, there’s, uh, banks have a lot of reserves, so they’re not as responsive. And so just to kind of, there’s like the, the technical, the tools, the Fed has to just make it happen. In terms of operationally, it means that they have to do some purchases now and then they call their, I mean the new name they have for these are reserve management. Purchases. So it’s really about operations. It’s not about, but it does mean they’re purchasing assets. So if you’re just focused on like the Fed’s purchasing assets, they’re putting liquidity into the system. Yes, they are doing that, but it’s not with the intent to kind of push the economy to run harder. It’s just enough liquidity to keep. The federal funds rate stable at the level that they wanted to be at, to just make sure that all these operations are short in the very short term lending markets amongst banks, that it’s all kind of working as mm-hmm. As it should be. So it’s more about operations and it’s about stimulus policy. Right. A lot of our, um, a lot of our listeners are real estate owners, investors, and they’re, you know, they think about, um. Mortgage rates and that kind of thing. There was recently a, a pretty significant, well, I don’t know how significant it really was. I think it was about, was it maybe $250 billion worth of mortgage backed securities purchased by Fannie Mae. Um, that ca can you talk about the purpose of that and really the, you know, what kind of effect that would actually, we could actually expect from that. It’s certainly been, I mean it’s, it is clear. You know, we talked about one reason that the administration would want interest rates down. It’d be like financing the deficit. Right. Another reason that very much pulls into kind of the affordability debate is we want interest rates lower, one of them lower for consumers. Now the White House has put a lot of pressure on the Fed for them to lower rates even faster than they have. Has not played ball with that. But then the Fed has lowered its rates. The Feds rates are very short term rates, and the federal funds rate is like an overnight rate with between banks. Right. So it, and it has an effect on, you know. Credit card rates, short term rates, but it’s not one, it, it has an effect, but it’s really not like driving necessarily 30 year mortgage rates or you know, some of the longer term rates. There’s a lot of other factors that go into that, and so in this kind of, you know, push for lower mortgage rates. Pushing on the Fed is not the only lever to pull, right? The administration has other levers that they could potentially pull, um, in trying to influence mortgage rates. Now, there, I’d argue the administration’s tools here, like the, the $200 billion, Fannie and Freddie purchase that you mentioned. That really is about trying to reduce the spread. Between mortgages and treasuries. So in some ways it sounds similar, like, oh, fed and Franny, which are, you know, GSEs. So part, part of the, you know, government right now, at least they were privatized during the global financial crisis. You think, oh, they’re going out and purchasing this Sounds a lot like the Fed going out and purchasing. There are there, there’s some parallels, but we need to remember, Fannie and Freddie don’t create money. The Fed, when they start, when they start the process of their quantitative easing, they’re creating reserves like they’re actually creating liquidity and money supply. Fannie and Freddie have authorization to be able to make these purchases, but they’re not like the fed. They’re not creating reserves, but they can, so I don’t wanna think about them like bringing down the whole set of interest rates, but they can affect this spread between mortgages and say treasuries. Right? And so, because again, if you’re, if the. If the GSEs are going out, they’re purchasing mortgage backed securities, well that’s increasing demand for those, and that can push down the rates, that can like squeeze that spread. And, and while the announcement has been made, you know, I mean they’re, they’re in the early stages of putting that in place, but we even on the announcements, saw a response in financial markets and you’re seeing some movement down, uh, in mortgage rates now. It was. Pretty modest, right? And, and 200 billion while, you know, not nothing, uh, really pales in comparison to like the scale of say, the quantitative easing that the Fed did. Um, and there are probably other, but the, you know, the administration’s not done. It doesn’t necessarily have to be that Fannie and Freddie do more purchases. The the spread between mortgage rates and treasuries is pretty substantial. There’s other places where, you know, the fees that go into getting a mortgage are quite a bit larger than they were before the, the global financial crisis. So maybe they go in and try to chip away at the fees and, you know, so there’s, there’s different levers. And I fully expect, and I think we’re gonna get some announcements here again soon on the White Houses. Housing affordability agenda. So there may be other, other ways that they’re trying to, uh, influence, uh, the mortgage spreads. But that’s, that’s what that is all about. And it, it should have, and it looks like, you know, it’s having some effect in terms of bringing rates down, but it likely, it’d be modest, like in the 10 