Speaker 1Germany, Japan, and Korea are all historically big creditors from a sovereign perspective. And in particular, Japan, if they're borrowing money to do defense stimmy, they have turned sellers of bonds as well. So now they're selling, they're competing with Besson to place bonds. Like everywhere you look, yield should be going up. And so to me, it's just all about when does something break at any of them? Because once it breaks at one, they're all going to have to do something. And that something's going to look a lot like yield curve control. Although my suspicion is they'll never call it yield curve control until they have to.
Speaker 2Today's episode is brought to you by the Fundrise Income Fund. You'll hear more about the income fund later in the show, but for now, let's get into today's interview. Welcome to Other People's Money. I'm Max Wheatley. I am joined today by Luke Roman, president and founder of Forest for the Trees. Luke, thank you so much for coming on the show. Thanks for having me on, Max. Great to be here. So there is so much happening in markets and macro right now. We have yields out of the stock market. We have yields out of the stock market. We have yields out of the 20-year highs. I want to understand what is the driving force for this sell-off in the bond
Speaker 1market. It's ultimately a supply and demand issue. And then the secularly inflationary dynamics or results of how the supply demand issue has been managed. What do I mean by that is that we've seen the U.S. in particular shift issuance to the front end since Yellen late in 23. Besson criticized it as soon as he got in Yellen's seat. He did the same thing except more or at least as much, but then added accelerated the treasury buybacks that Yellen was doing, which was also shifting to the front end on the margin. And he accelerated that quite a bit versus what Yellen was doing. And if you take a look at the stock market, you'll see that the stock market has shifted to the front end. The stock market has shifted to the front end. So it's a big step back. Why is this happening? It's very straightforward. No one wants to talk about it, but it's very straightforward. It's right in front of everybody's face. We kept $100 trillion plus in the United States. Europe and the U.K. also have their off-balance sheet liabilities. They were all off-balance sheet. And they were always going to stay off-balance sheet until people started getting old. And they were always going to stay off-balance sheet until people started getting old. And any sixth grader with an actuarial table and a calculator could have seen that if 65 million boomers were going to be born, they were eventually going to hit retirement age and start collecting. And once they did, these off-balance sheet liabilities would start coming on balance sheet and being cash flow negative. People said, oh, you don't have to worry about it. It's not part of our debt to GDP until they turn 65 and start demanding a check. And now they are. And adding to the problem, they would have been bad enough on its own, but adding to the problem has been that the United States in particular has been engaged in forever wars for going on 30 years now, 25 years certainly. And so when you look at veterans benefits, which, you know, right after the Vietnam War, right? Expensive, messy war. Veterans benefits as a percent of the defense budget got as high as 12 percent of total defense spending because it's accounted for separately. Um, and then during the eighties, the nineties fell back to three, four, five, six. It's turned up sharply in 2010 and it hasn't stopped. It's now 27% of defense spending. And it's not like
Speaker 2defense spending has gone down. It's not like defense spending hasn't gone down. This chart
Speaker 1looks like this. And this again is an off-balance sheet. It's a little bit of a liability that comes on. You want to go to war? Great. Well, you've got an awesome military. Great. And you better reserve for what happens on the other side of a war. If it lasts too long, which is you're going to be paying out a lot of benefits. We didn't. So now those are coming on balance sheet, uh, and to put some numbers around it, $400 billion of veterans benefits annually. Now it's about 8% of tax receipts, which are near all time highs and it's going at like two to three X the rate of, of, of tax receipts because we, we refuse to stop doing stupid wars. And because our guys are getting older and because of the money we've printed to pay for the veterans or the entitlements that are coming on balance sheet, et cetera, uh, inflation's rising. And so the cost of care is rising. So you're getting like triple whammied there, uh, on the veterans benefits costs. And so when you look at, just the interest expense on the debt, plus the entitlements, you're nearly a hundred percent of receipts. You throw on veterans benefits, you're over a hundred percent of receipts. And that drives a very simple dynamic, which is once you're over a hundred percent of receipts with debt, where it is, you can't raise taxes because it triggers a recession. You either print or you cut benefits. And when more you print, the more inflation goes up, the more inflation goes up, the more yields go up, the more yields go up, the less attractive, or, or, or the more inflation goes up, the less attractive long-term bonds are, the more you have to shift to the front end. The more you shift to the front end, the more inflationary it is, the faster, the faster the debt reprices when the interest rates go up. This is the spiral, the U S the UK, Japan, and, and Europe are in and being in this, it's a very recognizable spiral. We saw it after world war one in the UK, in Germany, in, in France, you know, the UK, the U S paradoxically took care of it the way the Chinese are taking care of it now, which is stand aside, let stuff fall in price like housing. We had a huge, you know, huge depression for like 18 months in the early 1920s. Jim Grant did a great book on that. Anyway, this is why yields are going up around the world and there's no easy answer for it. Again, smart people are looking at the boomers and the boomer generation around the world, going in and in the West going, all right, well, they're not going away. And yeah, it's very obvious there have to keep inflating.
