Bill Armour and the host dissect America's widening wealth gap, where the top 20% own nearly 90% of stocks while young adults face stagnation amid corporate monopolies like Walmart. They warn that physical AI and robotics could cement a feudal system controlled by families like Musk and Bezos, displacing workers before productivity justifies valuations. The discussion emphasizes biblical inheritance principles, contrasting American philanthropy with French laws to argue that transferring wealth early enables home ownership and family stability, ultimately framing asset accumulation as a tool for God's glory rather than personal comfort. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Macroeconomic Update & Predictions00:03:28
Leave us a five star review on your favorite podcast platform.
I get it.
It's annoying.
Everybody asks, but I'm going to tell you why.
When you give us a positive review, what that does is it triggers the algorithm so that our podcast shows up on more people's news feeds.
You and I both know that this ministry is willing to talk about things that most ministries aren't.
We need this content for the glory of God to reach more people's ears.
About once a month, we try to give a macroeconomic update, a market update, how our stocks, precious metals, all these different things, looking at the economy as a whole, it matters because people matter.
We want to see Christians, especially Christian men, be successful in laying up treasure here on earth so that they might be able to pass that down to future generations.
At the end of the day, the Bible is clear that the love of money is the root of all kinds of things.
Of evil, but money itself is not inherently good or bad, money is a tool.
Right, the wealth of the wicked should be laid up for the righteous.
We want to see those who trust in Jesus, love Jesus, want to push forward the crown rights of King Jesus to grow in success, to grow in power, to grow in wealth, and to utilize all these things as tools not ends in themselves, but as tools, means towards pushing forward the glory of God and the good of his people.
Kind of in a nutshell, not to give the whole episode away, but one of the things that we'll be focusing on today is that in general, if you are older, if you're of the boomer generation, and you have the luxury of being able to have extra capital, extra finances invested in the stock market, then 2025 has probably been, in general, a pretty good year for you.
But if you are a young adult and maybe recently married or just had your first or second kid, This year has not been great for you.
Prices are more expensive than ever.
Real estate, trying to own your first home, is nearly impossible.
You don't have really any extra cash to be able to invest in the stock market or anything else.
And so you are struggling.
And the idea of maybe changing careers or switching jobs is a risk that nobody can afford to take.
If you leave gainful employment, you may not find it again.
That's kind of what we're going to be talking about today.
We're also going to be giving some predictions.
For what we see happening in the economy at large over the next couple of months, over the next couple of years, and long term.
In order to do this, we have invited on Bill Armour.
He's a representative of Genesis Gold.
He's come on the show now a number of times.
And basically, our idea is that we would have Bill come on speaking from financial expertise about once a month in order to help us give this macroeconomic update.
So that's the episode for today.
Let's go ahead and dive in.
All right, Bill Armour, welcome to the show.
I'll just right out of the gate, I'll ask you this.
Gold, Silver, And Bitcoin Outlook00:09:13
What do you think over the last month?
Would you want to be invested in Bitcoin or gold?
Well, I mean, I know Bitcoin has been on quite the bear cycle here.
And gold and silver on the flip side have been on the other end of that.
Silver's up about 20%, gold's up about 6%, about 17% for silver, but still.
So, and you see this, you know, time and time again with Bitcoin.
You kind of know what you're getting into, I think, or people should.
When you're in Bitcoin, that these kind of drops are pretty regular.
They happen.
Metals is much more of the conservative approach to wealth management.
But over the last month, two months, obviously, you'd be thrilled to be in gold and silver, and you're probably hoping you see that bounce back in Bitcoin for the time being.
Yep.
Well said.
As far as crypto, I'm not super bullish on.
Bitcoin, I am.
And I do think that at this point, it's worth clearly expressing the distinction between the two.
There is a dynamic difference between farts.
Coin 3000, you know, and Bitcoin.
So I do think that Bitcoin has stood the test of time.
I think it's going to be here to stay.
But Bitcoin, as anybody knows, crypto following Bitcoin follows a four year cycle.
The halving took place in April every four years, April of 2024, last year.
And what we saw after the halving, or actually before, was a spike that was a little bit unusual.
Bitcoin.
Kind of started rocketing up faster in this bull cycle than it has in previous four year cycles.
And I think part of that is because you had institutions entering the game.
So it wasn't just retail and some of your long standing, all the way since, you know, 2012, you know, Bitcoin crypto whales, individual private parties, but you had institutions like BlackRock, JP Morgan, different individuals purchasing mass amounts of Bitcoin.
And so it started to spike sooner.
Than ordinarily in the four year cycle.
But it seems like as institutions are coming in, I think your Bitcoin is going to continue to grow.
I think that it's a decent investment long term.
But I don't think that you're going to see some of the massive swings that you have in the past because you're going to have institutions holding on to mass amounts of Bitcoin and kind of stabilizing a little bit.
You're going to see not just institutions, hedge funds, and things like that, but Even nation states.
I think of El Salvador or America for that matter, buying Bitcoin.
So I think it will start to probably stabilize and not have as many massive swings.
But if you follow that four year cycle, just looking back to 2021, it was about this time of year that Bitcoin started to go back down.
And I think everybody kind of doesn't want to admit that the bull cycle might be over in this four year cycle, but it's possible that it's over.
I think it's possible that we get all the way down to.
As low as 74 75,000, and we might see another peak.
We might see in December a Santa type rally, you know, where Bitcoin gets back over a hundred thousand.
Um, but for it to make, you know, in the short run a new all time high getting into the 130s or something like that, uh, just in the next few months, I think is unlikely.
If we're panning out, if someone's saying, Hey, I want to invest in Bitcoin today and I'm going to hold on to it till 2030, I, yeah, I mean, gun to my head, I'd say that's probably a decent idea.
I think you'll do well with that.
Um, but Right now, crypto is pretty rough.
There's a lot of guys at McDonald's just posted.
I'll put it this way.
McDonald's just posted that they have all time record applications for employment.
So the crypto guys are going back to McDonald's, and that's not great.
Yeah.
And I think this is something we've talked about on a previous episode, Bill, but the way that Bitcoin and crypto largely trade with equities, I think is big here.
Just if I characterize the economy today and even the markets specifically, it's just a lot of sort of like looming, kind of impending.
Collapse.
I think a lot of people feel that whether it's the AI valuations and things going down there, or if it's the layoffs, right?
As we've seen corporate layoffs for the top 2000 equities spike recently, Amazon announcing layoffs and UPS announcing layoffs, so on and so forth.
The list goes on.
Thousands and thousands of jobs here and sort of that downward pressure on wages.
I think everyone kind of just feels afraid at the moment.
And so, as we've seen, the stock market really got hit pretty hard.
I'd say, you know.
In November, I mean, there was a pretty big drop with the tariffs in October as well, but November's been a pretty shaky month for the markets.
And Bitcoin has fallen right along with that.
And, you know, I just looked at gold today and gold's doing all right.
And so, would love, one, I guess, to hear your characterization of the market.
But also, maybe you could tease out a little bit of like how, you know, when I remember when I first heard of Bitcoin, it was supposed to be this stable, you know, gold like asset.
And, And it doesn't behave like gold at all.
Gold historically has been the safe haven.
It's when the stock market's tanking and bond yields are going down, all of these things, people are running to this asset to say, this will hold my money fast.
And so, talk, I guess, both of those things the market and the economy more broadly, but also gold and how it's playing into that.
Yeah, absolutely.
So, I think when you talk about Bitcoin as kind of a long term store of value, it's important to just remember how young.
You know, crypto as a whole is right.
Like when we talk, when we compare it against gold and silver, the track record is not, you know, 20, 30 years.
We're talking, you know, 2000 plus years for gold and silver.
So there's a lot more built up trust, whether there should or shouldn't be.
I mean, you know, they're both just assets.
I got it.
You know, there's some obviously utility to gold and obviously a lot more to silver that buoy that.
But at the end of the day, there is a level of trust worldwide with gold and silver that hasn't really arrived yet with Bitcoin and it may over time.
But when we start to see any sort of economic shakeout, Really, what it comes down to is people have a general sense of discomfort when they see Bitcoin dropping.
Okay, is it going to go down?
How much further is it going to go down?
Where you see, obviously, that happens to some degree with any asset, with gold as well and silver, but it happens a lot less because people understand A, that there's utility involved in this, that if all things aside, silver is still going to be in demand, right?
So for silver, for instance, we're in the fifth consecutive year with a deficit in terms of production versus usage.
It was just added to the 2026 strategic minerals reserve list.
You've got all these different things.
That's going to buoy the value of silver, and gold has that too with semiconductors and whatnot.
But that's going to buoy it.
And then you've got, with gold in particular, the really long track record.
So there's always going to be some of that.
And again, maybe over time, you see Bitcoin have some of these less drastic moves.
It's not uncommon to just look up and Bitcoin is down 5% or 6% or up 5% or 6% in a given day.
That would be huge news in gold and silver any given day if gold's up 6%.
So, not to say that these things can't happen, it's just that speaks to kind of that general piece.
As far as the economy as a whole, I think there is just a lot of uncertainty, is the word I would use, because you've got things like just the general AI.
Some people think it's a bubble, some people think it's justified, and it's really tough.
I mean, no one has a crystal ball.
No one knows in 20 years when we look back and say, wow, we were undervaluing everything.
Or do we say 20 years later, wow, that was a massive bubble?
How did we not see this coming?
And because of that, there's a lot of people that are kind of anxious, and you see that playing out.
Across the world stage.
That's one of the reasons that gold has done so well institutions, central banks, et cetera, are saying, we just really don't feel confident.
We don't love the general situations.
We'd like to find something.
It speaks a little bit also to just the general sense of the dollar and distrust in the dollar and other countries wanting to buy metals, wanting to separate from the dollar.
We're now under 50% of the world's reserve currency that the countries hold in terms of non native currency.
It's under 50%.
So it used to be 70, 80%.
So countries are moving away from the dollar.
So there's just, all in all, I would just paint it as a lot of uncertainty and fear is kind of ruling right now because no one really knows what that's going to look like, especially when you've got all of the valuation in the market is really plugged into about seven companies, the Mag7.
Well said.
AI Value And Tesla Robotics00:15:41
A couple things from the chat, real quick.
One, based homemaker asked, did they replace Wes with a Christmas tree?
And the answer, of course, is yes.
And it was a major upgrade.
It cannot be understated how much of an improvement we were given a choice.
It was a hard choice.
We were sad to see him go.
He's done a lot of good and we love him immensely.
But we were given a choice, Wes or Christmas tree.
And the answer was clear.
And I think we made the right choice.
As much as Wes contributed, I feel like the tree contributes more.
And so I'm grateful with that choice.
No, we missed Wes.
He should be back on Wednesday.
No, we didn't trade Wes.
He'll be back on Wednesday.