basis points, maybe 20 if they ramp up the program some. But like, it, you know, it’s, it, it, you know, every, every bit counts. But this is not a. Uh, this won’t be enough to, you know, move rates down, dramatic mortgage rates down dramatically, uh, when you, when you look at the economy. Um, and I, I, I think just, you know, one last question. I mean, I just in terms of, you know, the people listening to this are. They’re, they’re people, you know, with jobs and who are trying to invest their money, and they’re trying to, you know, build long-term wealth, but they’re, you know, everybody’s worried about what’s happening with the economy. What, what, what do you think, like, just as, um, um, you know, perspective for people to understand or try to have some framework for how to look at what’s going on in the economy. How they should judge it. Like what would you suggest, like just for mom and pop investors trying to, what is happening with the economy? I’m not an economist. What, what are the, what are the things that you think they should consider studying up on, looking into a little bit? One challenge for a lot of investors, I mean, frankly, it’s, it’s been a challenge that I try to deal with too. Uh, we’re, we’re in an environment where there’s just. There’s so much news coming out of DC uh, with the White House and policies and the Fed, and you know, I mean, like, there’s just, there’s a lot. The headlines are big. And like I talked about with the tariffs, we had like really big tariff announcements. The really scary numbers were, and then it like dialed back and then we pushed through it and it’s like, and it’s this remembering that, um. There’s always a tendency to have this idea that the, the president really runs the economy. I mean, that’s not just about this administration. That’s like a longstanding, you know, the president gets, uh, blame or credit for the economy when really, right. Like we have a over 33, $30 trillion economy, hundreds of millions of workers, tens of millions of businesses. Like this is not about one administration. And so we always need to be careful about. Putting too much weight on the policies coming out of dc. Uh, and you know, last year if you really just listened to all the, you know, we’re cutting immigration, we’re raising tariffs, we’re doing, you know, all, there’s a lot of uncertainty in Doge. Well then you might have missed, like, there’s a bunch of AI investment happening and we’ve got a lot of growth in the economy and while consumers are still pretty resilient, so you, it’s kind of like. Tuning down the volume, some coming out of Washington, especially the like every twist and turn. Uh, and then kind of focusing in on the fundamentals. I will say, you know, you don’t wanna turn down DC too far because we, we do have some like big picture events that could play out over many years. Right. So kind of keeping an eye on it, but for the long game. As opposed to reacting to every twist and turn, every policy announcement, because a lot of this clearly is more of a negotiation than it is like, we’re gonna actually do this. So, you know, as investors, you don’t wanna get whipped around by the latest headline, but you also can’t put your head in the sand. Like you gotta kind of try and find a way to pull the signal out of the noise. And it is really. It’s really hard. Yeah. Like this has been a challenging time and the, the US economy’s been doing things that are not typical. We talked about some of the things with the labor market and we are running some policy experiments that haven’t been run in a long time, so things could change pretty dramatically. But I think it’s just trying to absorb the information, not get too wound up about it, but like also keep an eye on like what’s good for long-term growth. Yeah. Because it’s good for long-term productivity. Thank you so much Dr. Sahm. It’s uh, it’s been a pleasure talking to you on, uh, wealth Formula Podcast today. Great. Thank you so much. 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 concept. 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. It was Claudia Sahm. She is, uh, she’s a very, very smart lady. And, uh, just a reminder, if you have not done so, uh, I, I don’t frequently ask to do, do this, but, uh, make sure you give the show. Five stars and a positive review because that’s how we’re getting, you know, really high quality people like Claudia on the show, I’ve been around for a long time. It helps that the show is, you know, like over a decade old and all that stuff too. But, uh, anything you can do to support would be very helpful. And also one more reminder, uh, if you have not done so and you weren’t a credit investor, make sure you sign up for that investor club. At Wealth formula.com. That’s it for me. This week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is about Joffrey signing out. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheelwright and Ken m. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

