Podcasts about mauldin economics

“This is the exorbitant privilege of being the world's reserve currency … one of the things Trump is putting in danger,” says John Mauldin, New York Times best-selling author and co-founder of Mauldin Economics. He sits down with Daniela Cambone to break down the implications of the escalating trade war with China and the dangerous path the U.S. is headed toward—a potential recession.Mauldin criticizes oversimplified, blanket protectionist policies, such as high tariffs on poor countries, and strongly opposes the economic views of Peter Navarro. “I said eight years ago that Peter Navarro was the most dangerous economist in the country,” he says. Instead, Mauldin champions free trade, economic realism, and allowing businesses to operate without excessive government interference. Watch the video to learn Mauldin's view on what investors should do now to safeguard their wealth."Questions on Protecting Your Wealth with Gold & Silver? Schedule a Strategy Call Here ➡️ ⁠https://calendly.com/itmtrading/podcast⁠or Call 866-349-3310

To quote Wayne Huizenga, “Some people dream of success, while other people get up every morning and make it happen”. With that in mind welcome to this latest episode in the Investing Matters podcast series in which I have the privilege of speaking the hugely multi-talented and globally respected Writer, Trader, Musician, DJ, Entrepreneur, Financial Educator, former Wall St trader and Editor of The Daily Dirtnap, a newsletter for professional investors, Jared Dillian. The author of four books including the fantastic Harriman House recently published book: No Worries, How to live a stress-Free Financial Life. Jared graduated from the United States Coast Guard Academy in 1996 with a B.S. in Mathematics and Computer Science, from the University of San Francisco in 2001 with a Master's in Business Administration, concentration in Finance, and from the Savannah College of Art and Design in 2023 with a Masters in Fine Arts in Writing. Jared worked for a small floor market maker on the Pacific Options Exchange from 1999-2000 and was a trader for Lehman Brothers from 2001 to 2008, specializing in index arbitrage and ETF trading. Jared is a master of market psychology and has been called the “Dr. House” of trading, and he has a following ranging from casual investors to professional traders and hedge fund managers. He has been a regular contributor at Bloomberg Opinion, Forbes, TheStreet.com, and other outlets. Jared is a frequent speaker at conferences, and his appearances include MSNBC, Bloomberg TV, The New York Times, LA Times, Business Insider, was the host of The Jared Dillian Show, a nationally syndicated radio show on personal finance. In his spare time, Jared is a progressive house DJ and speaks frequently on mental health issues at financial institutions. Additionally, Jared is an adjunct professor in the business program at Coastal Carolina University. He was also an investment strategist at Mauldin Economics. In this fascinating and insightful Investing Matters interview Jared Dillian a survivor of 9/11, financial educator, former Wall St. trader, with over twenty-five years' experience of the markets, shares many investing, trading and personal finance lessons and strategies on how to achieve a “No Worries” stress-free financial life. Topics and discussions include: -Desired to a writer and author -Serving a spy for Coast Guard Intelligence. -His catalyst for going part-time to Business School. -Outworking everyone else. -His first lucky break in finance. -His hunger and determination to succeed. -Working on the Trading Floor -Working at Lehman Brothers as an Index Arbitrage trader & later as the Head of the ETF trading desk. -Lessons learned at Lehman Brothers -Rejecting a huge financial salary & security. -Backing himself & the importance of thinking big. -The Daily Dirtnap newsletter growth & success. - How & when he started investing and his current Investing/trading philosophy. -Always being contrarian. -Buying out of favour stocks. -Sentiment a recurring winning strategy. -Huge OIL qualitative trading success. -Psychology. -Deep value investing -No stock, no index, no mutual fund is safe. -Generating risk adjusted returns. -Minimising volatility. -The characteristics and straits of success investors & traders. -Hedge Funds -Growth of Private Equity and potential risks. - How to “Live in the Noise” of the markets and optimise your decision making. -The rationale behind the use of “Invest then Investigate”. -The book, No Worries: How to live a stress-Free Financial Life. -Why F.I.R.E. is a dumb philosophy. -- Why we can all choose how much money we earn. - The optimal way to minimize financial risk and stress. -Buying Vs Renting property -The Cult of Home ownership - The rule 150. -Investing diversification. -The awesome portfolio of ETFs. -Stocks/Bonds/Cash/Gold/Real Estate -Trading Bitcoin -The emergence of the Bitcoin ETF -The option value of cash -Personal finance and the Abundance Mindset

Sean recently sat down with Aaron Gentzler - CMO of Mauldin Economics and with 20 years of experience in the financial publishing niche - to talk shop. But this is more than conversation about how Aaron climbed the financial copywriting ladder. It's a conversation about one simple truth that new copywriters should WANT to hear: The financial niche is desperate for new talent. So how do you break into the financial niche? What are publishers looking for when they hire junior copywriters? How should you pitch your copywriter skills when you're cold emailing?

Learn more about the upcoming Mauldin Economics conference here: https://www.mauldineconomics.com/go/JM543Z17/WEA In this episode of Wealthion, Andrew Brill sits down with Ed D'Agostino of Mauldin Economics for a crucial discussion on the volatile economic landscape and how it impacts your investments. Amid rising geopolitical tensions, fluctuating markets, and the looming threat of a productivity boom, Ed shares expert insights on navigating these uncertain times. Learn about the significant themes driving the market, the impact of AI and reshoring, and strategic investment tips to safeguard and grow your wealth. Whether it's the rise of domestic oil production, the intricacies of global politics, or preparing for a market correction, this episode is packed with valuable information you won't want to miss. Stay till the end for Ed's take on the strategic investment conference and actionable advice for the turbulent decade ahead. For more wealth-building strategies and expert financial advice, subscribe to Wealthion and join our community of informed investors. Timestamps: 0:00 - Introduction 2:17 - Economic Landscape Overview 4:15 - Geopolitical Tensions and Their Economic Impacts 7:09 - Potential Conflicts and Investment Opportunities 10:07 - Market Trends and Investment Strategies 14:47 - Defensive Investment Opportunities 17:27 - Federal Reserve's Interest Rate Strategy 21:41 - The Job Market and Unemployment Rates 25:04 - National Debt and Financial Stability 30:08 - Addressing the Tax System and Debt Reduction 32:59 - Strategic Investment Conference Details 36:39 - Conclusion and Final Thoughts

If you'd like to know what goes on behind the scenes in the world of financial copywriting, our guest today has the inside story. Aaron Gentzler is CMO of Mauldin Economics, a major financial publisher based in Northern Florida. He's been in the business since 2006 and tells us about his own journey, as well as some of the experiences he's had training and advocating for younger copywriters. Just as important, he'll let you know what he has seen that spells bad news for people trying to get their foot in the door in the first place. Plus, he shares in-the-trenches insights about what works and what doesn't work with stories in copywriting. My book, The Persuasion Story Code https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CFD2KXNQDownload.

With a United States presidential election looming in November, Patrick Watson, Senior Economic Analyst at Mauldin Economics, says it's difficult to say what the key economic battleground will be because many voters are "living in their own realities."Speaking in a new episode of interest.co.nz's Of Interest podcast, Watson says there's not a great deal of agreement on whether the US economy is even in good or bad shape."If you ask Democrats, they mostly say the economy is fantastic. If you ask Republicans, they say the economy is terrible. I think it's somewhere in between. I think that's what the data actually shows," Watson says.The election is expected to be a rematch between incumbent Democrat Joe Biden, and his Republican predecessor Donald Trump."On the Trump side, they have not really announced a great deal of specific policy. So that's kind of a mystery. We know what the Biden administration has done and says they will do. People can like it or not like it, but they at least know. So what we do know from the Republican Trump side is he wants to further restrict immigration. He will probably resume the various trade war and tariff measures that he was doing last time and possibly more aggressively," Watson says."But again, the difficulty is people aren't operating from reality. People are operating from their own predispositions, what they think is happening. So that makes it hard to predict."Asked whether the average American is feeling as if they're doing well at the moment, Watson says this is a really interesting question."The survey data that's out there is really confusing, because when they ask people, how is your situation, how are you doing financially in your own family and household? Most people, pretty solid majorities, over 60% are saying, 'I'm great, I'm in a good spot.' But then if you ask them how do you think the economy is doing overall for everyone else, they become very bearish. They think it's terrible. So it's hard to see how both of those are true at the same time," says Watson.In the podcast Watson also talks about this week's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) monetary policy review and the outlook for interest rate cuts, the US inflation picture including housing's role in its stickiness, what's going on in US share markets, regional economic performance in the US, challenges in the US labour market, and the influence of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Jared Dillian is a writer, author, and speaker. He is the editor of The Daily Dirtnap, a daily market newsletter for investment professionals. Jared has written for Bloomberg Opinion, Forbes, and TheStreet.com, and he now works as an investment strategist for Mauldin Economics. He has spoken at dozens of conferences and other events, proving that he is an excellent public speaker. Jared Dillian Money is Jared's personal finance venture, where he is a partner and developer of content. He joined us today to talk about his brand new book, ‘No Worries: How to Live a Stress-Free Financial Life.'We dive into strategies for minimizing financial stress and building wealth, with Jared emphasizing the importance of increasing income and making savvy financial decisions. From discussing the impact of college education on financial well-being to sharing effective investment strategies, this episode provides valuable insights into reducing financial stress.Get ready for a conversation that will equip you with practical tools for improving your financial journey. [07.13] The choice – Money is a choice. You are the one who decides how much money you are going to make. [13.43] Debt or risk – We discuss how debt and risks cause financial stress.[18.19] Volatility – Jared explains why humans are bad investors. [21.25] Luck – Jared shares how he positioned himself to be exposed to luck and how it benefited him. [26.12] The three Cs – The three Cs you must have to make investments are courage, capital, and conviction. [30.06] Credit card debts – Jared explains why credit cards are a terrible way to borrow money. [36.36] College education – We talk about the lack of knowledge in college students about modern world finances. [41.00] The purpose – The purpose of a college education. [46.00] Awesome portfolio – Jared explains the awesome portfolio.[52.45] The balance – The importance of having a healthy relationship with money. ResourcesConnect with JaredWebsite - http://jareddillianshow.com/                jareddillianmoney.com/ Twitter - twitter.com/dailydirtnap Book by Jared DillianNo Worries: How to live a stress-free financial lifeBook by Nassim Nicholas TalebFooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the MarketsBook by Nassim Nicholas TalebThe Black Swan