Go up a little bit in the comments, tech crew, if you will.
Go up a little bit.
Stryker.
Stryker is very, very upset with me.
Just so frustrated with me.
He said, You were asking a gold bug and a theologian.
I'm just saying they might have great general wisdom, but they may not have great insight in specifics.
I know what he's getting at.
This is what Stryker's getting at some of his previous comments.
Stryker loves him some Bitcoin.
It is quite obvious from the chat.
And so perhaps I just let off, you know, started on the wrong foot and was not clear.
So let me be clear.
I'll go out on a limb.
I love predictions because I'm perfectly comfortable coming out after the fact and saying, you know what, I was wrong.
All right.
So some people don't like predictions because the phrase I was wrong is something that they physically cannot utter.
Right.
And I'm looking at you, pastors.
There are a lot of people in this world, many of them happen to be ministers, that can never, ever, ever, ever admit that they were wrong.
By the grace of God, I'm perfectly comfortable doing so.
I've been wrong many times and I can be wrong again.
But because I'm comfortable admitting that I'm wrong, I'm also comfortable making predictions.
So here's a prediction.
I think that Bitcoin will be a million dollars.
And I think relatively soon.
I don't think in a couple months, but I think 2030, 2031, I think that it's possible.
And I think that in my lifetime, barring some kind of extreme tragedy, assuming that I live for another 30, 40 years, I think that we'll see a $10 million Bitcoin.
So I'm not bearish on Bitcoin.
To be abundantly clear, I think that Bitcoin is phenomenal, and I think that Bitcoin can do a lot of good.
I'm friends with some of the OG Bitcoiners, some of the guys who wrote the book, Thank God for Bitcoin.
And I agree with their basic premise.
I despise fiat currency.
I despise having the Fed holding a lever that can just make money cheap or make money expensive at will, turning on a printer.
I like that Bitcoin is finite.
I like that Bitcoin, there'll only be 21 million ever.
So I'm aware of the concept.
I am pro the concept.
All I'm saying is that in terms of the four year cycle, It could be over.
I personally don't think that even this cycle is over.
I think that we will still see Bitcoin crossing the $100,000 threshold, maybe even getting a new all time high, $130,000, $140,000, maybe as high as $150,000.
But some of the original projections that I saw in 2024 and early 2025, guys like Tom Lee, you know, saying that Bitcoin is going to moon to, you know, $250,000 in this cycle by the end of this year.
I think, I mean, guys, Stryker, you tell me if I'm wrong, but am I. Am I being crazy by saying I don't think that Bitcoin hits a quarter million in the year of our Lord 2025 with 31 days left to go on the clock?
That's all I'm saying.
So I'm not against Bitcoin.
I'm not against crypto.
Some crypto I'm against because it's just retarded.
But Bitcoin, I think, is a great asset.
I think Ethereum also is a good asset.
I prefer some of the cryptocurrencies that actually have functionality, you know, blockchain technology or this, that, and the other, you know, something that.
That has some sort of utility in and of itself.
I think Bitcoin is the best, and I think that Bitcoin will be a longstanding, powerful asset.
But all I'm saying is that in the short run, in the next couple of months, Bitcoin feels a little shaky.
This current cycle could be at an end, at least for a little while.
And then the bigger thing that I was trying to say at the beginning is that the four year cycle that we're used to with Bitcoin could just be forever altered as we know it.
Not meaning that there's, you know, that there's not, you know, everything has bear cycles and bull cycles, but it may not follow the trajectory that it used to, where you could just every four years, you could count on Bitcoin is going to go up, you know, some extreme percentage.
I think the more that states, nations, and institutions get involved, you're going to see less of the traditional cycle that you've seen with Bitcoin in the past.
Another thing I wanted to comment on Michael Burry, I think he has some good insights.
I watched the big short with Steve Carell like everybody else.
You know, I'm aware of Michael Burry.
I like to think I'm a Michael Burry, you know, expert.
You know, I saw three tweets from him, read one Substack article, and watched the big short, right?
I think that makes me an expert.
But this is what I would say about Michael Burry, and other people have said it as well.
It's not just me.
But Michael Burry has called 15 of the last two market crashes.
Michael Burry has been betting on the market to crash with everything all the time for a couple decades.
So, He could be right.
He could be right.
He also could be wrong.
I want to do something a little bit different and then we'll go back to Bill, but I want to handle some of the super chats early.
So, Nathan, if you can pull up some of the super chats to kind of round out this segment, because I wanted to address a couple of them, give it back to Bill, then go to our first commercial break, and then we can take another round of super chats later on.
But this was from Giraffneck.
He said, he gave us a $10 super chat.
We appreciate that.
Thank you very much.
He said, what is the likelihood that big AI stocks like NVIDIA?
Can continue to grow?
Is it just an AI bubble?
Christmas tree looks good and Joel's beard game is strong.
Wes can't compete.
So true, King.
Poor Wes.
Wes needs to be here or he's going to get roasted.
So, the big AI stocks, this is my opinion, and I'd like to hear Bill and Antonio see what they think.
I think NVIDIA will continue to grow.
That said, once a company gets to a certain level, you're not going to see the percentage jumps in a matter of weeks or months that you see early on, right?
Like Amazon is still growing, but it's not like if you had bought Amazon in the 90s.
That's very different.
So, like, I'm expecting a thousand percent return in one year or 18 months.
I think that that's probably in the rear view mirror for companies like Nvidia.
But I think if I'm looking at AI, the question is, is it just a bubble and these kinds of things?
I think it will prove to be a bubble in some aspect, not entirely, in some aspect.
Meaning that there's a lot of, just like the dot com bubble, I think that AI is different than the dot com bubble.
But with the dot com bubble, it was like every company, every mom and pop business that you could think of is like, we have a website.
Oh my goodness, trillion dollar evaluation.
And like, we have a website, www.com.
And the reality is that, yes, having a website improved businesses, it made it more searchable, those kinds of things.
Maybe you could even order online.
But then every business started doing it, and the competition still exists.
And so it proved to be a bubble of sorts.
AI, I don't, I'm going to go out on a limb, another prediction here.
I don't think it's a bubble, not like the dot com bubble or not like the housing crash of 2006, seven, and eight.
I don't think, I think that it's real.
I think there's real legitimacy.
That said, I think like most things, when they become popular, when it's the talk of the town, everybody's going to hop on board.
I think that there are some companies that are doing something real with AI that will prove to be incredibly valuable.
Bearing out more value than we've ever seen.
Multiple trillion dollar evaluation companies in the years to come.
But I do think that those companies will be ultimately few and far between.
It's not going to be every single company that claims to have some kind of AI function, right?
I mean, like, honestly, we could IPO with Right Response and say, a Right Response has an AI function.
It's like, oh, really?
What is that function?
Well, we occasionally use Mid Journey to use AI to make our thumbnails.
Oh.
Okay, like, okay.
So you're not an AI company.
So I think there'll be some aspect of that.
People saying, we're an AI company or we have an AI wing of our company.
And a lot of that will prove to just be talk.
But the companies that are really behind it, in making something real, I think that there will continue to be real value.
That said, NVIDIA, I think, will probably grow slowly.
I think it will grow, but grow slowly.
I think its big jumps are behind it.
And I think over the next few years, what you're really going to see.
Is going to be physical AI.
I think that's where the value will lie.
And that's the question that's still kind of yet to be answered.
I lean towards yes, that it is possible and that it will be achieved.
But it's going to, I think, be companies that actually take the chips and all these kinds of things, and they're not just doing virtual AI, digital AI, visual AI, but physical AI that they actually like to be abundantly clear.
I'm talking like robots.
I think companies that are able to actually.
From FSD, self driving cars, that would be one level of physical utility to the AI.
But the big one would be things like Optimus, things like robots.
I think any company that's able to achieve that, and I do think it's a matter of time.
I don't think it's if, I think it's when.
Now, the question is is that right around the corner within the next two to five years, or are we still 20 years away?
So I think if there is a pop, a burst to the AI bubble, it's not the same as the dot com bubble.
It would simply be institutional money, Wall Street, waking up and realizing that these things will happen, but they're going to happen 20 years from now instead of two years from now, and everything.
You know, all the PE ratios of like Palantir being, you know, 300 times, you know, its actual evaluation, those things will plummet.
But that doesn't mean that AI is not real.
That doesn't mean that we won't actually have real, tangible, physical AI robots and value.
I think that that's going to happen.
I think it's just a matter of when.
Antonio, Bill, what do you guys think?
Yeah, I think I agree with a large swath of that.
When we talk about a bubble, I find the most helpful way to think about it is.
A bubble is essentially the pricing in of future earnings.
A bubble occurs when we basically say, Hey, I expect this company to make a million dollars in five years.
And so I'm going to pay a price with that expectation in mind.
And so the question becomes, in terms of is it a bubble, is it not a bubble?
Time will tell.
Time will tell whether or not the company actually generates the million dollars in economic productivity over that five year period.
With respect to AI, I think the jury's just still out.
NVIDIA specifically, you're totally right.
Valuation is at a point.
Once the mailman knows what NVIDIA is, there's probably not a lot of upside there.
And so, NVIDIA, though, you can think about them as kind of the backbone of a lot of the things you were talking about when it comes to robotics, manufacturing AI, those sorts of things.
You imagine an Amazon warehouse with completely end to end robotics, right?
There's virtually no person there.
Because AI can move the box.
It can do all of these like deft, agile activities with robotics.
And AI is the backbone of those things.
There's going to be an NVIDIA chip and each one of those different robots.
And so NVIDIA is really upstream from things that have to occur to prove its value, which is to say, are these AI companies that are functioning in robotics and manufacturing going to be able to use the NVIDIA chip to do something that is economically viable?
Right.
It's now, the way you can say it is now up to the AI appliers.
Exactly.
So, like the AI, the hardware, you know, the GPUs and CPUs and, you know, the guts of AI, the chips, that's been.
You can liken it to like kind of creating the railroad before the steam engine is ever invented.
And so the question is, is the steam engine going to exist?
Because if it doesn't, and you're NVIDIA and you just laid a railroad from the East Coast to the West Coast and there's no engine to run on it, then you're worthless.
And so that's kind of like where NVIDIA's at.
And, and, and, uh, And I think something that's just abundantly clear is these large language models, these OpenAI, ChatGPTs, they don't make money.
Like even OpenAI is, they see their natural evolution for their company into wearables and devices because these ChatGPT prompts aren't making money.
They're losing billions and billions of dollars a year because, to your point, there's no real world application for those things.
It doesn't translate into moving something, into building something.
And we've seen a little bit of this in self driving cars.
Right.
And in terms of like a vehicle being able to, or Waymo vehicle being able to take you from there.
Thank you.
Yeah, FSD, I think, is the clearest current case study of AI having a physical value, a physical function.