Could returning to the gold standard fix inflation? Nick Pell explains why this shiny solution might not be all it's cracked up to be on Skeptical Sunday.Welcome to Skeptical Sunday, a special edition of The Jordan Harbinger Show where Jordan and a guest break down a topic that you may have never thought about, open things up, and debunk common misconceptions. This time around, we're joined by writer and researcher Nick Pell!Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/1279On This Week's Skeptical Sunday:The gold standard wasn't some ancient monetary relic — it only emerged in 1821 when Britain pegged the pound to gold, with most industrialized nations hopping on board by the 1890s. It was abandoned during World War I because governments simply couldn't fund the war while maintaining gold convertibility.Today's global economy is roughly $115 trillion, while all the gold ever mined is worth about $28.5 trillion — roughly a quarter of global GDP. This massive mismatch means returning to gold would require either revaluing it to astronomical prices or causing catastrophic deflation.The appeal of the gold standard isn't really about the metal itself — it's about trust. People are drawn to money that doesn't depend on government promises or political whims. Gold represents certainty in an uncertain world.A return to gold would likely benefit net exporters like China while punishing net importers like the United States. Trade imbalances would transform into gold hoarding, creating constant liquidity crises that global commerce simply couldn't survive.The desire for "sound money" isn't misguided — it's the solution that's flawed. Better monetary policy rules, multi-asset pegs, or systems like Switzerland's debt-repayment requirements could provide the discipline people crave without nuking the world economy.Connect with Jordan on Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. If you have something you'd like us to tackle here on Skeptical Sunday, drop Jordan a line at jordan@jordanharbinger.com and let him know!And if you're still game to support us, please leave a review here — even one sentence helps! Sign up for Six-Minute Networking — our free networking and relationship development mini course — at jordanharbinger.com/course!Subscribe to our once-a-week Wee Bit Wiser newsletter today and start filling your Wednesdays with wisdom!Do you even Reddit, bro? Join us at r/JordanHarbinger!This Episode Is Brought To You By Our Fine Sponsors: Hiya: 50% off first order: hiyahealth.com/jordanThe Perfect Jean: 15% off first order: theperfectjean.nyc, code JORDAN15Quiltmind: Email jordanaudience@quiltmind.com to get started or visit quiltmind.com for more infoHomes.com: Find your home: homes.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We kick off FOLLOW UP by checking in on Elon Musk's personal dumpster fire, where the EU is investigating Grok for deepfake slop while Tesla's “unsupervised” robotaxis turned out to be supervised by literal chase cars — shocker. At least some of you are getting Siri settlement crumbs in your bank accounts, though you could probably double it betting against Musk's worthless promises on Polymarket.Transitioning to IN THE NEWS, Tesla is killing off the Model S and X to build robots while sales crater, proving that mixing hard-right politics with EV sales is a brilliant move for the balance sheet. Meanwhile, the corporate bloodbath continues with massive layoffs at Ubisoft, Vimeo (courtesy of the Bending Spoons buzzsaw), and Amazon, because “removing bureaucracy” is apparently HR-speak for 16,000 families losing their livelihoods. If that's not enough, Google is settling yet another privacy suit for $135 million, the EU is threatening to weaponize its tech sovereignty against the US, and the Trump administration wants Gemini to write federal regulations—because if there's one thing we want drafting airline safety rules, it's a hallucinating chatbot.Still IN THE NEWS, Waymo is under federal investigation for passing school buses and hitting children, while South Korea's new AI laws manage to please absolutely no one. Record labels are suing Anna's Archive for a cool $13 trillion—roughly three times the GDP of India—and the Winklevoss twins have finally admitted that NFTs are dead by shuttering Nifty Gateway.We pivot to MEDIA CANDY, where the Patriots and Seahawks are heading to Super Bowl 60, and the Winter Olympics are descending on Milan. We're doing the math on the Starfleet Academy timeline, celebrating the return of Ted Lasso and Shrinking, and trying to decide if Henry Cavill is the second coming of Timothy Dalton in the Highlander reboot. Plus, Jessica Jones is back in the Daredevil: Born Again trailer, and Colin Farrell's Sugar is returning to explain that wild noir twist we all totally saw coming.In APPS & DOODADS, the TikTok Armageddon is upon us as the new US owners break the app and drive everyone to UpScrolled, while Native Instruments enters insolvency, leaving our music-making dreams in restructuring limbo. Apple is dropping AirTag 2 with precision finding for your watch, which is great for finding the keys you lost while doom-scrolling.We wrap up with THE DARK SIDE WITH DAVE, featuring the new Muppets trailer and Steve Whitmire's deep thoughts on the state of the felt, plus a look at the artisans in Disneyland Handcrafted. Finally, Looney Tunes finds a new home on Turner Classic Movies, proving that the classics never die—they just move to a cable channel your parents actually watch. Dave finally learns about the Insta360 camera, a countertop dishwasher but no Animal Crackers, and a guide to gas masks and googles... for no particular