Speaker 2Well, it's interesting. We just had another ceasefire pause in the war as people consider the cost of the war. And if you were being generous, you would say, you know, maybe we have some sense here in, in keeping in trying to keep this, the cost of this thing in check. But the alternative way to look at it is I can't remember a time when the idea of America not being able to afford waging a war that it is maybe a signpost of that negative side of things that you're talking about that, that we can't actually afford to wage this war in short. Yes, there's,
Speaker 1you know, we can, we can wage war on weekends. And as long as the 10 year treasury yield is below 4.7%, which tells you either, it's not, it's not that serious a threat on one hand, right? Let's, let's say number one, it could mean it's not that serious a threat and Trump is going through the motions. So, you know, he, he keeps his friends in Tel Aviv happy, or it means we can't go to war anymore. And it has huge macro geopolitical implications in terms of what we hear so often, right? Ultimately the U S military is going to be the most powerful military in the history of the world. And we're going to beat you over the head with it. And if the latter is even partially true, those, those things aren't true anymore. And I, I think that's what's happening here. And it's still, it's such early days in terms of the implications that I think markets are just waking up to the sort of the reality of, and Oh, by the way, that then feeds back into inflation because look what's going on around the world. What are we hearing? Somehow they all got the same idea at the same time. I say that, you know, facetiously, cause I think they all sat down and said, they're going to do it. Japan, Germany, Korea, UK, U S all saying we're going to run basically defense stimmies, right? So in COVID we did, we did consumer stimmies where you, you run deficits and you, you, you send money to consumers, buy stuff. And these five are doing defense stimmies. They are borrowing money to rebuild their defense bases. And three of those guys, right? Germany, Japan, and Korea are all historically big creditors from a sovereign perspective. And in particular, Japan to a lesser extent, Germany, big creditors of the United States. Well, if they're borrowing money to do defense to me, they have turned sellers of bonds as well. And so not only is it inflationary, which reduces bonds, but it also turns Japan from bond buyer to bond seller. So now they're selling, they're competing with Besson to place bonds yields up like everywhere you look yield should be going up. And so to me, it's just all about when does something break at any of them? Cause once one, it breaks at one, they're all going to have to do something. And that's, something's going to look a lot like yield curve control. Although my suspicion is they'll never call it yield curve of control until they have to.