Aside from that, it's like, okay, well, now instead of a cat meme that's a still shot, now you can animate it as a cat meme video.
Incredible.
But that's a lot.
So it's got to be more than that for it to prove to ultimately be valuable.
But I think that's why it's the AI appliers right now.
That's why Tesla, Elon Musk, Is kind of constantly what people are talking about in the news is like his pay package being approved.
So Tesla has now secured him.
But the question is, can he do it?
Elon has promised many things, and some of those things he's achieved, and some of them he hasn't.
But the question is, can Tesla actually take all these chips and the guts of AI and actually create a physical application that's immensely valuable?
Because If companies, whether it's Serve Robotics or whether it's Tesla or these different companies, if they can't do it, then it doesn't just hurt them, the company that's attempting to apply it, but the manufacturers of the AI chips themselves, like NVIDIA.
And then I've also read recently that it seems like there may be a shift.
Like NVIDIA has certainly been the front runner, but it seems like Google might.
Long Term Crypto Investment Strategy00:15:19
I mean, you even have, what is it, JP Morgan?
Who, um, what's his name?
The super, super old investor.
He just retired recently.
Warren Buffett.
Yeah.
Like, uh, they just put a ton of investment into, you know, Google and they were sitting on just piles of cash.
Apple has always been his, you know, his favorite stock and he exited a ton of his Apple position in the last year or so and sat on cash for a very, very long time.
And, uh, you would think he would get in like after the tariff scare in April.
He didn't.
He just sat on cash, sat on cash.
V shaped recovery happened.
Warren Buffett's still sitting on cash.
Google hits all time highs, and Warren Buffett's like all in, you know, like when it's like, what?
And, you know, at the end of the day, it's because he's not a short term investor.
So he's thinking in 20 years, it doesn't matter.
Doesn't matter if I got, you know, the dippity dip, dip, dip, you know, trying to catch the falling knife or whether I did it at all time highs, you know, today, but they're going to be, you know, not even close to all time highs 20 years from now.
But still that shift.
To Google.
Not NVIDIA, although they have some NVIDIA position to be sure, but a massive position staked now in Google.
There's a lot of guys who are saying that even with the chips and the hardware of AI, that Google has some things in the works that may actually prove to be a formidable competitor to NVIDIA.
Yeah, and you can fact check me, but I believe that Google is either a partial owner or an entire owner of Waymo as well.
So you talk about FSD and devices and hardware and those sorts of things.
That's the thing, Google's prolific.
So, if Google can pull it off, they have everything.
They have the search engines, they have the cloud, they have data centers, at every single level, Google has carved out a position for itself with everything, with self driving cars.
So, if they can get the tech and for it to be as good or even better than Nvidia's or Tesla or something like that, then they already have the market carved out in every sector.
Right.
And they would just better economics and better printing money.
They would just win the world.
And I think Warren Buffett is looking at that and saying, I think long term, I think they win.
So, I think that, you know, even I say that to say that even some behemoth companies like Google, I don't think that they're going to go a thousand percent raise in their stock price, you know, in 18 months.
But Google could potentially 10x a thousand percent over 20 years.
That actually is possible, but those are long term investments.
Bill, what do you think?
Yeah.
I mean, I would start, you know, just going back to NVIDIA, like the reason that they perform so well is because they're beating guidance, right?
So, it's not like There's guidance put out on expectations, and then they exceed expectations.
They continue to do that over and over and over again, even as guidance is revised.
So just kind of keep that in mind that it's not like this is all speculation.
There is actual profits being generated, which is one of the big differences from 2000.
The other thing I just want to do is reshape a little bit.
When we talk about bubble, even with the dot com, it's not like, think about how our world has changed through the advent of the internet and dot com and whatnot.
So, it's not like nothing came out of that.
It's just that at the time, it was really hard to evaluate how companies were going to compete, market share online, and what that was going to shake out to be.
And you understood, people understood, that if they were correct, if they were right on the Amazons of the world and what they eventually became, that they would do incredibly, incredibly, tremendously well.
And so, there was this sort of mad dash to find companies that maybe didn't have to be online or weren't going to have the space there, didn't win the competition.
And eventually, obviously, the winners shook out of that.
And I think it's not dissimilar to what we're seeing with AI.
Again, not that AI is not going to be productive or anything like that, but that it's really hard to tell who shakes out of this, how it shakes out, in what places.
Obviously, FSD is a great example of somewhere that we're pretty, basically 100% sure that that will continue to develop and we're going to use that.
But there are other applications, many applications that we're not sure how important that will be or what the market share on that will look like 10 years, 20 years down the road.
And so everyone wants to be the company that has it.
The question is, is there market share there?
How will that develop?
So it's not so much when people talk about, is this a bubble?
I mean, I would say I think that there is definitely bloat.
I don't think that we're talking 50% drop or something like that.
But yeah, I would say absolutely there's bloat.
And I think all of these companies have made tremendous bets on AI.
And another important distinction is the bets they've made, the infrastructure, we were talking about this a little bit before the show, is that over 90% of GDP.
Comes from AI related capex, so capital expenditures from companies in creating data centers and things of that nature.
So there's, I mean, basically the entirety of the GDP this year is just, okay, how do we add AI into our companies?
How do we grow server farms, et cetera, which is not bad.
But the expectation, the guidance on these is two to four years to start seeing turnaround and growth.
And that's why some of these jobs, people are being laid off, is they're trying to repurpose a lot of those jobs that can be done by AI to AI.
But if we get two years into these processes, And they're not seeing the ability to sort of transfer workload into AI in the way that they want to, even if it's not that quick, then you're going to see, okay, then companies start slowing down the purchasing of chips.
They slow down the growth in these AI related capex.
And then that's where you would see somewhere like NVIDIA, as you guys mentioned, kind of being downstream from that.
That's where they would feel it is if guidance is we expect Google to buy this many chips, and then all of a sudden Google says, you know what, we're not seeing quite the return out of this we wanted.
And we're not able to develop this in the way we wanted necessarily, then, of course, okay, we're going to cut some amount of this order, some portion of the order.
Not that they would cut it entirely, but again, that some part of that goes, and then NVIDIA being kind of upstream from that feels that effect, and then their guidance has to be revised down.
And so I don't think it's a bubble in the sense that no one's going to be using AI, it's not going to be productive, anything like that.
I think the bubble talk is more in this is such an unheard of technology space that it's impossible to really predict with any good sense what this is going to look like 10 years, 20 years, 30 years.
And I know that you guys were talking a little bit about, you know, just again, When do we see that payoff?
And right now, the general guidance is companies expect to see that in two, four years.
And who knows, maybe it's there, maybe it's not.
And if it's not, they scale back and then you see this kind of shrink.
And then maybe over 20 years, it goes back up.
So I think it's more, I wouldn't shape it as this massive bubble that's about to pop and people are going to lose everything.
I would shape it more as going back to kind of what I was saying earlier, more into uncertainty.
And it really depends for anyone what are your goals?
I mean, if your goals are a 30 year hold, Then I think we can all agree that AI has, you know, will continue to develop and be productive and be helpful over 30 years.
But if you're, you know, in a more conservative approach, you may say, you know, I really don't know that I feel as comfortable, you know, in four years with AI, in two years, these AI bets pay off.
So I would just say it's kind of investment horizons and things of that nature when people talk about this.
Yeah, well said.
Let's go ahead and round out the super chats, the ones that we have so far, and then we'll go to our first commercial break.
We'll come back and talk some more.
This is from Dapper Dan.
He gave us $10.
We appreciate that, Dan.
Thank you.
He said, I am currently in the military and putting a percentage of my earnings into a Roth TSP.
I am leaning towards moving it into the SP 500.
Anything else that I should consider?
SP is usually a pretty safe bet.
We are kind of nearing all time highs.
Just about a week and a half ago, you know, when we came off of what was it?
It was like a 5% correction, pretty much.
I think SP, or at least the SPY, SPY was at like 688, was the all time high, and then it got as low as, I mean, it did.
650s, I think.
Yeah, 650s.
Uh huh.
Somewhat, not quite as severe as the April tariff scare, but somewhat significant, but has certainly recovered and bounced back off of that.
I think today we closed out around 679.
Although I've been reliably informed that Jerome Powell is supposed to speak at 8 p.m. Central or Eastern Time.
And he is a crusher of all dreams.
Throw a wrench in there.
So if you're betting short term on the market going down, today's a great day because you've got Jerome Powell, crusher of markets, crusher of dreams, just out of sheer spite to Trump.
He will literally, he'll be like, ruin the entire American economy just to spite Trump.
Worth it.
He'll do it.
So, anyways, I mean, yeah, the SP 500.
You can never go wrong with the SP if it's long term.
Yeah.
Within over a long term, and obviously, the typical advice is when you're younger, you can afford to be more aggressive in your allocations.
And you think about like the typical sort of allocations being, and now we've got crypto in there, but stocks and bonds.
And you say, Hey, bonds are less aggressive, stocks are more aggressive.
And then within stocks, you have the most aggressive being the NASDAQ and these tech companies, high growth, very sensitive to interest rates, very sensitive to the long term implications of public policy and those sorts of things.
You can think about hey, if I'm young, if I'm 25 years, 30 years out from investment, I can afford to be more aggressive.
And so I'm going to allocate money accordingly.
Maybe I'm 80% equities, I'm 20%, you know, or 15% yield, you know, bonds, and then I'm 5% crypto or something like that, or whatever you can really think.
And we've talked about this.
You can think of crypto as an equity and just kind of all bucket it together because it's going to move the same.
And so that's like the typical advice you'd hear.
So I think depending on how close you are to retirement, that's really what you want to be considering.
But here's the secret when it comes to, and Stryker, I kind of imply like, oh, it's a gold guy, it's a theologian.
Here's the secret 70% of active investors.
You know, money managers underperform the SP 500 over a long period.
And so, if you look at data from 2000 to 2025, you would have been better off giving your money to, you know, a mutual fund, SP index mutual fund.
Index, yeah.
Yeah.
And without any cost.
You don't have to pay the financial advisor.
You just put your money in the SP 500 and beat out seven out of 10.
Being a stock picker is incredibly hard.
It's the market, just economically speaking, is hyper efficient.
The market knows everything.
And we're talking about the market at writ large, not any individual person, not any individual company, but prices.
And this is like kind of at the heart of capitalism, as Adam Smith defined it in The Wealth of the Nations.
The idea is like capitalism is all information throughout the economy, everyone kind of putting in their little tidbit of information into the economy via prices.
And those prices actually being a composite of.
Basically, all the information anyone knows.
And when you think of the market that way, the concept of you knowing more or knowing something that the market doesn't or seeing something that the market doesn't seems ludicrous.
And it is ludicrous, actually.
And so, this is why it's very difficult.
I mean, even some of the best investors in the world, you can think of what Warren Buffett's a long term investor, so we'll put him aside, value investing aside.