Former US Army Ranger Paul Scharre knows all about AI's darker potential. He talks to Mauldin Economics publisher Ed D'Agostino about AI's role in combat, the rise of Chinese-style techno-authoritarianism, and US vulnerabilities in the Panama Canal.

A bit of a format flip on this episode as Sam and Derek tag team an interview with Jared Dillian, author of the new book No Worries: How to Live a Stress-Free Financial Life. Jared has had quite an interesting background from working at Lehman Brothers during their 2008 collapse to building a successful financial newsletter and podcast. The first half of the episode digs into Jared's thought on the current state of the economny, the effect of an inverted yield curve and his thoughts on the FIRE movement. We then jump into the principles discussed in the book for the second half of the episode. About Jared Dillian: Jared Dillian is the editor of The Daily Dirtnap, a daily market newsletter for investment professionals, continuously published since 2008. He graduated from the United States Coast Guard Academy in 1996 with a B.S. in Mathematics and Computer Science, from the University of San Francisco in 2001 with a Masters in Business Administration, concentration in Finance, and from the Savannah College of Art and Design in 2023 with a Masters in Fine Arts in Writing. Jared worked for a small floor market maker on the Pacific Options Exchange from 1999-2000, and was a trader for Lehman Brothers from 2001 to 2008, specializing in index arbitrage and ETF trading. He is also the author of STREET FREAK: Money And Madness At Lehman Brothers, which was named Businessweek's #1 general business book of 2011, and the novel ALL THE EVIL OF THIS WORLD, published in 2016, THOSE BASTARDS: 69 Essays on Life, Creativity, and Meaning, published in 2023, and NO WORRIES: How To Live a Stress Free Financial Life, to be published in 2024. Additionally, Jared is an adjunct professor in the business program at Coastal Carolina University. Jared is also an investment strategist at Mauldin Economics, and previously contributed to Bloomberg Opinion, Forbes and TheStreet.com. His media appearances include MSNBC, Fox Business, Bloomberg TV, BNN, The New York Times, LA Times, Business Insider, Marketwatch, Yahoo! Finance, and dozens of local and syndicated radio programs. He is also the host of The Jared Dillian Show, a nationally syndicated radio show on personal finance. In his spare time, Jared is a progressive house DJ and speaks frequently on mental health issues at financial institutions. Discussed:  Order Jared's New Book No Worries @DailyDirtNap on X/Twitter @JaredDillianMoney on Instagram ILAB 149: Bill Perkins on How To Die with Zero Where we are: Johnny FD – Chiang Mai, Thailand / IG @johnnyfdj Sam Marks - South Carolina, US / IG @sammarks12 Derek – Los Angeles / IG @DerekRadio Sponsor: ILAB PatreonJoin the Invest Like a Boss Patreon now and get tons of bonus content, including additional episodes, full quarterly updates including account screenshots and more for as low as $5/month at Patreon.com/InvestLikeaBoss Time Stamp: 00:30 - Interview with Jared Dillian Begins 05:16 - What's An Inverted Yield Curve? 14:50 - Jared's Thoughts on the FIRE Movement 17:42 - Key Points of the Book 34:34 - Sam & Derek Wrap Up & Recap If you enjoyed this episode, do us a favor and share it! If you haven't already, please take a minute to leave us a 5-star review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Copyright 2024. All rights reserved. Read our disclaimer here.

Matthew Jessup CEO and Managing Partner with Jessup Wealth Management, joins us from the Commonwealth Financial Network 2023 National Conference to discuss markets and investing. Brad McMillan, CIO at Commonwealth, joins us from the Commonwealth Financial Network 2023 National Conference to discuss markets and investing. Alison Williams, Senior Global Banks and Asset Managers Analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence, joins to break down big bank earnings. Jared Dillian, investment strategist at Mauldin Economics and editor at The Daily Dirtnap, author, also a former Bloomberg Opinion columnist, joins to talk markets, the Fed and inflation, and geopolitical risks. Jennifer Rie, Senior Legal Analyst: Antitrust with Bloomberg Intelligence, joins to discuss several corporate takeovers, including Kroger-Albertsons, Microsoft-Activision, and Exxon-Pioneer. Karen McColl, Senior Vice President of Wealth Management at Commonwealth, joins us from the Commonwealth Financial Network 2023 National Conference to discuss markets and investing. Sam Millette, director of Fixed Income at Commonwealth, joins to discuss joins us from the Commonwealth Financial Network 2023 National Conference to discuss markets and investing. Hosted by Paul Sweeney and Matt Miller.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you'd like to know what goes on behind the scenes in the world of financial copywriting, our guest today has the inside story. Aaron Gentzler is the CMO of Mauldin Economics, a major financial publisher based in Northern Florida. He's been in the business since 2006 and tells us about his own journey, as well as some of the experiences he's had training and advocating for younger copywriters. Just as important, he'll let you know what he has seen that spells bad news for people trying to get their foot in the door in the first place. Plus, he shares in-the-trenches insights about what works and what doesn't work with stories in copywriting. Contact Aaron at aaron@mauldineconomics.com Download.

Patrick Cox is a premiere anti-aging science analyst with Mauldin Economics, Chief Scientific officer for The Longevity Playbook along with his good friend and colleague Dr Mike Roizen (Mike is the co-founder of The Longevity Playbook, bestselling author, and the emeritus chief wellness officer at the Cleveland Clinic) and also Patrick is a contributor to Wall Street journal, Forbes,  USA today & has also served as a consultant for national political campaigns and Fortune 500 companiesIn this conversation with JD podcast host Andrew Cox | Joint Dynamics Patrick shares an insider's perspective on the economic realities of longevity, upcoming longevity treatments, and what we can do now to increase our health span to extend our lifespan.*our show sponsor is Muvitality Medicinal Mushrooms for modern day health and wellness | Mu …Go to muvitality.com and use the code JD10 to receive a 10% discount on your purchase of Mu Functional mushrooms such as Lions Mane, Cordyceps, Chaga, Reishi, and Turkey tail functional mushroomsEnjoyHere are some useful links for this podcastThe Longevity Playbook | LinkedInThe Methuselah Effects - How the Trend Toward Longevity is …Patrick Cox - ForbesPatrick Cox's Interview with Dr. Eugene Seymour - Mauldin EconomicsThe Longevity Playbook™ by Dr. Mike RoizenRelevant episodesEpisode 58 - Project Otto, a look into the future of health care and ongoing health optimisation - https://podcasts.apple.com/hk/podcast/episode-58-project-otto-a-look-into-the-future/id1527374894?i=1000581372113JOINT DYNAMICS links:Joint Dynamics Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/JointDynamicsHongKong/Joint Dynamics Instagram -https://www.instagram.com/jointdynamics/Joint Dynamics Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRQZplKxZMSvtc6LxM5WckwJoint Dynamics Website - www.jointdynamics.com.hk Host - Andrew Cox - https://www.jointdynamics.com.hk/the-team/trainers/andrew-coxThe Joint Dynamics online at home exercise program - contact admin@jointdynamics.com.hk to purchase your copy Introduction (Finalized).m4v