Speaker 2What about the, the high real yields we have right now um a lot of people have been saying you know just looking back over the last 10 years real yields have never been higher but if you look back even further the idea of real yields at two three percent isn't that crazy do you think we're heading into a world where to to make these bonds attractive if the only way that that that we know is to keep printing to keep issuing debt i mean are we going to have to see sustainably higher real yields to make any
Speaker 1all of this paper attractive it won't work if that's the plan it's it's a disaster because high real yields when you have debt to gdp of 125 and it growing faster than your economy right so united states is a highly financialized economy high real yields are going to drive much slower u.s growth um and the key driver to u.s growth for the last 12 to 18 months has been tech has been ai which is borrowing a ton of money now and which is very sensitive to positive real yields it needs negative real yields so basically what that translates to anyone saying that hey we need high real yields to place that paper is we need to put a bullet in tech and we need to put a bullet in the american economy to place those bonds and once you say it like that you realize how nonsensical it becomes because if you do that the u.s will go into recession u.s goes into recessions deficits are going to rise non-linearly um last four is three recessions we've seen deficits rise 600 to 1200 basis points of gdp so gdp is what 31 trillion so you're going to add two to 3.6 trillion dollars on top of a two trillion deficit in a world where you have positive real yields and now what now you still have your entitlements coming on they're going to come faster because in a recession those numbers grow even faster so you're going to be looking at that that number i quoted before of of interest gross interest plus entitlements plus veterans benefits you know it's maybe 104 102 today it's going to go to 130 percent 150 percent and what's going to happen is the dollar is going to skyrocket as the u.s government crowds out all global dollar markets trying to place paper and the treasury market dysfunctions the stock market crashes in the u.s around the world the economy it's basically early days of coven from the portion where treasury yields started going up instead of down until they step in and start buying treasuries under the auspices of of treasury market functioning in numbers that would make what they were buying under cove would look quaint by comparison so it the two the positive real yields people said hey sell gold on positive real yields yeah all my friends in emerging markets they're like when your debt to gdp is 125 percent and your deficit's six and it's growing faster than your receipts and your positive real yields are going to slow your receipts the last thing you should be selling on positive real yields on real yields rising is gold you should be buying gold hand over fist because you know how it's going to end it's just a question of when so that's just a mad repositioning and leverage so when you hear the new fed chair
Speaker 2talking about reducing the balance sheet that's just got a sound farcical to you yeah i think i i
Speaker 1think it's absolutely farcical and he is i think he's saying what he has to say and i think markets have a way of testing new fed share people and i think it would be a delicious irony if warsh who is so desperate he's been so vocal that he could have done powell's job better than powell did and look i'm not some you know i was a critic of powell you know you sort of had a moment in time where you can inflate away the debt and he chickened out that was the brave thing to do he should have done it but he couldn't do it so i've been no no like big supporter of powell i think he did fine but to hear warsh talk about how he could have done so much better is absolutely farcical and so i think it's going to be a wonderful delicious irony to watch he's if he tries to do this he is going to he will end up having to grow the fed's balance sheet bigger faster than bernanke and powell ever did in all likelihood and so it's just everybody wants to pretend like the debt isn't 125 of gdp and everyone wants to pretend like there aren't 65 million boomers that are you know somewhere between age 80 and age whatever they are 64. and they want to pretend that we haven't been at war for 25 years like if we just you know it's it's like the old joke on uh you know the three scientists on uh no scientists is being generous three people on a deserted island right a chemist a phys a physicist and a and an economist and they're like oh we you know can washes up we've got food great you know chemists is like hey we could use chemical reaction to open it great the physicists like hey we can you know create a lever and open it and the economist is like no let's just assume a can opener and so like warsh is like let's just assume the federal debt isn't what it is the entitlements aren't what they are the veterans benefits aren't what they are and that we have a non-financialized economy that isn't highly sensitive to real rates like what are you doing dude just take your friggin medicine mark it down move it on and let's go but otherwise it's just gonna be you know more the same i hope
Speaker 2you're enjoying today's episode one of the most powerful vehicles in finance for generating reliable consistent cash flow is real estate income it's a yield generating strategy that's backed by more than just cash flows it's backed by hard assets like property and land and real estate credit and it's a very important part of the real estate economy and it's a very important part of the real estate economy and it's a very important part of the real estate economy real estate income is a hands-off highly structured investment designed to deliver consistent and insulated returns no operational friction no management headaches just precision priority and predictable yield historically many of these real estate credit strategies were reserved exclusively for institutional investors but now they are available to all investors thanks to the fundrise income fund which has more than 600 million invested and a 7.9 distribution rate the income fund aims to deliver high current yields from a diversified portfolio of fundrise's most favored real estate backed fixed income strategies visit fundrise.com mm to learn more
Speaker 3and invest in the fundrise income fund that's fundrise.com mm past performance does not guarantee future results current distribution rate as of june 26. carefully consider the investment material before investing including objectives risks charges and expenses this and other information can be found in the income funds prospectus at fundrise.com income this is a paid