But you think about stock pickers, you think about hedge funds, you think about guys like Bill Ackman.
A lot of this stuff is luck, it is fortune, it is.
In the sense of, look, I knew that this was a risk.
It was probabilistic.
And I put my chips on this roulette table on black and I hit black.
And now I look like a genius, but I'm also losing.
Every other play that I'm making.
Yeah, I'm winning over here 10x.
Yeah.
But 90% of my other investments are even or down or something like that.
Yeah.
Right.
And so if you take that approach to the market of, okay, I'm investing for retirement, I've got 30 years before, I got 25 years or 30 years before I plan to quote unquote retire, although we have perspective on retirement, which is, Why would you stop working if you're able bodied?
But that aside, the idea would be I've got time.
And so, why wouldn't I just index with the SP 500?
Or, why wouldn't I just, if I want to be more aggressive, index with tech, you know, the NASDAQ?
QQQ.
Yeah, QQQ.
Exactly.
So, Spy.
Yeah, the Spy.
So, that's basically the gist of how to think about it, Bill.
I'd welcome your thoughts on that specifically.
Real quick, I was going to say, Bill, if it was me, I assume that the person who's writing in is relatively young.
I would do SP 500.
I think that's very wise.
SP 500, long term investing.
SP 500, I do one thing that's riskier, like QQQ or SPY.
And then I would do some Bitcoin.
I would.
I'd probably be looking at, if I'm young, I'd be looking at probably putting 20%.
10 is probably more conservative, but 20% of my portfolio in Bitcoin.
And then lastly, I would finish off with a hedge, long term hedge, being precious metals.
Doing a little bit.
So, SP 500, maybe call it SP 500, SPY, Bitcoin, and some gold is, I think, if you're young, I think that that's a really wise way to diversify in four different arenas, Bill, to you.
Yeah.
The only thing I'll add, because I pretty much agree with what you guys have said there, is whatever you do, I would say you're almost, I would think of it almost like you're picking a wife, right?
You're not picking it for a year or six months or, you know, you're picking it for a long time here.
And so, because I think where a lot of people get hung up on is they try to look at these in these really small time scales, you know, okay, what's the last six months, last three months, you know, whatever that might be.
And I mean, you're thinking about, and you guys are right to say, you're thinking about, you know, 30 plus years probably of what you want your money to do.
And this is how, you know, Warren Buffett approaches it as well it doesn't really matter if he's buying it at an all time high or on a dip or this or that, because the scale of the growth over that 20 or 30 years really is going to minimize that entry point dramatically.
Whatever you're doing, I would be confident and committed to it for the long term, there, as opposed to sort of jumping ship at every pretty girl you see, so to speak, as it walks by.
Financial Advice For Young Generations00:03:03
You really want to stay sort of committed.
And so, whether that's, if that's precious metals, great.
If that's Bitcoin, great.
If that's the SP, great.
But I think where a lot of people get themselves into trouble is one thing to keep in mind think of like 2008 when the market was crashing, people were running into gold.
And yeah, obviously, gold did great there.
But if you hold that another four years, you make that back.
And then you have a tremendous run after that from 2011 to 2015, 2016.
So I think you just don't want to play that game where you're constantly start selling when it's going lower and buy when it's going higher.
So I would just, that's the one tidbit I'd add in there.
Yep.
Well said.
All right.
Just to finish off the super chats, Giraffe Necky gave us one more super chat.
He said the Christmas tree might be prettier than Wes.
That's certainly true, but it can't produce any charts.
That is Also true.
Wes's chart game is off the charts.
Okay.
And then we've got one last super chat from Zach Kohlberg.
He wrote in and said, I'm a local pastor that aligns with Christian nationalism and biblical patriarchy.
God bless.
If anyone is looking for a local church in northern Colorado, let me know.
So, Zach, do us a favor before we end this broadcast so that we can read it live on the air.
Send us one more super chat, just a dollar, whatever, just so that it registers so that we see it because we get lots and lots of comments and give us an email.
Because otherwise, I'm afraid that those who are listening who are in Northern Colorado won't be able to get in touch with you.
So, if you could just give us an email address, then we'll be able to send our listeners your way.
Those who are listening who live in that area.
Is that an email right there, Nathan?
No, that's not.
All right.
And then one more super chat.
This is from Queen's Revenge.
And it's just a $5 gift.
We appreciate that.
Thank you so much.
All right.
That's it for our first segment.
We're going to go to our first commercial break.
Of the day, and then we'll come back and we'll talk a little bit about.
I would like to talk about the younger generation and some of the difficulties that they're experiencing because the reality is, like I said in the cold open, if you are older and you had some dry powder and extra capital and you had saved, you already owned your house and those kinds of things, you were able to invest, then 2025 has probably been pretty good for you.
But if you're in your 20s or your 30s, you're younger, 2025 and 2024, it has not been great.
Not been great.
So I would love to get Bill's perspective on what younger guys can do when we're living in a country that kind of is basically racking up debt for future younger generations so that the boomers can continue to be comfortable.
Think, you know, I've been hearing, I feel like it's been a hundred for a hundred years.
I've been hearing, you know, we've got 10 more years of the boomer generation.
Backwards Planning Your Legacy00:03:50
And I'm convinced at this point, I think they're going to start harvesting organs, or Elon's going to figure out how to build like a digital, you know, heart and lungs, you know, and kidneys.
And they're going to build a base on Mars or the moon.
And I think they could be here forever.
I really do.
So, how do we live knowing that our parents' generation, this doesn't mean that all the boomers are evil.
I'm not saying that, but that our parents' generation financially is doing pretty well, but it has objectively come at a cost.
Their success has come at a cost to younger generations.
So, what do those younger generations, guys who are under 40, do to get ahead?
I'd love to hear Bill's thoughts on that right after this first commercial break.
The silver is mine and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts.
Yet your retirement dollars keep shrinking daily as Washington prints money out of thin air.
Genesis Gold Group aligns financial guidance with godly principles when others serve only profit.
Their faith centered approach to gold IRAs stands apart in an industry that has forgotten what true stewardship actually means.
Why gamble your family's future on Wall Street's paper promises?
Your 401k and IRA deserve better protection.
Genesis Gold Group transforms your vulnerable retirement accounts into physical gold, something real, something tangible, something that God created with inherent.
Value.
Their faith driven experts walk you through every step, helping you shield your life's work from the financial storms up ahead.
No high pressure tactics, no hidden fees, just guidance rooted in timeless principles of sound stewardship.
So the decision is simple watch your retirement evaporate through inflation or secure it in God's precious metal.
Take action now.
Go and visit rightresponsebiblegold.com.
You can visit today for your free book, The Bible and Gold, and join the thousands of believers who sleep soundly, knowing their future is anchored in something unshakable.
Again, that's rightresponsebiblegold.com.
Safeguarding your legacy with God's timeless treasure.
When it comes to your financial future, are you planning forward or backwards from your desired results?
What type of financial culture do you want to create for your family?
And for your children's children.
We are not called to be wise as doves.
Therefore, simpleton planning simply won't cut it.
Joe Garresey helps families develop and implement a long term culture of excellent financial management.
He starts with your goals, your tithing plan, your retirement, and the legacy that you want to build for your generations.
And then he works backwards to build a real actionable plan to get your family on track.
Now, many of my personal friends have benefited from the financial wisdom of Joe Garresey that he shared for their specific situations.
Do you want to work with someone who strives for alpha with your investing, hates taxes, and brokers insurance?
Start planning smart.
Call Joe Garrison at 615 767 2555.
Again, that's 615 767 2555.
Or you can find him by going to backwardsplanningfinancial.info.
Protecting Main Street Investments00:15:13
M.com.
Again, that's backwards planning financial.
N as in Nancy, M as in ministries.com.
All right, we want to protect the good name of Bill Armour.
God bless him, a good Christian man.
I took those super chats because most of them had to do with the topic at hand, involved Bill.
I think it was good to have them.
But we've had some episodes, as you know, Bill, where the super chats are not related necessarily to the topic of the day, and some of our followers.
God bless them.
We love them, but they're a bit spicy.
You don't necessarily have to be associated with that and on the show.
So, this is what I'm thinking let's give it, I don't know, let's call it 20 minutes in the second segment.
I'm going to let Antonio frame it with a couple charts.
He's got some data.
Wes is out.
So, I mean, well, this is actually the Christmas tree.
Oh, so the Christmas tree put together some charts for us today.
Antonio's just going to pull them up on the slide, but the old tree put it together just some Christmas magic.
So, we're going to show some charts to articulate what we were talking about right before that last commercial break about younger generations and the economy not being so hot for them and struggling.
So, Antonio's going to frame it with a couple of charts that the Christmas tree provided for us, and then we'll turn it to you, Bill.
You take as much time as you want, and then when you're done, we'll just go ahead and say goodbye, and then we'll do the super chats on our own.
How's that sound?
Sounds like a plan.
Okay.
Perfect.
Yeah.
So, going back to what you had talked about, you sort of alluded to in the cold open with respect to hey, if you've been in the stock market for 2025, you feel like you've had a great year.
Your portfolio might have ballooned 40%.
Because you were invested in Nvidia and you were invested in Google and these sort of high growth companies.
And so maybe you got a new car.
Maybe you decided, hey, I'm going to buy a new house, even though interest rates are super high.
I think I can afford it because my stock portfolio looks great.
Well, it really is when we talk about the economy today.
And we talked about this kind of looming kind of fear that everyone has about really what's real, what's not.
And I think it comes down to what you can call the tale of two streets.
You have Wall Street.
And that's the big investment funds, and that's all of you know the sales and trading desks at JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley, and these kinds of people.
And then you have Main Street, and Main Street is the blue collar guy living in rural Colorado or rural Oklahoma.
And he works maybe he's a you know a truck driver, maybe he's a he works in an oil rig, he's in West Texas or something like that.
And this man works a wage job, he for the last probably at this point nearly half decade.
He has seen above average inflation.
And so his dollar has been weakening and weakening month to month.
He has seen virtually no increases in his wages because what we've seen from employment data is that the employment, sort of the state of the U.S. employment, isn't very good.
Companies are conducting mass layoffs, which puts downward pressure on wages.
And when there's not a lot of labor competition, if I'm a company, I'm not really going to increase wages just out of the goodness of my heart for my employees.
I'm only going to do that if they threaten to leave for somewhere else.
But if there's nowhere to go, Wages are fine, and I can keep my margins where they're at.
And that's really what we're talking about.
And I think that the chart that the Christmas tree's provided, and we can pull this up here, kind of gets to the heart of that.
And so, what this is showing is we talk about a blowout 2025, but this is actually showing from 1990 up until 2025, the percentage of stocks and mutual funds that are held by the top 20% of earners.
And so, what this is showing is we have skyrocketed up almost.