A great discussion with a true industry leader, Chuck McConnell. He is the Executive Director Center for Carbon Management in Energy and an Advisory Board Member at the Carbon Neutral Coalition. Both organizations are critical for forward thinking and planning for the future of energy. A little inside baseball, I had the pleasure of being on a panel discussion with Chuck at the Strategic Investor Conference hosted by John Maudlin and Mauldin Economics. Peter Snell and Jay Young were also on the panel, and we had a great talk about the future of energy. Also, please follow Chuck on LinkedIn HERE. We would also like to shout out to Raconteur as an episode sponsor. Thank you Chuck for your industry leadership and stopping by the podcast - Stu00:00 - Intro00:52 - Getting to Know Chuck Mcconnell and Being on the Advisory Board of Carbon Neutral Coalition02:15 - The Topic being discussed is about Sustainability.03:59 - Insights about he`s involvement in thought leadership at the University of Houston, including he`s goals for he`s work there, and how it relates to market features06:53 - What can we learn from the divergent paths taken by European and US-based oil companies in transitioning towards renewable energy, and how does Occidental Petroleum's success in the carbon capture market demonstrate a viable alternative approach for oil companies to address climate change concerns?09:18 - Given the recent resurgence of coal usage in some parts of the world, how can carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technology play a role in mitigating the carbon emissions associated with coal-fired power plants, and what are some potential challenges and opportunities in implementing CCUS in the coal industry?11:42 - Can you elaborate on the Global significance of the Carbon Coalition's efforts in Texas, particularly in light of Texas' leading position in various industries, and how do you see the Carbon Coalition's work influencing international efforts to address climate change?13:26 - Should we export advanced coal technologies, such as clean scrubbers and high-temperature coal plants, to reduce emissions in other countries?15:27 - Low cost energy with the least amount of impact on the environment, is the way to elevate humanity out of poverty17:17 - Can you share what upcoming plans or initiatives are in store for the Carbon Coalition, and how do you plan to effectively communicate this news to the public?19:22 - Do you believe that having a subject matter degree for CCUS will be essential in the future, and how can we encourage the spread of information and awareness about this important field?21:45 - What Upcoming Developments or plans do you have in store, Chuck?23:45 - What are the ways in which people can connect with you through your LinkedIn profile and the Carbon Coalition website?26:26 - Outro

You may remember the acronym MBS from the '07–'08 financial crisis. Michael Lewis's book and then movie, The Big Short, taught us all about how the mortgage-backed securities (MBS) market almost blew up the global financial system. Well, today, mortgage-backed securities are back in the news… In this week's episode of Global Macro Update, Barry Habib, founder and CEO of MBS Highway, joins Ed D'Agostino to discuss the role of mortgage-backed securities in Silicon Valley Bank's failure—and if the other shoe will drop for the rest of the banking sector. To hear more from Barry Habib, along with about 50 other financial and economic experts, click here for info on Mauldin Economics' premier event, the Strategic Investment Conference.

Any one of the problems we face—energy prices, housing, inflation—by itself wouldn't break our back, says John Mauldin, co-founder of Mauldin Economics and one of the most brilliant minds in macroeconomics. But all of them coming together could create a serious crisis. Show host Ed D'Agostino and John discuss what the looming global debt crisis could mean for your portfolio... the disconnect between energy policies and energy needs... and why the Fed needs to “drive a stake through the heart of inflation.” For more of John Mauldin's macroeconomic insights, click here to subscribe to his free weekly e-letter, Thoughts from the Frontline. Don't miss this week's episode of Global Macro Update—listen now!

Any one of the problems we face—energy prices, housing, inflation—by itself wouldn't break our back, says John Mauldin, co-founder of Mauldin Economics and one of the most brilliant minds in macroeconomics. But all of them coming together could create a serious crisis. Show host Ed D'Agostino and John discuss what the looming global debt crisis could mean for your portfolio... the disconnect between energy policies and energy needs... and why the Fed needs to “drive a stake through the heart of inflation.” For more of John Mauldin's macroeconomic insights, click here to subscribe to his free weekly e-letter, Thoughts from the Frontline. Don't miss this week's episode of Global Macro Update—listen now!

Segment 1: Ed D'Agostino, COO & Publisher, Mauldin Economics, talks to John about the market continuing their rally, the weekly jobless claims ticking up, the difficult environment for business right now, the Fed trying to bring inflation under control, and why energy and food are the two most important invariables right now. Segment 2: Joan E. […]

Ed D'Agostino is a well-known investment advisory and Publisher, Mauldin Economics, an international investment research firm *Follow him on Twitter: @EdDAgostino

Storied and successful investor John Mauldin joins to talk about the realities and opportunities during our time of chaos, about the philosophy of markets, and about the opportunities in America's oilfields, too. Mauldin Economics and his recent newsletter referred to in this edition: Rock and a Hard Place (May 27, 2022.)

Storied and successful investor John Mauldin joins to talk about the realities and opportunities during our time of chaos, about the philosophy of markets, and about the opportunities in America's oilfields, too. Mauldin Economics and his recent newsletter referred to in this edition: Rock and a Hard Place (May 27, 2022.)... Source

Storied and successful investor John Mauldin joins to talk about the realities and opportunities during our time of chaos, about the philosophy of markets, and about the opportunities in America’s oilfields, too. Mauldin Economics and his recent newsletter referred to in this edition: Rock and a Hard Place (May 27, 2022.)... Source

Robert Ross is the founder of tickstocks and author of  “A Beginner's Guide to High-Risk, High-Reward Investing”. His unique style of clear and direct stock research helped him build a massive following in the investment research industry, starting his career at investment research company Mauldin Economics and quickly rising through the ranks to become the youngest chief analyst in the industry. He uses his platform to promote fundamentally sound investing habits for people of all ages. Ross has a lot of knowledge in the cryptocurrency space. Listen to this podcast and know Ross's interesting entrepreneurial journey, he also discusses how to have high risks and high rewards and how to be successful with less work and less stress. Please Enjoy!          Would you please consider being 1% and leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts/ iTunes if you enjoy the podcast? It takes less than 30 seconds, and it makes a world of difference in reaching new interesting guests! To sign up for Kevin's Podcast email Newsletter and to view the show notes & past guests please visit-https://officialkevindavid.com/podcast Follow Kevin: https://mmini.me/@FollowKD

On todays podcast I was happy to host Robert Ross, founder of Tik Stocks and author of the upcoming book “A Beginner's Guide to High-Risk, High-Reward Investing: From Cryptocurrencies and Short Selling to SPACs and NFTs, an Essential Guide to the Next Big Investment”, releasing on May 10th this year. You can find the book here - Amazon - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beginners-Guide-High-Risk-High-Reward-Investing-ebook/dp/B09DDCV7WR/Publisher - https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/A-Beginners-Guide-to-High-Risk-High-Reward-Investing/Robert-Ross/9781507218235On the podcast we talked about Roberts background, why we haven't seen a risk off environment, interesting investment vehicles mentioned in the book and the mistakes most retail investors make. Robert Ross's unique style of clear and direct stock research helped him build a massive following in the investment research industry, starting his career at investment research company Mauldin Economics and quickly rising through the ranks of to become the youngest chief analyst in the industry. Today, over a million investors turn to Ross every month for his take on investing, economics, and personal finance. Between his social media followers on TikTok, Instagram, and Patreon and profiles in Time, Business Insider, MarketWatch, and Daily Mail (London), Ross uses his platform to promote fundamentally sound investing habits for people of all ages. Ross has a degree in economics from Loyola University New Orleans and lives in Los Angeles, California.Robert Ross - LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/robertedwardross/TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@tik.stocks?lang=enInstagram - https://www.instagram.com/tikstocks/?hl=enTwitter - https://twitter.com/tikstocksWTFinance - Website - https://www.wtfinance.online/Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/wtfinancee/Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/67rpmjG92PNBW0doLyPvfnTikTok - https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeUjj9xV/iTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wtfinance/id1554934665?uo=4LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/anthony-fatseas-761066103/Twitter - https://twitter.com/AnthonyFatseas

Jayant Bhandari is a mining and metals analyst who is one of the most polemical voices on matters concerning culture, economics, and politics. His work has appeared at the Mises Institute (USA), Mises Institute (Canada), Mises Institute (India), Casey Research, Acting Man, International Man, Mining Journal, Zero Hedge, Lew Rockwell, Fraser Institute, Le Québécois Libre, Mauldin Economics, Northern Miner, Mining Markets.José Niño talked with Jayant about India, politics in the Third World, wokism, and other maladies that are currently afflicting the West.Follow Jayant's work here:http://jayantbhandari.com/Buy My Book "The 10 Myths of Gun Control" TodayIf you're serious about changing the gun control status quo we live in, this book is a must.After reading this text, you will be able to hold your own in any debate with your anti-gun friends, family, or associates. No questions asked.And heck, you will have a solid foundation in championing issues like gun rights should you take your activism to the next level.Knowledge is power and the foundation for any worthwhile endeavor. With this next-level information at your fingertips, the sky is the limit.So make today the day you say NO to the gun control status quo by taking action NOW.The full retail price for The 10 Myths of Gun Control is $6.Get Your Copy TodayBookmark my Website For Direct ContactIn the era of Big Tech censorship, we can't rely on just one or two platforms to keep us connected. Bookmark my website today so you always know where to get the true, unfiltered information about the news and views that matter to you.Subscribe to my Premium Newsletter TodayThe Niño FileIf you're serious about changing the authoritarian status quo we live in, make sure to join the Niño File on Patreon for as little as $5 a month. This is the premier source for dedicated and passionate leaders who want to not just “move the needle”, but actually win and change the landscape ahead of us.The Niño File is bringing you the necessary and concise ways to help you identify and train strong candidates, kill bad legislation while actively passing good bills, keeping incumbents accountable and knowing how to replace them when push comes to shove. Those are just the tip of the iceberg, the only way to get so much more is to join today!Don't Forget to Follow me on Twitter @JoseAlNino This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit josbcf.substack.com/subscribe