Speaker 2advertisement it'll be interesting this this week to see what we get from the fed but i i mean just looking at the the price reaction to um to the the ceasefire announcement you know in the past with oil down like this you would have expected bonds to really rally the the equity markets are now negative on the day that we're recording this so we got a ceasefire and with the outside of the oil markets we couldn't get the reaction uh i mean what do you make of that um as well the ai trade unwind as you said it's highly tied to rates how much of this do you think is where we are in the bond market affecting the equity market versus people starting to doubt uh that we're gonna achieve you know artificial general intelligence
Speaker 1i don't know that they're doubting we'll achieve agi what i think has come into play is china right this this reminds me so much of um so much else i've seen as it relates to china uh which is you know oh don't worry they're never going to catch us they're closer but they're still never going to catch us oh yeah they have a competitive offering but it's just cheaper it's not as good oh god it's cheaper and it's better and by the time you get to that last one it's over you've lost and i think that's what we're in the early days of seeing with this ai which is again 2000.com bubble it burst who cares it was mostly equity issuance right the equities go to zero you know sorry thanks for playing if you believed in you know the sock puppet you lost okay great that's markets the second they started borrowing money and mass to finance this and then using these vendor financing arrangements etc and then it got looped into a national defense imperative i think that's what we're watching is the fact that people say well there's a big debate is japan better or excuse me is china better is china not better i don't know i don't have the credentials to know and evaluate which ai models better i read smart people who i think are do have the credentials and they kind of go both ways with the different qua here's what i know 30 years in markets the fact that we are discussing is china competitive or not is all that matters because it means it's close enough for government work and in sectors that are as richly valued as this i mean we are valued in friggin lala land on pers you know multiples of revenues you know p e to the ones that even have earnings uh and they've borrowed a bunch of money it was all borrowed on the come all of it it wasn't like they had the cash flows to pay this stuff and so if you have a forget about a down round if you just have a slower round of refinancing things like open ai equity etc the whole whole thing starts to come unwound. And that has capital flow implications, that has growth implications. And to your point, that long bonds in the United States, 10 and 30-year treasury, sold off over the last two weeks or last month as the AI trade was questioned over the last three weeks, it's a really troubling signal. Now, you could say, well, we went back to war and oil went up and that's why. Fair point. But I think you raise a great point, which is oil's down today. What's a 10-year? I saw it earlier down two basis points.
Speaker 2I mean, it's not the rally you would expect for oil down five bucks on a pause of the war.
Speaker 1No, no. And so, yeah, I think it's super important. We had charts in a report for clients last week, which highlighted, I saw that not, or excuse me, labor force participation rate in the United States is tanking. It's not only is it tanking, but it's back to COVID lows. And I'm like, all right, well, let's just see what this looks like. I took it back to 2000 and I compared it to 10-year treasury yields. And it's like the same chart, lower labor force participation, lower tenure. Makes sense. Deflationary. 30-year, it's even tighter. Well, let's look at, you know, 10-year term premiums, right? So what's the market, the rate, the market's demanding to buy US longer term paper against that. And it's pretty correlated until 2022, 23. And all of a sudden long-term yields and term premiums had taken off as, as labor force participation rate has turned down. And in the last six to 12 months, all three of those have taken off like scalded cats as labor force participation rate has tanked. That is emerging. We're in a market with a debt and fiscal crisis price action. There is no world where a declining labor force participation rate should be driving sharply higher yields. There's should be no world there, none. And yet it's happening. And so why I think it goes right back to that discussion of, hey, we can pretend, right? You can, you can, you can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. And Warsh and all the others are ignoring debt to GDP is 125%. Japan's a seller. Germany's a seller. Korea is a seller. UK is a seller. UK has been our second biggest creditor, by the way. So they're going to build up their military. Chances are they're going to finance their own bonds instead of ours. And then you've got debt as well. Like I said, debt where it isn't, you've got these off balance sheet liabilities coming on balance sheet at rates that are two, three X of what receipts are growing, what GDP is growing. It is a, it's the same. It's going to be the same after, after world war one. I mean, I don't think that's where we're going because for a lot of different reasons, but directionally it's the exact same problem.
Speaker 2Now you talked about the, the changing nature of the stimulus that we're going through right now compared to COVID, where it was sort of direct to consumers. I mean, do you, do you view there, there being a potential that all of this AI spending has become such a big driver of the GDP growth of the, of the U S economy at this point that, um, it, it is, in many ways, the stimulus and it will be backstopped. Yeah, I do. And to me, the only
Speaker 1question is, is how big a drawdown do you need to justify some sort of treasury, uh, or fed backstop bailout guarantee of the AI thing? Um, I heard credible rumblings. The subject was broached
Speaker 2six to nine months ago already. Oh, really that, that they've already discussed what happens if this whole thing unwinds in specific cases. Okay. And would it be just like, like the public bonds, like the big bond issuance that we hear about from the major companies? Are they, how far down, uh, how far down do you think they would go? What was the fed buying in COVID?