Almost 90% of all stocks and mutual funds are owned by rich people, wealthy people, Wall Street.
And so when we see Wall Street shoot up 40%, or a couple stocks shoot up 40%, Wall Street, the SP shoots up 20%, what that means is that the people who own 90% of it are doing really well.
But of course, if you work a job, you make 100K a year, maybe less, you don't have a ton of discretionary income between rent, between food prices going up.
So, how much money can you really allocate to stocks?
To benefit in some of the spoils that Wall Street gets to benefit in, not a lot.
And so you can kind of contrast this view with the next chart that I'm going to pull up, which is a historical view back to, I think, 2010 of US layoffs.
And so you see this massive spike, of course, in 2020 and the shakeout related to COVID.
But what you've seen since 2022, as the economy started to recover, is a slow and steady increase in layoffs that companies are conducting.
And then you see most recently this massive spike.
And so, this is what we were alluding to in the first segment.
We're talking about UPS.
We're talking about Amazon.
The list goes on and on.
And we're not talking about 100 jobs here, 100 jobs here.
We're talking about 30,000 jobs here, 15,000 jobs here.
And so, this is what Main Street is feeling.
Main Street is feeling, I don't know if I have a ton of job security.
I don't have a lot of opportunity to move up socially with respect to my wealth and income.
And so, This is kind of the heart of where we're at.
I welcome Bill's thoughts on this.
What do you think is causing some of this sort of dichotomy, you could call it?
The widening wealth gap.
The widening wealth gap.
Yep, that's right.
Yeah, I mean, the first thought that comes to mind is I think that as we see these, I think Walmart's a good example of this.
And this is not to say that big companies are bad, but this is a good example Walmart is happy when they plug a new Walmart into an area.
They are happy to lose money and lose a lot of money in the short term to put out a nearby grocery, let's say a mom and pop grocery chain.
And that's an investment for them, is to lose money until, because they have deeper pockets than the mom and the pop there.
And so it's an investment for them to lose money until their competitor, mom and pop grocery store, eventually can't hold anymore.
They have to fold up and then they can bring prices back up.
So you're seeing, this is the part when, because capitalism is the greatest financial system in the world, but this is, to me, this is the part when you get these companies that are so big and so powerful.
Where they start effectively writing the rules.
And that's a lot of what we're seeing.
That's the scary part about something like the Mag7 to me is that when you've got companies that dominate each space, and you see Google was a good example, as we talked about earlier, that dominate, they get their hands into everything, is it starts to be really hard for natural competition to occur because they can suffocate out that natural competition.
And so, what that ends up being is that you don't have the option to play as a participant in a free market economy.
You almost don't have the option because you're limited by.
A couple companies that are dominating that space.
And obviously, technically, they're not allowed to collude in that way, quote unquote.
But I think we all know that that certainly happens behind closed doors.
And so the average everyday person is squeezed out.
On the other side of this, you think of just that generally Wall Street as a whole, there is value in finding appropriate ways to allocate capital.
That's good.
That is a positive thing.
We want money going to things that will eventually be productive.
I mean, things like the Ubers of the world that now people use every single day.
At some point, someone had to find that and allocate capital, and that's the kind of the hedge fund side of things.
So that kind of thing is good.
But again, there's sort of the shadow side to all of this.
And I would look back at, and you can do, people feel free, there's plenty of graphs on this, but leaving the gold standard, obviously I'm a gold guy, so take that with a grain of salt.
But I think that we start to see this chasm that begins to shake out over time of money becoming sort of your money becoming devalued, rather.
And then the people that have it are able to allocate it and grow it.
So I think that as life becomes more expensive, as the graphs obviously point out, People are more and more limited.
And we see, I think, the vision of the World Economic Bank and et cetera, of you'll own nothing and you'll be happy.
And I think that's kind of the large economic scale plan for this.
And so when people talk to me, what do we do about that?
I think at this point, it's really tough.
I mean, we've, and I wouldn't say that it was so conscious, but I think that a lot of people just don't think that much about these kinds of things.
They don't know really how to vote on these sorts of things.
It's been allowed to occur for so long.
And now we're really starting to reap what has been sown over the last 30 years or so.
You look at the national debt from 2000 today.
All of these pieces are coalescing into it is really, really hard for a normal, average, everyday person, which is really, I think, what we want to protect in this country.
It's what's made this country great the middle class.
And as that gets pushed down and destroyed over time, really stolen from, even that's what the Fed does, right?
When they print money out of thin air.
They're stealing from you.
It's the invisible tax.
People would never vote for it to be taxed in the way that they have been, but it's happened through, again, the mass printing.
So, all of that to say, I mean, it sounds like I'm just describing the problem.
That's really all you can do at this point.
If you're in that position, it's really tough to get out.
I think that we're going to see, we get to a juncture where it's almost, these become unsustainable.
People won't commit themselves to living in a world where they can't own anything, where they can't raise a family.
If a country can't provide the ability to do that, then obviously it's not a great place to be.
So I think that there's a lot of reshaping that needs to happen.
How you go about that, I mean, that's a huge, huge, huge ask.
Yeah, that's a great point.
I think it actually, as you were speaking, it kind of points to something for me just in the back of my mind around the ways that our concept, even of what a flourishing economy looks like, has changed.
You think back to the early 20th century, sort of the trust busting that was going on at that time.
You had these massive railroad companies, massive.
Oil companies.
And they were basically buying out all of these different local distributors and local oil companies and local railroads to create this massive network of their own companies' operations.
And what they did with that was they harmed consumers by raising prices now that there was no competition.
But fast forward to where we're at in 2025.
And I think one of the reasons the FTC has had such a difficult time, to your point, sniffing out where there's some of that corrupt.
You know, non competition happening is because we live in a different economy where, to the point of you'll own nothing and be happy, it actually more often than not doesn't harm the consumer.
You have massive companies like Google who are able to get to the point where they're decreasing prices, they're increasing services that they're providing to consumers, or a company like Netflix, which is, you know, pumping out content and content, and the pricing hasn't changed all that much, but their IP has grown substantially.
And so, We just live in a different time where, you know, if you think back to the 20th century, 19th century, really before there was an information economy or even really just geographic connection, you could be a local blacksmith in your sort of small county in rural Kentucky, and you could make your way up in the world by being a great blacksmith.
And maybe you create a distribution arm or whatever the case is, and you could grow and you could move up.
Massive companies with no limit geographically because of the way that the transportation economy works and no limit to the information that they have and how they can manage businesses on the other side of the world.
You have this massive cloud of large companies who, in every corner of the country, can keep the working man down.
I think that's what the economy has come to.
And with no clear way to break that, break through that mold, you know, you have the FTC, they're not going to break up a company.
They're not going, you almost need.
Public policy that favors it's a great idea.
Public policy that favors the working man, that favors the one income household.
Otherwise, what you're going to get is this perpetual stagnation at the bottom.
It's almost like a low pressure weather system.
You're going to get this stagnation at the bottom, and you're going to have clouds moving 50, 60 miles an hour overhead.
And there's really no way out.
Yeah.
I would just tack on another thing is you mentioned sort of the information economy and how it's grown, how interconnected we are, is we're able to outsource so much of this.
I mean, you know, I think of, you know, friends who are accountants and so much of what they do now has been outsourced to India.
And so, you know, how do you compete with that, right?
So these are these really are American jobs that have been outsourced.
And that's to say nothing of obviously, you know, and I think Trump has curbed that a little bit, but that's to say nothing of bringing people here to do the same jobs for cheaper.
It's really oppressive.
It makes it Really, really impossible to compete because there is someone who is willing to do a job for far less because they're sending that money across to India or whatever it might be.
And so you're competing against that.
You can't live on the same amount that they can provide for their family across an ocean for.
So what do you do?
You pick the same job, get paid nothing.
So the competition that's been created is objectively bad for the average person.
Right.
It's almost like you can't win in late stage capitalism.
Either one, you have a company who's so big that.
The wages have just completely stagnated.
Or you have historical capitalism, which was good, which is a race to the bottom.
How can I make something cheaper?
How can I make it more affordable and get it into more people's hands?
You think of the Ford Model T.
It was like, let's create an assembly line, make this really cheap, fast, sort of compartmentalized and widgets.
And then we can get it to everyone for cheap.
And even in that version of capitalism, which has historically made this country great, what that's resulted in is exactly what you said it's outsourcing jobs overseas.
And making things super cheap for the American worker, but also their wages aren't going to go up and they're not going to be able to develop any new skills or develop professionally or grow up, you know, grow in the company.
And so it's almost like either way you go, either way you take capitalism where we're at today with our current public policy, you're not going to win.
Efficiency Versus Human Labor00:16:00
Yeah.
I would even add AI being sort of continuing this trend, you know, as we've talked about, this is kind of my bigger fear with AI.
Is this continued trend of pushing, of taking jobs?
I mean, think of how much you talk about manual AI.
So, think we can actually do things.
That takes another huge chunk.
I mean, there's so much there that that can eat, if you really think about it, into just the productive space that people operate in any given day.
And that can take so much there.
So, what does that look like after that?
And I think that we all know the companies here obviously don't have our best interests at heart, nor should they necessarily.
It's not their job.
Their companies.
But I think that we reach a point where what is good for them is actively bad for the American people.
And that is, I think, the point that we've reached as a country is when most companies' end goal is necessarily bad for the average American.
And so there's this competing sort of thing they want more profits and we want better lives.
And those don't exactly, even cheaper things, doesn't necessarily mean being able to pay a little less for Netflix isn't making my life better.
I can go without Netflix.
But I can't go without feeding my family, owning a home, et cetera.
So there's obviously, we live in a world where we have access to a lot more things, and that's a good thing.
I mean, we like that we have access to all our toys and whatnot.
But at the same time, the minimum here to survive is becoming out of reach for most people.
And that's the issue.
Yeah.
What you said, Bill, the point where the interest of major Fortune 100, Fortune 500 companies, Their interest becomes diametrically opposed with the general interest of the average American.
That is a point that we're not just reaching, but I think we have thoroughly reached.
And I think that it's becoming even worse by the day.
And what you said in terms of the fear of AI, especially physical application of AI, replacing average Americans in their jobs, I think of FSD, self driving vehicles.
The number one job.
For men who are trying to support a family without a college degree, which is a massive swath of the American population, average blue collar American is truck driving.
Well, if FSD, and here's the thing it's not going to be Google with Waymo or Elon with Tesla or whatever standing up before a jury and saying, well, capitalism and free markets, and we let the best man.
Win, you know, John Henry versus, you know, the steam engine, the locomotive, you know, and it's not my fault if I built something that beats the average American.
And that won't be the argument.
It won't.
I've thought about this.
The argument will be it'll be an argument of human dignity versus human safety.
This is what it always is, right?
This was the same argument with COVID.