DoubleLine's Jeffrey Sherman and Sam Lau welcome Jared Dillian, editor of The Daily Dirtnap market newsletter, investment strategist at Mauldin Economics, podcaster (Be Smart) and DJ (DJ Stochastic), for Mr. Dillian's take on today's markets and his thoughts on ... Read More

John Mauldin is the co-founder of Mauldin Economics, which publishes a growing number of investing resources and publications designed to help investors thrive, especially in today's challenging economy. As a renowned financial expert, John shares his insights into how the governments of the world are always solving last decade's problems and why the investing strategies that worked back in the 90s no longer work today. He dishes out some brilliant investing strategies that you can try in today's world such as “Core and Explore” and how you can potentially prepare yourself for the Great Reset. Reference Links www.mauldineconomics.com

Mauldin Economics Virtual SIC 2020 - Catherine Wood // ARK Invest + Barry Ritholtz // Ritholtz Wealth Management Courtesy of Mauldin Economics

In April 2018, Vitaliy met with one of his best investment friends, John Mauldin. John has been an inspiration to Vitaliy both personally and professionally, but no more so in the context of writing. John writes at Mauldin Economics, one of the web's... The post Be Kind – Ep 75 appeared first on The Intellectual Investor.

In April 2018, Vitaliy met with one of his best investment friends, John Mauldin. John has been an inspiration to Vitaliy both personally and professionally, but no more so in the context of writing. John writes at Mauldin Economics, one of the web's the most widely read and successful investment letters. In this podcast, Vitaliy shares how John was able to inspire him to both write better, and be a better human being. John's articles-> https://www.mauldineconomics.com/ You can read this article online at: https://contrarianedge.com/be-kind/

#Episode 74 today is with Jared Dillian (@DailyDirtnap) of the Daily Dirtnap, which is a investment newsletter, and also hosts a podcast  , the monthly Dirtcast . He is also a strategist at Mauldin Economics. We enjoyed talking to him about #emergingmarkets #options #politics #economics and copied his speed round of unrelated topics. Please tune in and … Continue reading "74. Jared Dillian"

Swan Global Investments, our long-time partner for the Advisors Option, has an event every year that brings together leaders from the industry to promote an open dialogue to discuss and share ideas on some of the most challenging issues facing investors. We are pleased to bring you audio from this event. Part 3: The Coming Age of Transformation, How It Will Change Everything Guest Speaker: John Mauldin - Chairman of Mauldin Economics, President of Mauldin Solutions, LLC

Swan Global Investments, our long-time partner for the Advisors Option, has an event every year that brings together leaders from the industry to promote an open dialogue to discuss and share ideas on some of the most challenging issues facing investors. We are pleased to bring you audio from this event. Part 3: The Coming Age of Transformation, How It Will Change Everything Guest Speaker: John Mauldin - Chairman of Mauldin Economics, President of Mauldin Solutions, LLC

In this episode I speak about a Mauldin Economics article where the Writer, Patrick Watson, discusses ways to three fundamental ways to prepare ourselves in the wake of AI & Automation reducing the amount of available jobs in the market. I also speak about watching the movies; Downsizing, Wind River & Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri. Finally I share some BIG news with you to wrap up the episode!   The Spun Today Podcast is a Podcast that is anchored in Writing & Random Rants, but unlimited in scope. Give it a whirl.   Links referenced in this episode:   Teach Your Brain to Beat the Robots: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/connecting-the-dots/teach-your-brain-to-beat-the-robots#   The concept of Time in Chinese Language: https://chelseabubbly.com/2016/05/26/the-concept-of-time-in-chinese-language/   Fill out my Spun Today Questionnaire if you’re passionate about your craft. I’ll share your insight and motivation on the Podcast: http://www.spuntoday.com/questionnaire/   Check out my Book: Make Way for You – Tips for getting out of your own way http://www.spuntoday.com/books/ (e-Book & Paperback are now available).   Shop on Amazon using this link, to support the Podcast: http://www.amazon.com//ref=as_sl_pc_tf_lc?&tag=sputod0c-20&camp=216797&creative=446321&linkCode=ur1&adid=104DDN7SG8A2HXW52TFB&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spuntoday.com%2Fcontact%2F   Shop on iTunes using this link, to support the Podcast: https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewTop?genreId=38&id=27820&popId=42&uo=10   Shop at the Spun Today store for Mugs, T-Shirts and more: https://viralstyle.com/store/spuntoday/tonyortiz   Outro Song #1: Welcome to New York City – Cam’Ron, Jay-Z, Juelz Santana Outro Song #2: Yeo Man – Cam’Ron Outro Song #3: Volvio La Traicionera - Aventura   SpunToday Logo by: http://pcepeda.com/ Sound effects are credited to: http://www.freesfx.co.uk   Listen on: iTunes, Stitcher, Pocket Casts, Google Play and YouTube