Speaker 1Weren't they buying junk bonds? Weren't they, weren't they buying corporate, they were buying
Speaker 2corporate bonds, right? I don't know if they ever bought the corporate bonds. I know they said they would, they, they just opened the door that that's a possibility that they would do that,
Speaker 1but they never actually stepped in. Yeah. If they did it at all. Yeah. If they did it at all, small, but that was enough, right? So I think look at the, look at the imperative of how this is being described, right? We can't afford to lose this. This is the new cold war. China can't win blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And then look at the reality of the math. And you just, to me, it is, it's elemental. They're going to have to buy backstop bond. Like they'll just take over NVIDIA, right? NVIDIA is on the tape today, guaranteeing, you know, $250 billion of, uh, I think it's open, open AI. I think it's open AI, uh, some sort of data center here in Ohio, actually. And interestingly, NVIDIA is down on the day I last I saw, right? So it's NVIDIA is starting to trade down on guaranteeing other people's bonds. That's another signpost, right? Um, that shouldn't be happening. And ultimately I think treasury or fed will take over for, for NVIDIA. Uh, this is guaranteeing these things that I'll take over. For SoftBank take over for, and just backstop the whole thing. And it's, you know, it may not even be that expensive per se, but I think that's, what's going to happen. And it'll be a really. Okay. I think stocks go up on that. I think bonds go down on that. I think dollar goes down on that. I think inflation goes up on that. Um, I think gold goes up on that. I think Bitcoin goes up on that. Uh, I think industrials go up a ton on that. So to me, it's just so crystal clear. Yeah. That's where this is going, but I, I, again, it's Warsh is going to lose all credibility after it happens. And, and so will Besant, right? Because Besant will be running the frigging Chinese economic model. He's been complaining about for the last 15 years of his career. And that's fine. Like this, that's what this was always going to go, but just don't pee down my back and tell me
Speaker 2it's raining. Just tell me the truth. Yeah. I mean, they're taking stakes in companies like Intel. It seems there's Chinese characteristics for, for sure. Um, but I want to talk a little bit more about the, the short term. We had quite the whipsaw in expectations in, in rates this year from everybody saying we're going to get cuts to now people are starting to price in, in hikes. The, the, there was a period in time when people were pricing in cuts and the long end was selling off. Now we're getting, we're having inflation concerns and the long end was selling off. And, and so I, I wonder like, is there a world where without intervention in the bond market, where you see, um, where you see the long end stabilizing? Yeah, I think we're past,
Speaker 1I think we're past, you know, we've crossed the Rubicon on that front. Um, and the bond vigilantes were for a long time, kneecapped by derivatives, um, and the private, the private vigilantes, but the, but the vigilantes now, are, you know, Kevin Warsh is a vigilante, right? He's talking about selling bonds out of the long end. Um, the, the global sovereigns are, are, you know, foreign central banks are vigilantes. They're not buying this stuff. They haven't bought this stuff for 12 years, uh, on a net basis. Central bank holdings of, of, of bonds are, are down slightly over 12 years as the debt has risen. Like I want to see about like $18 trillion over that time. Um, maybe it's just 12 trillion. I don't know what's 6 trillion between friends, right? Um, the, uh, so I think we're past the Rubicon on that front. Now, what could I do to get the long end down? I could get it down for a little bit for you, right? If you blink, Hey, S and P down 40 S and P down 20 in two days, three days, I could get the long end bid for you for three, four or five days, maybe even a week. And then it's going to fall back down. And then it's going to fall back down. And then it's going to fall back down. And then it's going to turn around. It's going to start selling off with the S and P. We saw that in COVID. We saw it in liberation day. We saw it on the war. We keep seeing it. People don't want to believe it, right? It's like, it's like, if you're watching the movie jaws and it's like, Oh, girl washes up, she's cut in half. That's just a motorboat engine. And then like a little boy gets chomped up. And then the other, the fisherman gets chomped up. And like you see in the teeth and you're seeing the bite mark, then you see the shark. and you're, and, and, and yet you go, I'm still going to go swimming. I don't know what's eating people. They say, you know, there's something out there. Like the issue is there's too much supply. There's not enough demand at the rates that we can afford. And everybody knows it. It's a, cause