reason.Sponsors:DeleteMe - Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com/GOG and use promo code GOG at checkout.SquareSpace - go to squarespace.com/GRUMPY for a free trial. And when you're ready to launch, use code GRUMPY to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.Private Internet Access - Go to GOG.Show/vpn and sign up today. For a limited time only, you can get OUR favorite VPN for as little as $2.03 a month.SetApp - With a single monthly subscription you get 240+ apps for your Mac. Go to SetApp and get started today!!!1Password - Get a great deal on the only password manager recommended by Grumpy Old Geeks! gog.show/1passwordShow notes at https://gog.show/731Watch the episode at https://youtu.be/B54je_oJWjMFOLLOW UPThe EU is investigating Grok and X over potentially illegal deepfakesPeople on Polymarket Are Making a Fortune by Betting Against Elon Musk's Famously Worthless PromisesElon Musk Made Tesla Fans Think Unsupervised Robotaxis Had Arrived. They Can't Find ThemTesla Quietly Pauses Its “Unsupervised” Robotaxi Rides as Reality Sets InApple Siri settlement payments hitting bank accounts. What to know.IN THE NEWSTesla bet big on Elon Musk. His politics continue to haunt it.With Tesla Revenue and Profits Down, Elon Musk Plays Up SafetyTesla Kills Models S and XUbisoft proposes even more layoffs after last week's studio closures and game cancellationsVimeo lays off most of its staff just months after being bought by private equity firmAmazon Laying Off 16,000 as It Increases ‘Ownership' and Removes ‘Bureaucracy'Report Says the E.U. Is Gearing Up to Weaponize Europe's Tech Industry Against the U.S.Google will pay $135 million to settle illegal data collection lawsuitGDPR Enforcement TrackerNTSB will investigate why Waymo's robotaxis are illegally passing school busesWaymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa MonicaVideo shows Waymo vehicle slam into parked cars in Echo ParkTrump admin reportedly plans to use AI to write federal regulationsSouth Korea's ‘world-first' AI laws face pushback amid bid to become leading tech powerSpotify and Big 3 Record Labels Sue Anna's Archive for $13 Trillion (!) Alleging TheftAmazon converting some Fresh supermarkets, Go stores to Whole Foods locationsSEC agrees to dismiss case over crypto lending by Winklevoss' GeminiWinklevoss Twins Shut Down NFT Marketplace in Another Sign Crypto Art Is DeadMEDIA CANDYPlur1busShrinkingA Knight of the Seven KingdomsStealHow to watch the 2026 Super Bowl: Patriots vs. Seahawks channel, where to stream and moreWinter Olympics: How to watch, schedule of events, and everything else you need to know about the 2026 Milano Cortina gamesWait, So When Is 'Starfleet Academy' Set, Anyway?The First ‘Daredevil: Born Again' Season 2 Trailer Brings Back Jessica JonesMarvel Television's Daredevil: Born Again Season 2 | Teaser TrailerTed Lasso Gets Kicked Back to Apple TVThere Can Only Be One First Look at the ‘Highlander' RebootColin Farrell's Detective Show ‘Sugar' Will Finally Have to Address that Wild Twist This SummerAPPS & DOODADSTikTok Is Now Collecting Even More Data About Its Users. Here Are the 3 Biggest ChangesTikTok users freak out over app's 'immigration status' collection — here's what it meansTikTok's New US Owners Are Off to a Very Rocky StartTikTok Data Center Outage Triggers Trust Crisis for New US OwnersYes, TikTok is still broken for many peopleSocial network UpScrolled sees surge in downloads following TikTok's US takeoverNative Instruments enters into insolvency proceedings, leaving its future uncertainWispr FlowAirTag 2: Three tidbits you might have missedTHE DARK SIDE WITH DAVEDave BittnerThe CyberWireHacking HumansCaveatControl LoopOnly Malware in the BuildingThe Muppet Show | Official Trailer | Disney+Steve Whitmire, former Kermit the Frog performer, has written a long, thoughtful piece about the current stae of the Muppets.Disneyland Handcrafted‘Looney Tunes' Has Found a New Home: Turner Classic MoviesThe Dark Side of Scooby DooA Disturbing (Yet Convincing) Theory Reveals There Were Never Any "Monsters" In Scooby DooCartoon Conspiracy Theory | Scooby Doo and The Gang Are Draft Dodgers?!Producing A Multi-Person Interview With An Insta360 CameraA listener on Mastodon pointed out that The Verge had a story on countertop dishwashersA Demonstrator's Guide to Gas Masks and GogglesEmma RepairsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Meet my friends, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton! If you love Verdict, the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show might also be in your audio wheelhouse. Politics, news analysis, and some pop culture and comedy thrown in too. Here’s a sample episode recapping four takeaways. Give the guys a listen and then follow and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Trump Accounts President Trump joined Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, CEOs and investors at an all-day summit in D.C. Highlighting a new imitative that will encourage fiscal responsibility. Joe Lavorgna, Counselor to U.S. Treasury Secretary An in‑depth interview with Joe Lavorgna, counselor to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and former Wall Street economist. Lavorgna explains the Trump administration’s newly announced “Trump Accounts,” a policy initiative designed to provide