Well, liberty, yeah, sure, that matters.
But I mean, your life matters.
Human safety, right?
It's always public safety pitted against individual liberty.
Public safety.
individual liberty.
And that will be the argument.
So the argument won't be well, if Tesla is able to achieve, and Google with Waymo is able to achieve FSD, and that it's cheaper to have chips in your 18 wheeler to drive across the country than to hire a guy and pay him 80, 90, 100 grand a year.
Well, fair is fair.
And we beat them fair and square.
And so we win because free markets.
That won't be the argument.
The argument will be well, how many people die annually in America?
With truck driving accidents.
Right.
And of course, what will be conveniently missing from the data will be well, how many of those trucks were being driven by immigrants and not actual Americans?
Right.
How many of those trucks were driven by Pakistanis, by Indians, by Haitians, by what?
That'll be conveniently missing.
So, literally, I mean, I think it's intentional, right?
Why attribute it to ignorance when you can attribute it to sheer malice, right?
The old phrase, but in reverse, because I actually think it's just sinister.
I actually think people are just evil.
Not the average person, but our elites, our leaders.
I actually think it's wicked.
I think flooding the country with immigrants for multiple reasons.
One, I think the great replacement is not a theory, it is true.
They've said it out loud.
Another reason is to elect liberal politicians, just to buy votes.
But I think another reason is to stir up chaos so that the people will willingly, for their safety, give more power to the state and say, save us, save us, protect us, so that you can get the population.
Uh, the entire because the average American who are not truck drivers would sympathize with the truck drivers and say, I don't want these guys unemployed, I don't want them homeless, I don't want them out of a job.
But uh, if you import uh, millions and millions and millions of third worlders and then put them behind the wheel of a truck and they start causing accidents, and all of a sudden you can point to data and say, Well, over the last decade, we've had you know, uh, 200,000 Americans tragically.
Some of them burned alive, trapped in their cars because of these 18 wheel accidents.
And so the argument between Waymo and the truck driver union, these guys, blue collar Americans who salted the earth that want to keep their jobs and stay employed to feed their families, the argument won't be capitalism, free markets.
No, the argument will be well, don't you care about the lives of your fellow Americans?
And public safety matters more than individual liberty.
Here's the statistics of, you know, at first it was a little risky, but now, you know, we've got a decade under our belt.
And with our FSD, you know, trucks, you know, self driving trucks, here's the casualties.
They've come down 90% from a human because there's human error with, you know, and so if we have human truck drives, when the reality is, is it human error or is it more specific?
Is it a particular type of human error?
Is it Pakistani error?
Is it, you know, and but no, it's human error.
And You know, at the end of the day, you guys, I know you want to stay employed, but your employment, as important as that is, is it really worth a quarter million American lives annually who have died in these accidents?
And so, not for greed, not for the bottom line, not for GDP must go up for Waymo, but for the safety and dignity of human lives in America.
We're going to have to get rid of human.
That's what's, I think, that's what we're looking at.
And so, I'm saying all that just to give a tangible example, right?
We can play out the hypotheticals and they don't feel that hypothetical.
Feels pretty plausible.
That's how it will go.
That's the lawyer's case, Google's lawyers.
That's how they'll argue the case in court.
They will probably win.
And so then what you're looking at is, you know, we've always quoted, right?
Well, I'm a conservative.
I'm a conservative Christian.
I'm a Republican.
You know, I'm a capitalist, you know.
And so we've always quoted, you know, verses like the Apostle Paul.
If a man does not work, then let him not eat.
Okay.
But we know that that verse is not talking about a man who is hit by a car and is a quadriplegic and can't.
Well, we're not saying.
The Bible says that quadriplegics should starve.
The Bible says that people with Down syndrome should starve.
We've never argued that.
We've always intuitively known in exegeting a text like that that it's the man who's not willing to work, the fully able bodied man who consciously, of his own volition, is choosing to be lazy.
That man, if he chooses not to work, then that's a man who should be choosing not to eat.
But what do you do if all of a sudden 10%, 20%, 30, 40, 50%, half of the country?
Is willing to work, but simply can't.
Not because they're not able, but in all the fields that they would be able to fulfill, there is some kind of AI mechanism that can do it without the human error.
They can do it more safely.
They can do it more efficiently.
And we know the real reason is they can do it more cheaply.
They can do it more cheaply.
And so then all of a sudden you have all these people who are willing to work, but can't find Employment.
And the last thing that I'll say is, you know, I've had this argument with some of my friends, you know, God bless them.
And they've said, you know, that true, true conservatives, true capitalists, you know, and I'm like, guys, this time it's different.
And they're like, it's not different.
Everybody has always said it was different, you know, and then they were proven wrong.
And they're like, well, the cotton gin, you know, like people were worried that the cotton gin was going to put, you know, all these people out of work.
But what it really did was it was a tool that multiplied efforts and created, you know, employment opportunities and whole other fields that people had not yet imagined.
And that's what, okay, this is not the cotton gin.
It's not a hammer.
It's not a screwdriver.
It's not the steam locomotive.
Yes, AI is a tool like the cotton jet.
However, here's the deal.
But what if it happens to be a tool that is shaped exactly like a human being?
It has legs and arms, literally a face, can talk, right?
So, Joel, you're saying that a tool will replace human beings.
And people have worried about that for centuries, but no tool has ever been able to replace a human being.
Okay, what about one that's built to look and function exactly like a human being?
Could that one maybe be the first that replaces human beings?
And if so, and we're more conservatives, right?
And so we're like, well, I don't like socialism.
Even Elon Musk, as rich as he is, it's his money and he shouldn't have to give it.
And we should lower taxes.
In fact, we should get rid of property taxes.
And I've always made these arguments.
I hate property taxes, I think it's theft.
Here's the deal, though you get rid of property taxes.
I'm just thinking, these are new thoughts for me.
I'm just going to be honest.
You get rid of property taxes and you have AI, physical application of AI in robots that can do what humans do.
Do they replace the highest swath of the population, those who are 120 IQ plus, 130 IQ?
No.
But what about guys who are 85, 90, 95 IQ, who are salt of the earth?
They're good people, they're hardworking.
But they're not geniuses necessarily.
And they don't have a surplus.
They don't have any extra capital lying around to where, like, okay, robots are coming in, but I see the writing on the wall.
So I'm going to buy 10 robots and use them to do this.
And then I'll buy 10 more.
Like, no, they don't have any free capital to do this.
So all this happens, and they're not able to optimize.
They're not able to capitalize on any of it because they don't have capital.
They don't have dry powder.
They're living check to check to check.
So all this takes place.
And then I'm looking at that.
And then as conservatives, we're making the argument that taxation is theft.
You know, like, here's the reality you get rid of property taxes, which I've always wanted to do, I still want to do.
That said, you get rid of property taxes.
You keep limitless immigration.
You also have physical AI appliances and all these things.
You put them all together.
And I think what you get this is my prediction.
I think what you get in 20 to 40 years is a feudal lord system.
Yeah.
Without property taxes, property will not turn over.
It won't.
You can just hold it forever, right?
A wise prophet once said on Black Sheep with Chris Farley, right?
He's playing checkers with David Spade, you know, and he's on his like fourth or fifth or sixth or seventh game losing in a row.
And David Spade is like, his character says, you know, man, I've never won this many times in checkers.
And Chris Farley responds by saying, well, you know, it's kind of easy to win when you never move your back row.
And here's the thing this is how property works.
No property taxes, no incentive to ever move your back row.
How long does it take for 10% of the population to own all the land?
Land is finite, there was only so much land.
How long does it take for the gates?
And then all of a sudden, in this feudal lore system, you're looking at houses.
Think of like Game of Thrones, right?
You're looking at family.
So you go from, well, I'm afraid of a tyrannical state.
Well, you know what?
Tyranny, the state, the civil realm does not have a monopoly on tyranny, right?
Three sovereign spheres that God instituted the family, right?
Home, church, and state.
Guess what?
All three of them historically have proven quite well that they have the potential to be tyrannical.
What do you call it when the state is tyrannical?
Right, what you like, like a Caesar, yeah, a um, you know, a civil tyrant.
Uh, the church, what do you call that when the church is tyrannical?
Well, you call it Roman Catholicism in the 1500s, right?
Selling indulgences, tetzel going around every time a coin in the coffer clings, you know, a soul from purgatory springs.
Can you hear your great aunt screaming out in agony, you poor peasant, you're being greedy, give us your last shilling?
Um, you know, so we've seen the church be tyrannical, that's possible, entirely possible.
Uh, we've seen the state be tyrannical, you don't have to look that far back, just look to 2020 and 2021.
COVID restrictions and all this kind of stuff.
But the family, what do you call a tyrannical family?
Well, that can't happen.
Families can't be tied.
It's called a mafia.
Families ruled New York City, biggest city in America.
Ruled by the state?
Nope.
Police were afraid to go in.
Families ruled that entire city.
And so I think, you know, like a Game of Thrones, you know, like in our case, House Musk, House Bezos.
House Gates, House Zuckerberg.
What do you do when five families, private institutions, conservative, five families own every square inch of land in America?
And everyone ultimately is renting, borrowing from them.
And it's like, well, you know, well, we protected our sacred conservatism.
It's not the state.
Okay, well, you better hope that those five families are more benevolent than the state.
You know, and you're now a serf with a feudal lord.
You pledge your fidelity.
Hopefully, he makes some kind of provision so that you can feed your kids.
So, like, I know it sounds a bit, you know, hyperbolic.
It sounds a bit dramatic, but I don't think that it's improbable.
I think that it's absolutely possible that within 20 might be a Bit ambitious, but within 40, 50 years, that you could actually have a great shift away from governments to privatized corporations.
Accumulating Wealth Against Inflation00:16:37
And we think corporations really represent families, except it's worse.
The invention of the corporation is families without any accountability, it's families without any fiscal liability.
So when you think corporations, it's still a man, it's still a family, a house standing behind it.
It's Gates, it's Zuckerberg, it's this.
Except now, if Meta does something that ends up killing a bunch of people, it's still Zuckerberg, House Zuckerberg, that's responsible, except he doesn't have to go to jail.
Right?
It's just his corporation gets some kind of penalty and he can go and do it again.
So it's actually worse than the feudal lord system.
It would be like, because the lord still has some kind of recompense.
The lords, you know, you knew who they were, you knew where they slept.
If all the peasants on his fiefdom, Um, we were being deprived by him, then they would ransack his mansion and pull him out of his bed.
You know, I think of like Braveheart, you know, he's rounding up all the Scottish lords, you know, in the middle of the night who betrayed him, you know, and killing them in their sleep.
But what do you do when it's these corporations and nobody even knows where Zuckerberg lives, you know, and you can't find him and he's in the court system can't hold him accountable?
And you know, so I think it's a big deal, obviously.