Guests: Greg Valliere - Chief Global Strategist at Horizon Investments Jared Dillian - Investment Strategist at Mauldin Economics and editor of "The Daily Dirt Nap" a market newsletter for market professionals See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Xander Snyder and Jacob L. Shapiro talk about the geopolitical consequences of new U.S. sanctions against Russia, North Korea and Iran.Sign up for free updates on topics like this! Go here: goo.gl/hfTxMX TRANSCRIPT: Jacob L. Shapiro: Hello, everyone, welcome to another Geopolitical Futures Podcast. I'm Jacob Shapiro. I am joined once more by Xander Snyder. Xander, it's always good to talk to you. XS: Thanks, good to be here. JLS: We've been trying some different things with the podcast in the last couple weeks. Last week, Kamran and I had a little discussion about democracy and geopolitics. We appreciated all your feedback on that. Before that, we were doing some talk about history and battles and geopolitical contingencies. This week, we're going to go in a little bit of different direction. We're going to just try and take a sense of what's been going on this week in geopolitics in 30 minutes and try and talk through some of the major issues and the things that have happened this week that might actually have staying power beyond the week itself. Because some many of the things itself, so many of the headlines and the things that happen in the news really don't matter that much once the headline is out there. So we're going to try and get to the deep stuff that we think is going to matter in the long term. And the major thing I think, Xander, that really affected this week was not just the House but the Senate also apparently has just passed sanctions not just on Russia – although that's getting most of the attention – but also on North Korea and also on Iran. Just this morning as we're recording before we went live, I saw that a bunch of different news organizations were reporting that North Korea also tested some kind of missile this morning too. We don't know whether it was an ICBM or something else. But it seems to me the real magnetic issue of this week has been sanctions, would you agree? XS: Yeah seems like a lot has been revolving around sanctions this week. And very quick timeline of it is back in mid-June, the Senate overwhelmingly approved some form of sanctions and then it kind of got negotiated between the House and the Senate for another month. And then the House earlier this week passed sort of a new and improved version that both houses had agreed to by I think it was like 419 to 3, an overwhelming majority, and then the Senate passed it again with an overwhelming majority of like 98 to 2. And one of the big changes in the new version of the sanctions bill – well compared to the sanctions that were passed against Russia in 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea and took control of that area of Ukraine – basically ties President Trump's hands in a lot of ways. So the way that some of these clauses were phrased in the original sanctions bill was saying the president “may” choose to implement one or several of the different measures that are provided for in the sanctions bill. And in this new one that just passed both houses essentially an amendment was proposed that changes the word “may” to the word “shall,” so the president shall implement all of these sanctions. And what that does is it removes a certain degree of power from the president to decide who sanctions who or what corporate entity sanctions are going to be levied against. And it also reduces his ability to issue waivers against individuals or individual entities that do have sanctions levied against them. So that's just kind of like the starting point for how a lot of activity has revolved around these sanctions over the last week. JLS: Yeah, I think one of the interesting things to point out is that both President Obama and President Bush tried to really reset relations with Russia in a more positive direction. That was definitely something Trump wanted to do as well. And Trump has encountered the same types of geopolitical obstacles externally that both Obama and Bush did. I mean, there are just interests that are divergent between Russia and the United States and no matter how much Putin and Trump may or may not like each other, those issues seem to come to the forefront. But Trump also seems to have on top of that, a domestic situation in the United States that is blocking him from doing anything even in some of the foreign policy realms, right? You talked a little bit about how it's enforcing and making Trump raise a bunch of sanctions that were only there through executive order in which he had some options with. But so Congress is basically forcing his hand in that bit. But there are also some parts of the sanctions that relate to energy and I know that you did a closer look at some of the energy-related stuff, especially in terms of where Russian energy goes, so do you want to talk a little bit about that? XS: Yeah, I think the point that you make speaks to one way that we look at the world, which is leaders always encounter constraints and frequently they encounter constraints that they were not anticipating on the campaign trail. So they're able to use boastful rhetoric and you know say almost anything that they want to. Either not realizing or maybe recognizing but not playing up the fact that they're not nearly going to be able to do as much as they say they're going to when they get into office. And this has just been sort of another one of these constraints in the foreign policy world that Trump has run into when he's been in office. Now, the European Commission and Germany in particular have taken umbrage, they've been a little concerned with the set of sanctions that were passed this week. This is because the sanctions bill provide for measures to be taken against companies with residents in any country really that have a certain degree of involvement with Russian energy companies, and I think the threshold is something like 30 percent investment in a joint venture project. Antonia, one of our senior analysts, wrote a Reality Check on that earlier this week in a little bit more detail so you can go read up on that there. But the idea is that since the sanctions can potentially target companies that are not Russia, and Germany has some energy projects that they've co-invested with Russia because Germany gets a lot of their both natural gas and oil from Russia but especially their natural gas. And now they're concerned that potentially both their companies and potentially their energy securities to a certain degree can be threatened by these sanctions. And they're saying, “Well, you know, the U.S. shouldn't have the right to target non-Russian companies when the point is to go after Russia with these sanctions.” So that's been one of the other issues that's kind of arisen surrounding the sanctions bill. JLS: Yeah. And I think one thing to point out there is that the sanctions themselves I don't think are the major story. Sanctions have been levied a lot of different times by a lot of different countries and I wrote a piece the other day that sort of talked about how sanctions are usually, not always but usually a fairly ineffective obstacle. It's not the sanctions so much that are interesting. I don't think the sanctions are going to compel Russian behavior one way or another. It is though I think from the Russian point of view, a provocation. So especially with the sanctions that are being levied against Russia in this particular case, Russia's not going to be able to not respond in some kind of way. And we've already seen in the last couple days, I would call it weird stuff happening in the Ukraine. Just electricity being cut off to one region, the stuff about Saakashvili, the former president of Georgia who became a Ukrainian citizen and was a governor of Odessa in Ukraine. His citizenship has been revoked. There have just been some signs that Ukraine seems to be feeling a little bit more willing to push back against Russia. And of course, the big thing was that the new special representative to Ukraine that the State Department appointed suggested that the United States would look into arming Ukraine with defensive weaponry. So all of those things mean not that sanctions are going to do what the United States wants necessarily. I think Russia is going to perceive this as a challenge and Russia's going to have to try and push back if not in the Ukraine, probably somewhere else along the periphery and I think that's why this issue is going to be important going forward for a while. XS: Yeah just before I hopped on to do the podcast, I was reading that Russia has begun to retaliate a little. They've basically begun kicking out some U.S. diplomats and reduced the number of U.S. diplomats in Russia to the number of Russian diplomats in the U.S. which was fewer and have begun to seize some U.S. diplomats' vacation properties and some warehouses I guess that were used to store U.S. diplomats' goods. So that's something sort of short term but another way you can look at sort of Russia's flexibility in terms of how they can retaliate in a larger way, I mean one way you could look at that is in the energy world because a lot of Europe is dependent on Russia for its supply of energy. Europe imports really a lot of its energy needs. I think Germany in particular imports approximately 60 percent of its energy consumption. And something like 55-plus percent of its natural gas consumption comes from Russia. So there is some deeper structural dependencies on Russia in the energy market that actually gives it the ability to retaliate at least against U.S. allies in a somewhat more serious way than just kicking out a couple of diplomats. JLS: Yeah, absolutely. Moving on from Russia, though, Russia is not the only player in the sanctions regime. I think that it's getting the most attention because of the complicated and convoluted relationship between Donald Trump and Russia and the United States, but the bill originally was not designed as a sanctions bill for Russia. It was designed as a sanctions bill against specifically Iran. And you know both Russia and North Korea were things that were added on later. Iran and North Korea are both countries that the United States has been having trouble with for a long time and has been trying to use sanctions with for a long time. And it seems that Congress is trying to reinforce that method but I'm not sure it's going to work. You know Iran really was able to come to terms with the United States not so much because of sanctions I think but really because the Islamic State rose and broke Iranian strategy. And Iran really had to measure what was the more important enemy and I think that they prioritized defeating the Sunni Arab force in the Islamic State over basically the nuclear program that they were developing and when you see Iran testing and still using missiles. I don't think they've necessarily abandoned that program. They may not be enriching uranium and I think they are probably abiding by the terms of the deal. But that doesn't mean that they aren't working on other parts of a delivery system. And on top of that we have North Korea which seems to not be going away and I know that a lot of listeners probably have been hearing us talking for a while about how the situation in North Korea is deteriorating and the tensions are high. But we continue to see it that way. You know, I think one of the things that we're doing is there's probably some kind of negotiation or diplomatic process going on there. And you know, I think there's a lot of misdirection coming out of the U.S. right now. On the one hand, you get the three carrier battlegroups there. Then the carrier battlegroups disperse and you have the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff saying, “We're going to give the diplomatic route a couple months.” And we'll see from that so. You've looked a lot at North Korea, Xander, what is your sort of current read on U.S. posture towards North Korea and how do you see it going forward in the next couple weeks after this test, especially if it turns out to be an ICBM that was tested? XS: Yeah, we are still waiting on confirmation on whether it was or not. If this most recent launch was another ICBM, that would appear obviously a lot more threatening because it could potentially show that North Korea is making progress on developing a delivery system that could potentially deliver some sort of nuclear warhead. We don't believe that they're there yet even though they may have missiles that can fly further now as we saw earlier this month. As far as North Korea generally goes, sanctions like you said they generally don't work. When we say generally, we don't mean never. I think you cited a report from the Peterson Institute in your piece that said something like two-thirds of the time sanctions prove ineffective. And North Korea has been sanctioned repeatedly for 20 years and all we've seen them do in that time is basically start a nuclear weapons program, develop it, get to a point where they are very close to, you know, within a year or two having some sort of miniaturized nuclear warhead, potentially having intercontinental delivery capabilities. So sanctions just don't really seem to work a whole lot about North Korea and if you try to put yourself in the mindset of the North Korean regime, it kind of makes a little bit more sense. You know, a lot of people think that Kim Jong Un is just crazy and that the Kim regime is insane, that you know it's this terribly oppressive autocratic regime, and it is an oppressive autocratic regime. But a perspective that doesn't get out there as frequently, is that this is a regime that's been around for 70 years. They've withstood the collapse of their biggest patron, the Soviet Union, for several decades. And they've gotten through increasing pressure placed on them from the United States and arguably China recently, although those numbers are a little bit harder to read. I think it's difficult to claim that a regime that's been around and has stayed stable for that long is truly insane. They have to be acting at least to some degree rationally. And if you look at the effects or lack of effects of sanctions on North Korea, you know, the regime believes that it is at constant threat from the United States and if it gives on some of the things that the United States wants it to give on, that it's going to be at even a greater risk of if not collapse then losing its control on the governing institutions in North Korea. So for a regime that feels completely threatened for survival, it seems like sanctions are, they're going to be more willing to just accept that their country will be hurting than to just give up control, give up reins of power on their country. JLS: Yeah, and I think that the other side of this is that sanctions are probably not going to compel North Korea to give up its program. Like you said, if they haven't given it up already with the sanctions that have been levied against them, it's doubtful that this new batch of sanctions is going to be the one to do it. But I think the other thing that this brings up is that everybody is wondering what is China's role in helping manage North Korea and how much can they actually do? And one of the things that we looked at this week was new data out of Korea that said that while Chinese imports from North Korea have decreased by about 25 percent year-on-year, their exports to North Korea have gone up quite a bit, almost 20 percent that way. And so that's not a new thing, we've seen data from China itself confirming that earlier in the year and Donald Trump even tweeted, you know, about how China wasn't living up to its end of the bargain in terms of taking care of North Korea. But I think this is a good way of showing also the sort of ineffective logic of sanctions because, OK, so you've sanctioned North Korea, but the hard thing with sanctions – it's also the hard thing in getting something like an OPEC agreement to work – is making sure that everybody does it in the exact same way. The problem is that everybody doesn't have exactly the same interests. So you can't necessarily expect everyone to carry out the sanctions the same way or to be completely 100 percent consistent. So maybe China, it's dealing with North Korea in the way that it's dealing with it, perhaps not in the way that the United States wants. Are you just going to go and sanction China then? Like where does it stop? The problem at the end of the day is that North Korea is developing a nuclear weapon that can strike the United States. And you can sanction North Korea all you want and you can sanction China all you want, you know, unless those sanctions are going to compel someone to stop developing a nuclear program or are going to compel China to do something to stop North Korea from developing that program ­­– and I am not convinced China can do anything to stop that – it's not really going to work, right? XS: It seems unlikely, yeah. One thing that we are focused on that we've talked about before, certainly internally, I think maybe we've written some Watch List items on it, is whether or not the United States will be effective in obtaining sanctions on imports of crude oil to North Korea. Late last year, there were sanctions placed on North Korean coal exports to China, and that was seen as a significant or at least sort of a milestone in the development of the sanctions regime against North Korea because that's one way that North Korea receives a lot of hard foreign currency from abroad. But it seems like their supply of crude oil hasn't technically changed that much, and Tillerson mentioned a couple weeks ago that that's one thing that they would be seeking through conversations with China. But North Korea, there's some reports, some data that seems to indicate that they get a lot of crude oil both from China and Russia. It's hard to know because those numbers are no longer officially published by China and I don't think they've ever been officially published by Russia so they come through like North Korean defectors who supposedly have been dealing with imports from Russia. So that might be one area of sanctions where, if somehow the U.S. could pull that off, it might change the game a little bit because it could impact North Korea's ability to wage a conventional war. But there's no reason, or I can't see any reason at least, why China would get in line behind that or certainly why Russia would. It seems like they would want to extract pretty significant concessions from the U.S. in other parts of the world in order to actually implement a sanctions regime like that. JLS: Yeah, and then of course, the last piece to the puzzle of these sanctions here is Iran. And I think Iran has fallen a little bit by the wayside in terms of people's attention and in terms of even the U.S. attention. You know, before he was secretary of defense, James Mattis was very, very focused on Iran in general when he was thinking about U.S. foreign policy. And I think that Iran is going to become more and more of an issue for the United States. I think the Middle East is going to become more and more of an issue for the United States, not necessarily because of Iran itself but because the battle against the Islamic State is progressing. I don't think that it's imminently over. I think the Islamic State is going to stand and fight for quite a while longer. But you can sort of begin to see the end game for the Islamic State and for defeating this particular iteration of the Islamic State. And I think that you're not going to get peace out of that. What you're going to get is that the coalition that formed against ISIS is going to break apart and there's going to be a lot of power vacuums all over the Middle East that different countries are going to be looking to fill, and I think Iran is the one that is most aggressively pursuing those things. So we've had a couple years here with a very uneasy understanding between the United States and between Iran. I don't expect the nuclear deal to fall apart anytime soon or anything like that. And like I said, I think we're still looking at another year maybe two of the Islamic State being a major actor. But I think if you start thinking about the Middle East five years, 10 years out, and you think about what's going to happen once the Islamic State loses some of its what core territory is left remaining to it. Iran and the United States don't see eye to eye in the Middle East. The United States is trying to reconstruct a balance of power there and Iran is trying to set itself up as a regional hegemon. It is expending a lot of money and a lot of even its own soldiers in Iraq, in Syria, even in Lebanon with its relationship with Hezbollah to try and make that come to fruition. So I don't think that these sanctions themselves will be that consequential in terms of the relationship between the United States and Iran, but I think that relationship overall is probably trending in a negative direction. I don't think that we should think for a moment that just because the nuclear accord happened a couple years ago, that things are going to stay rosy there. XS: You mentioned a couple of minutes ago that your of Iran's acquiescence to the nuclear accord was not due to the prior sanctions regime implemented by the U.S. but rather the regional challenge it faced by a potential Sunni leader, ISIS. Could you explain a little bit more what you mean by that? JLS: Sure, and I don't want to fall into the fallacy of saying that one thing is the most determinative or deciding thing, right? Like obviously all these things were working in concert together. And I do think that the sanctions that the U.S. carried out against Iran in 2010, they certainly hurt the Iranian economy. We have plenty of evidence in terms of shrinking GDP and people not buying Iranian oil across the board that indicated that Iran's economy was hurting and that average, everyday Iranians were hurting. Again, though, when you have a country like Iran that has for so long been a U.S. enemy and frankly has some reason to think of the U.S. as an enemy. The U.S. was involved in trying to – I mean, not trying – helped a military coup in Iran in 1953. This is not a country that has a reason to trust necessarily United States motives. So I am saying that to say in the same way that we were talking about North Korea and we're saying, “Well, are sanctions really going to affect a regime that has already sacrificed so much and which has such a level of sort of autocracy and dedication in the population itself?” I sort of see Iran the same way. Iran is a very proud country with a very well-defined national identity, and I don't think that Iran is going to bend just because the United States or the West even is trying to make Iran feel things economically. I think what Iran did was, I think that before 2010, they saw a very real chance of extending their influence from Tehran all the way to the Mediterranean Sea. Iraq was in shambles and that's a majority Shiite Arab country, so they thought that they could dominate there. You had Syria, which was under the control of Bashar al-Assad and that was another Iranian – I don't want to say client state, but another Iranian ally in the region and definitely looked towards Iran for guidance and money and things. And then you had Hezbollah, which had basically taken over large parts if not all of Lebanon and is that rare militant group that has gone from militant group to governing group, and has done that fairly well. That was the story in 2010. There was an arc of Shiite influence going to the Mediterranean and things looked very good for Iran. That all fell apart because ISIS rose in Iraq and significantly challenged the Iranian idea of stability there. Bashar al-Assad faced rebels in his own country, which ISIS eventually came to capitalize on. Brought Hezbollah into that fight, so Hezbollah can no longer focus on annoying Israel or doing any of the other proxy things that it does. It's committed to almost a conventional-style war in Syria. So you had all of these strategic things just fall apart on Iran, and you have to understand that for Iran, it's Iran's Ukraine, basically. You know we talked earlier about how Russia has such a deep interest in Ukraine. Iraq and the state of things beyond the Zagros mountains in that direction is the same type of thing for Iran. So I think sanctions played a role, and I think sanctions hurt the Iranian economy, and I think it would certainly be hard for Iran to go back to where it was before. We've seen very high GDP growth numbers out of their economy, and I think that both Iran and some of the Western companies that are partnering with Iran would make real sanctions hard to enforce. But overall, when I look at the deciding factors over why that deal had to be made, the United States decided that it needed to defeat ISIS and it needed to defeat ISIS first and then it could deal with other problems later. And I think Iran sort of saw the same thing. They were worried about ISIS not just taking over Syria and knocking out one of their client states along the way to the Mediterranean but also significantly threatening Baghdad, and it's not an idle threat and it's not something that they were imagining. I mean Saddam Hussein – the Sunnis were ruling but it was not only a secularist regime – but the point is that was Iran's mortal enemy. They fought one of the worst wars that's not talked about I think in the 20th century between 1980 and 1989. So that's kind of what I meant about that. I think that the United States and Iran, the sanctions stuff is all surface level. The deeper problem there is that the United States wants a balance of power in that region, and Iran wants to be the power in that region. And for as long as that's the case – and I don't see that stopping anytime soon – they are going to butt heads, and sanctions aren't going to do anything to change that underlying reality. XS: So despite these conflicting long-term divergences in national interests, countries can still find ways to cooperate on short-term security interests? JLS: Yeah, absolutely. I mean the United States and Russia are definitely at odds against each other in Ukraine. They're tacitly cooperating in Syria. I mean that goes underreported, I think. I mean there's no way that the United States could have the assets running around that it does in Syria and Russia could have the assets that has running around in Syria and there not be some level of coordination. And when we look at the U.S.-backed forces in the region, especially the Syrian Kurds and the Syrian Democratic Forces, and we look at what the Syrian Army is doing, which is backed by Russia, you can see a coherent strategy of basically trying to cut the ground out from underneath ISIS. And sure maybe there's not a formalization or maybe they're not having tea and cookies in the afternoon together, but there's definitely some level of communication between the United States and Russia on that issue. So yeah, it's very rare that you have a relationship between two countries that is just totally hostile and has no bounds for cooperation. I would say one example, though, of where there isn't a lot of – there's really no grounds of cooperation that I can think of between North Korea and the United States. Can you think of anything there? XS: I mean not really. North Korea's core security imperative is to deter an attack from the United States, which requires developing a weapon which would violate one of the United States' core security imperatives, which is keeping North Korea from having a deliverable nuclear weapon. JLS: And I mean one of the results of North Korea being such a closed regime to the rest of the world is that North Korea really does not on a global stage have a lot of power that it can play with or bargain with, right? There's nothing that North Korea can do for the United States in East Asia if the U.S. did want to make some kind of deal. Whereas Iran is a powerful country and has power over a lot of different actors that the United States sometimes has trouble interacting with. In that sense, Iran is much more like China. China is trying to present itself as an actor that can help the United States or can find common ground with the United States so the United States should cooperate with it. North Korea doesn't really function that way. North Korea really is shut off and is really crouched into a defensive posture. Mostly because I don't think there is any other real way for them to do it. And in some sense, they've succeeded. They have created a situation that is incredibly difficult even for very powerful countries like China and the United States to deal with. XS: So if you're interested in this stuff, we've written a lot about sanctions but really about how sanctions sit on top of a lot of deeper, underlying structural causes for why we see nations acting the way they do. We've written a lot about that this week. You can check out the RC that Jacob you did yesterday. Antonia published one on sanctions earlier this week. I will be having a piece that will analyze Europe's energy dependency on Russia and perhaps give some sense of how Russia could retaliate there and that will published on Mauldin Economics, our partner's website, on Monday. And that should give you a bit of a deeper understanding of what's really going on behind these sanctions. JLS: Yeah, and I think it will be an interesting exercise of maybe 3-6 months from now, Xander, we sit down and we start a podcast and we see where these sanctions are and what impact they've actually had over the course of the last 3-6 months. XS: Let's do it. JLS: Yeah. On that note, thanks, everyone, for listening. We're glad you are enjoying the podcast, we will catch you next week. See you out there.