newborn children with seed investment capital to encourage long‑term wealth building, financial literacy, and participation in the U.S. capitalist system. Clay and Buck explore the power of compound interest, with Lavorgna outlining how early investment contributions—combined with historical stock market returns—could grow into hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars over time. The discussion highlights the administration’s broader goal of expanding equity ownership and addressing the fact that millions of American households currently lack any exposure to the stock market. The conversation then expands to affordability, inflation, and economic growth heading into the 2026 midterm elections. Lavorgna argues that Trump‑era policies emphasizing deregulation, domestic energy production, capital investment, and productivity growth are creating what he describes as a “disinflationary boom.” He explains how rising productivity allows wages to increase while prices stabilize or fall, improving living standards and restoring purchasing power. Clay and Buck also question Lavorgna about public versus private markets, access to wealth creation for average investors, and the long‑term implications of the AI boom. Lavorgna expresses optimism that innovation, strong GDP growth, and declining inflation will continue to support market expansion and job creation. FBI Raid in Fulton County FBI agents are reported to be executing a search warrant at an election facility in Fulton County. Clay and Buck frame the raid as potentially tied to lingering questions surrounding the 2020 presidential election, noting that such discussions were once heavily censored on social media. While acknowledging the seriousness of federal involvement, both hosts caution listeners to temper expectations, citing statutes of limitation, institutional reluctance, and the likelihood that any findings—no matter how significant—would still be dismissed by partisan audiences. Election integrity and voter confidence dominate the early portion of Hour 3, with Clay and Buck debating whether meaningful accountability for 2020 is still possible and arguing that the most important outcome now is ensuring future elections are secure. They discuss how political polarization has hardened perceptions on both sides, referencing long‑standing beliefs among Democrats about Russian interference in 2016 and skepticism among Republicans about 2020 results. The hosts emphasize that Trump’s decisive return to the White House in 2024 may represent the most consequential response to past disputes, arguing that his second term has proven more powerful and effective than a hypothetical uninterrupted presidency would have been. The hour also includes updates on law enforcement actions tied to recent unrest, with Buck highlighting announcements from the Department of Justice regarding arrests of individuals accused of assaulting federal officers during anti‑ICE riots in Minnesota. While expressing skepticism about whether meaningful penalties will ultimately be imposed at the local level, both hosts agree that federal arrests represent a necessary step toward restoring order and protecting immigration enforcement personnel. Listener calls follow, including personal stories expressing support for law enforcement and reflections on accountability, responsibility, and respect for police officers doing difficult jobs under intense scrutiny Mark Halperin on the Future of Media An extended interview with veteran political journalist Mark Halperin. Halperin assesses the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, arguing that Trump benefited strategically from four years out of office to plan, staff, and refine priorities. Halperin highlights what he describes as a more energized and deliberate administration, while outlining three major challenges ahead: passing legislation in a divided Senate, managing long‑term competition with China, and navigating the looming midterm elections. The discussion also addresses internal administration tensions, particularly surrounding DHS leadership and messaging failures related to ICE enforcement, with Halperin predicting that while personnel changes are unlikely, visibility and roles may shift. Halperin and the hosts further analyze the spread of anti‑ICE protests beyond Minneapolis, including incidents in New York City, and discuss how the administration must balance maintaining firm enforcement with controlling optics and preventing escalation. Halperin argues that better crowd control and clearer operational perimeters could reduce danger to both agents and civilians while limiting copycat protests. The hour also includes lighter moments, including a viral exchange about generational cultural knowledge involving legendary sports broadcasters John Madden and Pat Summerall, which sparks a humorous debate about media literacy, generational divides, and shared cultural reference points. Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8 For the latest updates from Clay and Buck: https://www.clayandbuck.com/ Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton on Social Media: X - https://x.com/clayandbuck FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/ IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuckYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.