All right, there's my soapbox, but I think it's a really big deal.
And I'll be honest, as much as I don't like a big state because I have all my conservative inclinations that have just been there for years, and it just feels like compromise.
I'll be honest, I think a big state in some aspects, not in every arena, but in some aspects, I think I'd rather have a big state than five big families.
If we're talking about the American families, right?
Millions of families.
And them holding collective power that is greater than the state, I'm on board.
That's what I always thought of when I was championing the family as a conservative.
I was thinking about multiple families the average family, the American family, the Christian families.
I was not thinking about out of 300 million people in a country, five or 10 families, none of them being Christians, having any Christian profession whatsoever to speak of, and them replacing.
The state, in terms of influence, power, wealth.
That does not sound like capitalism for the win.
That doesn't feel like a win.
That feels like, Mr. President, actually, we're losing too much.
Could we stop losing?
So, to round out the episode, I'll let you, Bill, have the final word to that.
Do you think it's crazy that I'm just out to lunch, that'll never happen?
Or do you think it's possible?
And if it is possible, what in the world do we do?
I would say it's happening.
I mean, BlackRock is doing this as we speak.
I mean, one of the targeted buys here is multifamily housing, even single family housing, with the goal to rent in large swaths, right?
And over time, they continue to accumulate property.
And I think that's the end goal, right?
Is they don't ever want to sell that property.
They want to move that into rentals.
And it continues, you'll see housing prices go up as a result of that, which again, if you own a house at the time, that's great.
Housing prices are going up, but it continues.
We're seeing this, people getting priced out of buying a house.
And I think that this continues.
I think you're right.
I don't think it happens tomorrow, but I think we're on that trajectory.
And I think at some point you run into, I mean, people decide if this is untenable, then they react as such.
Right now, I think a lot of people are willing participants in the sense that they are unhappy, but not unhappy enough to necessarily do anything to stop that.
And I hope that obviously things do change.
I think that there's some things that give me hope.
But at the same time, I definitely see the shadow side to where this can absolutely develop that way.
So, in the meantime, I think that the best thing people can do is accumulating wealth sort of insulates you in some ways from this.
And hopefully, Hopefully, you're not one of those people that has to go.
I think about, okay, well, maybe because people say, well, there's always going to be operators for the robots and whatnot, but you don't want to have to go into $300,000 in debt to get a PhD in order to opt to fix these robots or something.
I mean, there's people, even average everyday people that may really want to do and may be smart enough to do things, eventually get priced out of that via just the cost of education and how much schools are making.
So I think there's even more there.
It's a broad subject.
But I would say in the meantime, you know, planning ahead 30, 40 years, the way that you really insulate yourself from that, as weird as it sounds, is to accumulate wealth, is to save, is to be someone that is prudent in that way, not to just be so flippant about the way, because the way that we live now and the fact that you're not going to have the same earning potential in the sense that maybe you can't work as much when you're 60 as you can now.
So I think people, you know, that are around my age, our age, should be really productive members of society.
They should go out there, they should earn, they should save.
And obviously, you know, There will come times here where we're able to push against the system.
I think that, you know, I have my love and my hate for President Trump in different ways, but I would say that in some ways he's also been, he has bucked that system a little bit.
And so I think that there will come forks in the road over the next 20, 40 years where people have to choose the status quo or something different.
And I think a lot of this is going to have to be something different.
Yep.
Well said.
All right.
Right here at the end, do us a favor.
Thanks so much for coming on the show.
We appreciate it.
You've been really helpful.
I think this is, correct me if I'm wrong, but is this your fourth time joining us now?
Or third?
That sounds about right.
Fourth, yeah.
Okay.
Well, you've been a blessing, and your knowledge of the economy and investment has been really helpful.
These are things that a lot of young people don't necessarily want to think about or talk about.
But as you have said, as we have said, it's absolutely paramount that we think ahead.
We think about our family's legacy, that we think about provision, and we recognize that in many ways, it's like the train is leaving the station, has already left the station.
And right now, If by the grace of God you sprint, you might be able to catch it.
But that window is closing in real time.
Every day you can feel it getting away from you.
And so making wise decisions now is absolutely vital.
So, right here at the end of the show, for any of our listeners who want to diversify and maybe they don't YOLO everything into gold, but diversify and put some portion of their portfolio, whatever it is, even if it's like, man, I'm barely getting by, I've got $1,000.
Total for all investments.
I think all three of us would agree that if you have $1,000 total for investments, a couple hundred would be wise to invest in precious metals.
Gold has stood the test of time.
And so, if anybody of our listeners wants to invest with Genesis Gold Group, could you give them a place where they can go?
Yeah, absolutely.
So, I think we have a URL there that will be in the link.
If not, in the show notes.
Yeah.
And then, additionally, that obviously will.
We'll put out a request and we can reach out and get you information, figure out what your situation is, how you might go about that, what that looks like.
Hopefully, I've been presented the reality, which is we're not some company that's going to be on there saying, you got to do every penny, you got to do it now.
I don't work at a used car dealership.
But certainly, helping people, specifically Christians that understand where we are now and where we're heading and want to protect both themselves and obviously their families, their family's future.
They can reach out obviously via that link there or request for information, or they can call 1 800 200 Gold.
Again, that's 1 800 200 Gold.
I speak to a representative.
You can ask for me directly.
Again, my name is Bill.
I'm happy to break down what your situation looks like, what kind of options you might have.
You've got obviously the traditional sense of money in the bank, savings, whatnot, and you want to convert that into metals, always an option.
Lesser known way, you've got the option of 401ks, IRAs, TSPs.
You know, all these different avenues that you can take, you know, some of those funds and actually convert them into metals as opposed to maybe the market.
Maybe you do look at the market.
Maybe you disagree in some ways and you do think we're in a bubble.
Or even just for the time being, you're not sure and you want to park some in metals.
Those are all options for people.
And again, we're happy to figure that out and see what that looks like for any person that's interested.
Great.
Well, thanks again, Bill, for coming on the show.
We greatly appreciate it.
You are free to go.
You fulfilled your obligation.
We will take the rest of the super chats without you, but we hope to see you again.
Perhaps early in the new year.
I'm sure we'll have plenty to talk about.
I feel like December, November was crazy.
November was incredibly volatile in the market.
And I'm hoping that December is not so negative.
I'm hoping for some good news, a rate cut, things like that.
But either way, whether it's positive or negative, I do feel like December is going to make some headline news with just the economy.
And so I'd love, if you can, we'll get back together hopefully in the new year and talk again.
Sounds like a plan.
God bless you guys.
Have a great rest of the show.
All right, you too.
Okay, Nathan, let's go ahead and throw up the super chats for the rest of the day and we'll try to knock those out.
So, this is from Zach Kohlberg.
Okay, so this is the pastor.
If you were with us earlier on in the episode, some guys are just now tuning in because we're still in the live broadcast.
But if you were with us from the beginning, he wrote in with a super chat saying that he is a pastor who is Christian nationalist friendly, he is biblical patriarchy friendly, on board with these principles.
So, he's our guy.
And he is a local pastor of a church located in North Colorado, I believe is what he said.
So, the northern region of Colorado.
But he didn't give us a link for people who might be in that area and might want to check out his church.
So, he's getting back now.
He gave us a $2 super chat.
He said, I'm trying to put in my email, but it won't send.
And then he gave us another $2 super chat.
So, YouTube, we thank you from the bottom of our hearts for making things difficult so that he had to give us more super chats.
I feel like we're talking about major corporations gouging people.
Well, this one actually worked in our favor.
So, anyway, sorry about that, Zach.
I wish it would have worked, but he came back with a second try.
He said, The name of the church, I can at least give you that.
It's Sherwood Park Baptist Church in Greeley, Colorado.
So, the name of the city, Greeley, that's G R E E L E Y. Greeley, Colorado.
That's the name of his town.
And the name of the church is Sherwood, S H E R W O O D. Sherwood Park Baptist Church.
So, check it out.
I'm sure they've got a website, and I'm sure that Pastor Zach would be happy to have you on a Sunday morning.
Next super chat.
Antonio, you want to take it?
Yeah.
Mick Volcat sent a.
Two dollars, thanks for that.
And says, Xers, generation X, me, and boomers should buy our kids' houses.
Amen.
That's so true.
I actually recently learned this rare France W.
No way.
That France actually has inheritance laws.
I think it's something like 30% of your wealth has to be passed down to your children.
You couldn't give it away.
You know, you have all these billionaires.
You're like, oh, 99% of my wealth.
I think there's a wealth pledge or something like that that like Warren Buffett has signed and Bill Gates have signed, which is basically saying, like, I'm going to give all my wealth away.
99%.
Now, to be fair, 99% of $130 billion leaves quite a lot for your children.
But the point still stands that in the Western tradition, in the biblical tradition, there is a command to leave an inheritance for your children.
And so France's laws reflect that.
I'm sure there's other European countries I'm not aware that have laws like that.
But you know who doesn't?
The greatest country on earth.
Yeah, America.
Oh, America, America, America.
Yep, you're right.
Mick Volcat, we appreciate that.
That's, you know, as we're talking about, like, how is the younger generation going to make it economically?
It seems like the train has already left the station, feels like there's no hope.
Well, one hope, and it really is a major part of God's design, it is absolutely biblical, thoroughly biblical, is that a good man, the proverbs say, a good man leaves an inheritance not only for his children, but his children's children.
So, looking two generations down the pike, And wanting to set up both your children and your grandchildren.
I saw a post from someone just the other day.
You know what?
I'm going to look it up because it was so good.
I'd like to just read it.
But he was talking about leaving an inheritance to your children, but the significance of the timing of that inheritance, right?
So if you die at 90 years old and your children are now 65, you know, 65 years old receiving an inheritance is helpful, but not super helpful, not nearly as helpful.
Is receiving that inheritance or at least a portion of, you don't have to liquidate everything, but a portion of that inheritance when you're in your 20s or your 30s and buying your first home.
And so I'm going to look for this real quick.
As I do, can you go ahead and we'll come back to Volcat because I want to make a point on that about Gen Xers and boomers helping their children and children's children by leaving an inheritance.
And I want to make the point about the timing of at least a portion of that inheritance and how it matters so much.
So we'll come back and I'll find this quote.
And read it.
But in the meantime, can you go on, Antonio, with the next super chat?
Yep.
Nunyo Business.
Nunyo Business.
Great name, Nunyo Business.
Sent $20.
We really appreciate that.
And says, I appreciated the nod to John Cooper of Skillet.
This is what we mentioned a couple episodes ago.
And I think they did, I forget the Christmas song.
Was it Oh Holy Night?
Oh Come, Manual.
They did a sort of heavy metal, or at least the last portion of the song was a sort of metallic version of that song.
It says, I appreciated the nod to John Cooper of Skillet a few episodes back.