George Friedman joins the podcast this week to talk about indicators that suggest the U.S. is gearing up to attack North Korea. Sign up for free updates on topics like this! Go here: hubs.ly/H06mXwR0 TRANSCRIPT: Jacob L. Shapiro: Hello everyone from Orlando, Florida. I am here with George Friedman this week who's joining us for the podcast. Hi George, how's it going? George Friedman: I get by, how are you? JLS: I'm doing alright. We're here for Mauldin Economics' Strategic Investment Conference and we decided to take a step away and put out this podcast this week for y'all. So the main thing that we want to talk about today is North Korea. George actually started off the conference proceedings here with something of a bang when he laid out some intelligence that we've been picking up from North Korea that seems to suggest that the United States is more likely than less likely to strike North Korea so George how about you lay out for podcast listeners exactly what you've been seeing? GF: Well to begin with, Business Insider published something that I said the war was imminent, which I didn't say but Business Insider wanted it to be. What basically we saw last week was first another carrier, the Reagan which is based in Japan being deployed toward the Korean peninsula. We also some very heavy exercises, some of which were scheduled, some not, in South Korea. We also saw some very heavy brass including the Chief of Naval Operations had been back visiting Guam. Guam is a very important because Guam is the strategic base for the bombers: B1s, B2s, B52s – will be coming out of there if there is an attack. And finally, we saw something, which is interesting, which is that the Guam Chamber of Commerce on May 31st will be getting a briefing from DHS people, Department of Homeland Security, on civil defense. Now, what really struck me is I haven't seen the term civil defense since I was a kid and suddenly it shows up in Guam and oddly enough all the other different movements that were taking place while not insignificant were not as significant to me as this. Why would they be holding briefings in Guam on civil defense? And that really stuck with me and then I went back to what I saw happening in February. In February, there was a kind of fundamental shift in U.S. policy toward Korea. What had happened was the Koreans appear to have launched a missile fueled by solid state fuel. Now that's important, because if it's liquid fuel then satellites will have some warning time that it's being fueled and getting ready to go. You don't get that warning time with solid fuel. It's ready to go from the very beginning and you won't even know that it's fueled. Now there's a question obviously of what state the development of a warhead is because it's not easy to build a nuclear warhead. It's pretty easy to detonate a device on the ground, much harder to build a warhead that you can fit on top of missile that can survive the launch and the reentry. So, when the solid fuel issue emerged, suddenly the United States had to reevaluate its position. And if everyone recalls back in March, we started having all sorts of meetings, pronouncements on both sides, hysterical threats coming out of North Korea, just all the operatic things that lead up to a conflict. Then, the Chinese President Xi visited and Trump tweeted that if the Chinese help us with our problem with Korea, we would be much more forthcoming on trade issues. Now this has always been the case in U.S. policy going back for years but interestingly enough no one has ever tweeted it before, which I thought was charming. I thought isn't that nice? You know, it was very nice to let us all know what we already know. Things went quiet and were quiet until very recently. But either the Chinese didn't help or the Chinese were unwilling to take the step you needed and in the end, we wound up in the last week with some significant movements of weapons into position that remind me at least of the kind of buildup we had during Desert Storm and other things of that sort. This is sort of the way we go to war. Sometimes, we're hoping that they will accept this and capitulate. Saddam Hussein didn't. We're in a position either to bluff or play as the other side wants. JLS: I want to push back a little bit against you to drill down deeper into this and one question I asked you yesterday was that when we think about North Korea and in general when we think of all regimes, we think of regime survival as being the most important thing. So first of all, why would North Korea get to a state where it would do something that they know would threaten the United States, they know that the United States is going to see this and it's going to react in a particular way. And then the other side of that equation is, what is in it for the United States to actually intervene here? Why not just let them have it? Are the North Koreas really going to fire it and risk mutually assured destruction because if they did fire something at the United States obviously many people would die but the United States would respond with overwhelming force and if you think through your method, it's always said that actors don't do things that are going to lead to their outright destruction. How do you respond to those two questions? GF: Well that's a shockingly good question, and don't let it happen again. (laughs). Ok so first of all, the North Koreans and every country in the world is aware that the United States has a nuclear fetish. If you have a nuclear program, we're going to negotiate with you. If you have a nuclear weapon, we're not going to mess with you. The North Koreans badly want to reach a stage where they have a nuclear weapon. They survived very improbably the collapse of the Soviet Union and the transformation of China into a quasi-non-Maoist country. That they survived has been an extraordinary achievement. That they will continue to survive is their fundamental goal and they understand that South Korea really doesn't want North Korea to collapse. Because then they would have to do what West Germany did with East Germany and this would be very expensive. The Chinese are happy to have a buffer between them and South Korea. And very frankly, they use the North Koreans as kind of a tool. Every time, the U.S. presses the Chinese, North Koreans do something insane, the Americans go the Chinese and say “Hey, help us out.” They do, they come back to the table, we say now let's get back to those trade talks and they say what? We just bailed you out and you want to talk about trade talks? It's a good game, it's not an iron clad game, but it's one that they've been willing to do. What the North Koreans want to do of course is to move from having a program to having a weapon. The United States is actually fairly content in letting them have a program. But they don't want them to have a weapon. You asked why? First because once they have a weapon, we really can't take steps against that. Even if they are not going to hit us, they might hit the Japanese or parts of South Korea or something like that. And second, once that they have that cover, they can build ICBMs that put us in reach. Now, the probability of them using it is extremely low. But if you're the president of the United States and you are facing something that is unlikely but catastrophic, you have pledged to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. That's a very serious oath to take. And you know all military men do, I am not sure the president's oath has that in it but it should. In any case, the president of the United States is going to look at very differently, what kind of risk can he take? I think that North Koreans decided, looking at what appears looking from the outside chaos in Washington, that if there was a time to slip this through, this was the moment. The chaos from Washington is real but it doesn't really define the posture of the American military. They remain fairly aware of what's going on in the world. So, what happened is that with the evolution we saw with the missiles, the questions arose, how confident are we in our intelligence that the Koreans aren't approaching a viable, nuclear weapon? And the answer comes back, if you are sitting at a coffee shop and BS'ing with the gang, not a chance. If you are secretary of defense, that kind of confidence can cost you. So, they entered into the zone of uncertainty where we aren't quite sure what they have or what they don't have and that pushes us to make a decision. And the problem is that if they end up having the weapon, options are closed off. So for many, this is the last moment to exercise those options. And so, a carrier began to move, exercises were held. Two other carriers on the West Coast of the United States, they haven't moved yet. If they move, that will be more of an indicator. But certainly, we've moved into a more aggressive posture. Plus, the new President Moon of South Korea took a day off. This should not be such an exciting event except in South Korea apparently taking a day off is really a big deal for the president. You don't do that. What he did is he went sort of incommunicado for 24 hours. Now personally, he might have wanted to get drunk, I don't know. Or he went into some serious consultations of various sorts. It's hard to tell. But the indicators are upticking to the United States at least establishing the possibility of an attack and possibly prepare for one. JLS: Do you think this is going to be the nature of threats to the United States going forward in the next decades? I mean when we look at the things the United States has been involved in the world most seriously, it's you know the Islamic State, North Korea, things that threaten the United States in some fundamental way. But it's not the Soviet Union, it's not even Russia or China, it's not even going toe-to-toe with any kind of big power. I know you've written about the United States developing imperial power, developing imperial power, trying to develop any kind of self-awareness about its kind of imperial power. So do you think this is what U.S. conflict is going to look like in the coming decades or does this distract from some of the real state-on-state issues that the United States has with bigger countries? GF: During the 20th century, the United States had two major systemic wars, the first and the second World War. And I would define a systemic war as when the entire international system destabilizes and you have large scale conflicts between nation-states, sometimes called peer-to-peer conflicts. We also had lots of minor interventions, we went into Mexico, we involved ourselves in the Philippines and had quite a civil war there, intervened in a civil war. We intervened in Nicaragua, in Haiti. So, in fact the two types of war, one has a very limited political objective, sometimes attainable, sometimes not. The other is a systemic war whether there's an unlimited possibility of disaster or triumph, where the world is changing its entire shape, I call that systemic wars because the entire system is reshaping itself. Every century has had some form of systemic war because nations rise and fall and they destabilize it. When we look at the 19th century, it was Napoleonic wars where literally everything was on the table. In the 18th century, it was the Seven Years' War which once again everything was on the table. So, the question is not is this way wars are going to be? The answer is there's always two kinds of wars and my assumption is that the 21st century is not going to be the first century in which there is not a systemic war. So, we will have large-scale war fare. We'll also have more limited political wars, these are the ones we can afford to lose and we don't do very well in these. Vietnam was an example of a limited war that we lost and the republic survived very nicely and moved on and the Soviet Union collapsed. Iraq has not yet been lost but it's doing a very good imitation. So too Afghanistan. These are the regional wars that a great power may engage in. And let me say something about imperial wars before everybody gets upset. An empire in my mind is not a formal entity like the British Empire was, like the Roman Empire was. It can be an informal reality. It is a situation of overwhelming economic presence throughout the world and great military power. The United States is one quarter of the world's economy. That means that everything the United States does anywhere in the world is going to affect somebody. The United States is also the only global military power. It became that in World War II when it invaded Europe and the Japanese Empire simultaneously in 1944, which was an enormous achievement. The United States doesn't really want to be an empire. It'd rather watch the Super Bowl. But empire is a condition, it is not a decision, it is not a formal structure. It is simply that everything you do is going to tick somebody off. And sometimes they are going to try to do something against you. The United States is in that condition. It really hasn't accepted what it is, it has no ongoing operating system for managing it. It is now in the process of understanding the limits of this power but also understanding the reality of that power. So, I think we will have wars like in the Middle East. We will probably have less than that as we get more prudent in what we select. But always the war that matters is the systemic war, that's the one you can't afford to lose. So, if you lose in Vietnam and you lose in Iraq and you lose everywhere and probably if you lose in Korea, life goes on. World War II as the Japanese and the Germans learned, this was not good to lose this war. It really meant a great deal. The Russians understood that and the British and the Americans as well, although the probability of being defeated was slight. Still, we must understand that the idea that because you're having these wars there will never again be a systemic war is unrealistic. And the idea that because we have systemic wars, we should ignore the political challenges is also unrealistic. We have both kinds of wars. And the military unfortunately will frequently prepare for all the political wars and then have to suddenly reorganize for the systemic war. JLS: So, taking us back to North Korea a little bit, you actually said at one point that you thought that there was maybe a 70 percent chance around that of war breaking out between the United States and North Korea. If we're wrong, what does that look like? What do these movements then mean and then what happens afterwards? GF: Well the nice things about these movements is you can turn around and go home. Which is to say, if this is a bluff to unnerve the North Koreans, at the same time that they are launching missiles, if that's what this is, you can decide what to do later. If you wait with a deployment, then a window opens that you can't close because they are not there. So, it's a prudent move that gives you options. Now, one of the things to remember is that we're unsure of what the North Koreans have. We do know that the North Koreans have a very powerful counterpunch. They have masses of artillery just north of the DMZ within range of Seoul which is a city of 25 million people, which we are partnered with through alliance and which we have responsibility not to destroy their capital and 25 million people. The North Koreans may estimate that we will be restrained because of the deterrent threat that they have toward the city. They may also assume the United States remains convinced that they don't have nuclear weapons and will wait. And that may be true. But they're betting at this point that they can bluff a nuke well enough to say: you don't know if we have one or not, you don't know if we got it in a missile or in a boat heading to San Francisco harbor, you don't know. And so that achieves for them, the primary goal: don't mess with us. Their primary goal is regime survival. And do not think of them as stupid, and the kid may be fat but he's not crazy. He's enjoying life and he's also not oddly enough the sole ruler of North Korea. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a complex mechanism. It has a leadership that lives extremely well, does business around the world under very different circumstances. They have shown no suicidal indications. This is not Japanese kamikazes, and this is not ISIS. These are people who survived and want to continue to survive. They look at the United States as extremely irrational and totally unpredictable. So what's interesting in this is, they look at the United States as a dangerous country. They still haven't figured out why we bombed Kosovo. I am having trouble, I've always had trouble understanding this, but they don't look at us as a rational actor. They look at us as a country torn internally, externally incomprehensible, extremely dangerous and powerful, that they have to manage and manipulate. And that's what they're trying to do. The Americans look at them as if they were ISIS, that they want to die. That they are so committed to the fat boy that they just wanna die. And that's also a kind of crazy view but it leads us to have very extreme reactions to their behavior. They have extreme reactions to ours. Neither side understands each other, which is at this moment why the United States within its own parameters may choose to become aggressive earlier rather than later. JLS: I want to ask you one more question, it's going to be a little bit of a curve ball. Would you say that North Korea is the last totalitarian state in the world from the age of totalitarian states or do you think it's just something completely different from the totalitarian states that ruled in the 1930s and 40s? GF: Let's define that, the totalitarian states, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany particularly had overarching ideologies and part of the regime was that everything was turning around that ideology and what made them totalitarian is that there was a totalistic view of the world that the public absorbed, much of them believed. And those that didn't were killed. That made it this way. This is more like what Karl Marx called an Oriental despotism and by that it is ruled by a family, not by a political party. It is ruled by a family that fights among itself apparently. But also has an infrastructure under it and it is infinitely more corrupt than Stalin or Hitler. So one of things you have to remember about totalitarian societies is the incorruptibility of the leader. Stalin really didn't steal very much. He didn't need to, but you know he didn't. Neither did Hitler, he was a very frugal person. Personal luxuries didn't apply to them because they were, like Robespierre, ascetic, they didn't do it. No one will ever call the North Korean leadership ascetic. No one will ever claim they actually believe in anything beyond survival, although they may claim. They do have a reign of terror. Now, the reign of terror must be distinguished from totalitarianism. It can be very good, it can be very efficient. There are other countries where it is terrifying to disagree. Saudi Arabia is not one that I would, you know, run feminism up the flag pole. So is it the only one? It's a wonderful example of Oriental despotism. It's not the only one but they do a mighty good job. JLS: Fair enough. Thanks for joining us George and thank you all for listening. As always you can write into us at comments@geopoliticalfutures.com if you have any suggestions for topics or any critiques or other things that you'd like us to take up in this podcast and we will see you all next week.

Mauldin Economics' John Mauldin sits down to discuss reforming the corporate tax code and helicopter money on Bloomberg Surveillance with Tom Keene and Michael McKee. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Patrick Cox produces unbiased and independent research in the field of transformational technology. He has worked closely with Nobel Prize-winning scientists and economists along with having over 200 of his editorials appear on the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and more. Patrick shares some insider science to Jason and his audience today and also talks about some very interesting medical advancements the media fails to report on.    Key Takeaways: 4:35 – Conviction and convenience do not live together, so you have to separate yourself from convenience.  7:10 – If you have plans to do great things, you are bound to find some resistance from your friends and family.  10:00 – You can't get more in life until you are grateful for what you have today.  14:00 – Birmingham property tour is coming up and Meet the Masters event is coming up in January.  18:00 – There's a lot of exciting things going on in science, but you wouldn't know that because the media is very poor at reporting science.  20:10 – Social security is under estimating our life spans. In reality, people will be living a lot longer.  24:30 – The government is obsessed with not putting out a drug that may have side effects, which Patrick believes is absurd when so many lives are at stake. A possible cure with side effects is better than no cure when people are dying.   27:00 – The FDA has not adapted to the new model of how personalized medicine works.  30:10 – Scientists did tests on a chemical compound called anatabine and found it be the most effective anti-inflammatory agent ever discovered.   34:00 – There are a number of ways you can rejuvenate the heart muscles when they've been damaged. We thought for a long time that these could not be repaired at all.  39:00 – The Japanese are leading in rejuvenation medicine because they understand their citizens are getting older and fewer Japanese are being born.   42:15 – We have the tech crowd pushing against the roadblocks that cutting-edge medicine is facing.    Mentioned In This Episode: http://www.jasonhartman.com/ http://www.patrickcoxdna.com/   https://www.mauldineconomics.com/