It's ironic that John, a rock artist, seems to be quite based, while many quote unquote worship artists seem squishy and fake.
Future episode on Christian music, maybe?
Yeah, that is something that's true.
I don't know, you know, candidly, don't know a ton about Skillet, but I have seen here and there references to, I think, one of the members of Skillet being pretty based.
And so we love to hear that, even if it doesn't necessarily suit our music taste.
Wes is here.
Wes is here.
He'd make a different point.
But no, I think that actually points to something, you know, as we called the Be Fruit Sniffers, points to something true about the heart of that band.
And, yeah.
Yeah, and maybe we'll do an episode on Christian music.
I think that could be good.
Yeah, I'd be down for that.
John Cooper is solid.
He is one of the few guys who's been in the Christian music sphere over decades now, at least two decades, and did not compromise.
Many, many, I mean, you go back and look at who was popular in the 1990s, early 2000s in the Christian music sphere, and they're all gay furries and transvestites and XYZ.
And John has remained theologically solid.
And yeah, not my favorite style.
So I will not be partaking personally in a heavy metal version of O'Cum, O'Cum Emmanuel.
I think they nailed it the first time.
They being the people who actually wrote the song, not Skillet.
However, you're just not going to get me to bash Skillet.
John Cooper has been phenomenal.
Grateful for him.
And I'm sure that they put out plenty of music that is great.
Yeah.
Yep.
Timing Inheritance And Daycare Costs00:09:55
And then we have Zach Kohlberg in the chat.
He sent another $2, just creating a thread here.
He says he's included the link right below in the super chat.
Is that there, Nathan?
I think YouTube's blocking it, but I put it in.
It lets me do it.
Okay.
Yep.
So Nathan has put the link there in the chat for folks that are interested.
And again, that's Greeley, Colorado.
If you're in the area, go ahead and check out this church, Zach Kohlberg's church.
What's the name of it again?
It's Sherwood Park Baptist Church.
Yep, Sherwood Park Baptist.
All right, are there any more super chats?
Because I'm still not finding this.
I'm trying.
I'm trying.
I like to think that I'm just dangerously close.
But at the same time, I also feel so far, so far.
All right, I cannot find it, which is a bummer because it was such a great post.
And I can't even remember who posted it, but somebody said something on X a while ago, a few days ago, and I shared it.
But he was just talking about essentially just talking about the timing, the significance of the timing of leaving an inheritance to your children when they're younger in their 20s or their 30s, so that they're able to actually purchase property, purchase a house, get ahead.
And he just kind of gave a little bit of math and some of the principles about why it makes like a life and death difference over the course of a person's career to receive that inheritance earlier.
Do you want to just generally speak to that, the timing of money?
I mean, you're an economy guy, Antonio.
Like, just the way compound interest and these kinds of things, the way that money works, and why it's not just the amount.
Like the old adage of time in the market is better than timing the market.
Can you speak to that a little bit?
Give me just a couple more moments.
So, and just for the record, so I studied finance, I got my undergraduate degree in finance.
And one of the core tenets of a finance degree is something called time value of money.
And it essentially, you can sort of think about it in terms of a question.
It's would you rather have $1 million today or $2 million a year from now?
And the right answer to that, when you sort of go through all of the economic principles, is you'd rather have money today.
And there's all sorts of reasons that that's the case.
One is compounding interest.
You could say, if I had a million dollars today, I could invest that in a small business, I could invest that in the stock market, and I could see returns that allow me to generate additional income.
But there's also another element, which is risk.
Things change through time.
And so, to use the analogy of inheritance, right?
You could say, I will give all of my children's money, their inheritance to them when they're 65.
But the stock market could also crash when they're 63 and you have less to give them.
And so that's that sort of risk element or time risk element to money.
And so you figure between investing and getting compound interest, between the certainty of having the money now and being able to do something with it productive now, between those two things, how we typically talk in finance is we say, Money that's in the future is discounted.
So, if I had two million dollars 10 years from now, what I do to find the proper valuation of the two million dollars is called time, time money val or time value discounting.
I essentially say two million dollars 10 years from now is approximately, depending on the formula you use, 12, you know, 1.2 million dollars today.
And that would factor in theoretically the risk and that would factor in opportunity costs, which is another sort of economic principle that I didn't mention, which is I can do the upside.
Yeah, exactly.
So And it works the same way with inheritance.
Obviously, when your children are young or they come of age, they're going to, Lord willing, have children in their early 20s or mid 20s.
They're going to need to be able to provide for those children.
They are going to want to buy a house, maybe have some land that those children can be raised up on.
Maybe that land has elements like a family farm or a family garden.
Those things cost money.
There's upfront infrastructure costs that an inheritance today could help supply, and an inheritance when they're 65.
The window of opportunity there has far been unclosed.
And so that's the general sort of concept there.
Of course, to your point, it doesn't mean when my child turns 20 and I have $5 million or $2 million or even $500,000 stored up for them, I give it all to them at that moment.
There's a prudential assessment of needs that has to be undertaken.
Hey, what are you going to use this money for?
How can I help you?
Like those questions are important when you're giving inheritance to your children.
So, because again, you're Their parent, and even into their young adulthood, you're there to shepherd them financially and otherwise.
And so those things all come into consideration.
But yes, the point is a very true point of how can I help my children now, which is totally contrary to the boomer mentality of, well, I had to struggle.
I went through it and I had to figure it out.
Granted, it was a far better economy and a lot more opportunity and a lot more growth potential, but I had to figure it out, and my children will figure it out as well.
And that's just not the state of the world.
Not only is that just antithetical to sort of the biblical principles and the general equity thereof that apply here, but it's also just flies in the face of reality.
Yep.
It flies in the face of scripture and reality.
Well said.
I found the quote.
So this is from, I don't know anything about the guy.
So, like, if he's got a bunch of other things that are bad, then, you know, take it with a grain of salt.
I don't know.
So I can't give like a full endorsement.
But at the same time, I do want to acknowledge, give credit to the post that I'm reading.
So the handle is.
At Kurt, that's K U R T Soup, S U P E C P A, at Kurt Soup, C P A.
He posted this.
Your son makes $92,000 a year and just turned 40 in a rental apartment.
You have $5.1 million collecting dust.
Explain that to me.
My client watched this happen for three years.
He said, I don't want to enable him.
Enable him to what?
To own a home?
To stop bleeding $2,800 a month in rent?
Enable him to give your grandkids their own bedrooms?
We finally structured a $225,000 gift last month.
Now his son owns a home.
The grandkids have a yard to play in.
And he gets to hang out with his grandkids in a space that they'll remember forever.
Your kids don't need your money when they're 65 years old.
They need it when they're 35, when houses cost $500,000 on average.
Daycare is $2,400 a month.
Now, we're not a fan of daycare here with Right Response Ministries, but translate that to being a single income household, right?
Because daycare is mom, which means that, you know, this guy, he doesn't have the same virtues and principles that we do of wanting children to actually be raised by their parents.
But he's saying daycare is expensive.
It costs $2,400 a month.
And he's assuming, right, if he's saying daycare, then that assumes that you have a two income household.
Mom is working out of the home.
So you have two incomes and you're still not making it.
So his overarching point that he's making is even more applicable for our listeners who are striving to, you know, for wives and mothers per Titus chapter 2 in scripture to be keepers of home, right?
So then you're not paying the $2,400 a month for daycare.
But what you're the cost that you're accumulating instead is the entire annual income of a second breadwinner because mom is actually mom and she's actually at home.
So it's actually even more expensive.
So houses cost $500,000 average.
Daycare is $2,400 a month.
Student loans on average are $87,000.
Hope is running out.
Why not give your kids the inheritance while you're still alive to see them use it?
Well said.
I don't want to enable him.
I love that part.
Enable him to what?
To own a home?
To stop losing $2,800 a month in rent to give your grandkids their own bedrooms.
Now your son owns a home.
The grandkids have a yard.
He can get to hang out with the grandchildren in a space that they'll remember forever.
I think that that's profoundly well said.
And I hope that most of our listeners are younger, but I hope for some of our older listeners, now granted, the very first part of that post was you have $5.1 million accumulating dust.
I recognize that that's probably not the case for every one of our older listeners, right?
You might be saying, well, if I had $5.1 million, then I'd give an inheritance.
Okay, well, then just, you know, act accordingly, right?
So it's like, okay, I don't have $5.1 million.
I have $2.1, you know, I have $1 million.
Okay, well, you don't want to be a burden, financial burden on your children.
So you can't give all that away.
Or, you know, if you only have $1 million, you can't even give, you know, a significant portion of that away.
But is there anything that you can do?
Can you help them, you know, with, You know, making a down payment so they can skip the PMI, you know, interest.
And maybe they, you know, you do half the down payment and they do half the down payment.
So you're helping them with 10% of a home purchase.
You know, there are ways that you can help them, but the principle still remains a little bit of financial help when your children are in their 30s goes further than a lot of financial help when your children are in their 60s.
Avoiding Burdens On Children00:02:36
And so it's not just the amount of money, but it's also the time.
The time of value and considering that.
So that's it for us today.
That's the episode.
I hope that you guys have been blessed by it.
I hope that you make wise financial investments and are able to accumulate wealth, not as an end in itself, not merely for your comfort or joy or happiness.
Money can't produce those things, but you accumulate wealth as a tool in order to wield it righteously for the good of your children and children's children and ultimately for the glory of God.
Thanks for tuning in.
And Lord willing, we'll see you again on Wednesday at 3 p.m. Central Time.
God bless.
Hey, friends.
Gray Toad Tallow is a family business making skin care the way that it should be.
Simple.
And clean.
The company began as a personal mission to find healthier, more affordable solutions to common skin problems without the chemicals that are found in most products today.
Now, that search led to crafting balms from grass fed, grass finished animals that were naturally rich in vitamins and healthy fats, which is exactly what your skin craves.
These balms fight dryness, they calm eczema and psoriasis, along with other stubborn skin issues.
Without containing all the nasty toxins.
Gray Toad Tallow offers everyday soaps, balms, and beard balm for men.
To experience some of their products, grab a balm sample pack.
Each batch is made with care in their home and shipped directly to their customers.
For skin care, the way that God designed, natural, clean, and effective, visit GrayToadTallow.com.
Use code RITE. 15 for 15% off your order today.
Again, that's graytoedtallow.com.
And if you want 15% off, then add the promo code Write15 today.
America is a country that was founded for the purpose of allowing Christians to do their duty before God, not to have their consciences ruled by the doctrines and commandments of men.
Reese Fund exists in order to see the Ten Commandments properly applied, not just as a plaque on the wall, but to actually be used in business as though.
Their commandments from God that we're supposed to obey.
Our goal is to find businesses and to buy them and to build them up.
We want to find manufacturing businesses and use them to make sure that we can maintain our capacity to do things here.