Michael Covel speaks with John Mauldin of Mauldin Economics. Mauldin is a noted financial expert, a New York Times best-selling author, a pioneering online commentator, and the publisher of one of the most widely read investment newsletters in the world. Mauldin and Covel discuss credit card rates and zero interest rate policy; the improper use of credit; debt spirals; central bank policies that keep whipsaw periods going; the actions in Japan and how they can spread across the world; the justifications that Mauldin sees behind the scenes; black swans and boom-bust periods; how the 2008 financial crisis wasn’t a true black swan event; the “why” behind zero interest rate policy; and the specter of Keynesianism over the world. For more information on John Mauldin, go to mauldineconomics.com. Want a free trend following video? Go to trendfollowing.com/win.

Ed D'Agostino is the GM of the Hard Assets Alliance and Publisher of Mauldin Economics. He joins the show to discuss the impacts he's seeing given recent developments in the buying and selling of gold and silver. Despite the bear market in precious metals, demand for physical is still incredibly strong. Ed breaks down the difference between the paper and physical metals markets and talks about premiums for metals in this turbulent market. The Hard Assets Alliance is one of the few vendors that is able to control premiums from skyrocketing. D'Agostino began his career in finance at a boutique investment house and later joined his largest client as Vice President of Business Development. In this capacity, Ed directed strategic growth initiatives while providing investment analysis and advisory services to the company's principals.  Prior to joining Mauldin Economics, Ed was Managing Director at a consultancy focused on business development in the financial sector. He has been instrumental in the start-up and expansion of several businesses. Ed's clients, including hedge funds, lenders, and investment publishers, relied on him to recruit and mentor analysts, develop controls and systems, and implement growth strategies.  In early 2012, Ed consulted with John Mauldin to develop the business plan for Mauldin Economics, and subsequently joined the company to build a strong editorial, research and analytical team. Ed and the growing team of analysts and financial editors at Mauldin Economics share a single-minded purpose—to produce the highest quality investment publications in the industry.  Find out more about the Hard Assets Alliance at www.hardassetsalliance.com. Visit Mauldin Economics at www.mauldineconomics.com.