it's a pretty straightforward math problem. And so like, I can get you rates down for a week or maybe even 10 days. If we crash S and P, like if we have a black, another black Monday, like 87 event, I could get it down for you. The other way I can get it down for you is Kevin Warsh prints money and buys it and caps it. That'll get it down for you. And I guess the last way is, you know, Besant going to, you know, Warsh and saying, Hey, revalue, you know, revalue gold and, and, or, or Besant letting gold really run and then revaluing it and then telling Besant or Warsh, excuse me, to create a TGA deposit. And Besant buying back his own bonds. Then I could, then I could get it down for you. And if you did that, by the way, you get that, the GDP down now. sort of these traditional metrics that for the last 30, 40 years, I'll work right. Hey, if we have equities down 10%, that's going to create demand for bonds. It will not create demand for bonds until you de-lever the bet. You have to de-value debt to GDP from 125 to at least 80 and probably more like 60 to 70%, which means you either got to whack the heck out of the dollar, um, particularly against gold, or you have to do yield curve control. That's it. Like those are the ways out. And you know, they want, they don't want, they don't want to do that because then they're going to, you know, they're going to be the John laws who have to buy back all their bonds at night printing money. I mean, this is going, which one do you think is,
Speaker 2is more realistic? You, you do have to give Warsh a little credit that he has at least come in saying that he wants to change the way that, that the central bank thinks. Uh, the idea of revaluing gold in the past, you know, monetary policy, policy regimes of the past few decades seems kind of outlandish. I mean, do you think that they would, that, that Warsh would revalue gold or do you think he's going to be more traditional and just do, you know, financial
Speaker 1repression? I think he's gonna be much more traditional. I think, I agree that it's outlandish that they would do gold at least until they absolutely had to do it. Um, I was just one, trying to find, on my screen, something that Warsh said recently, cause everyone's talking it right. So, uh, last week he told Congress that, uh, the federal reserve is not in the bailout businesses. Um, especially not for the biggest debtor of all the U S treasury. Sorry. That was Gregory Ip at the wall street journal. He did though, append an escape clause. This is a direct quote last week from Kevin Warsh quote in periods of crises, like this, the 2020 pandemic and the 2008 crisis central banks by design need to step into markets to create a fair price and quote. Okay. So we'll get fair prices fair for who? Yes. We'll get fair prices. Yeah. So he's basically like, he's full of crap to be blunt. Like he's, he's, he's going, when push comes to shove, he's going to play tough for a little bit. He's a play harder to get, right? He ain't going to sleep with the markets on the first date. He's going to wait till date three when he has a crisis. And you know, then he's, then he's going to be sleeping with them, you know, giving them whatever they want because he's, he doesn't have a choice. His alternative is the treasury market dysfunctions again, because it's a supply demand problem. If he wants to change that,
Speaker 2he's got to devalue the debt. Well, let's talk about where some of that demand is going. You said it's going to just other bond markets just because there is so much debt. And I think that's so much issuance, but also central bank buying of gold has, has reaccelerated. There was a brief blip in March when I think people were, were selling gold, you know, to, to get dollars to buy, to buy oil as, as the price of oil went up, you know, emerging markets in particular. But since then buying of gold has resumed. We have stabilized a bit in the gold sell-off. I mean, do you think that now with, the crisis maybe behind us again, do you think we are going to start to see the gold buying pick back up in a resume, a resumption of the rally? I don't know if the crisis is behind us or not.
Speaker 1I think that remains to be seen. But I do think the gold buying will just resume because I think there's a moment in time where people sell gold to get, to get oil, right? Basically to finance reserves. And they sold treasuries right alongside that as well. You can see that in the data. But the longer a war goes on, the less you want to own bonds and the more you want to own, the more you want to own gold. And also what this war has demonstrated, which is the Americans not only can't go to war on anything other than a weekend or, and, and as long as the 10 year treasury yield is below 4.7%, but even under those conditions, they can only go to war for a couple months and then they run out of defensive missiles. And need China to restock them. And they can't make their own rare earths yet. And in no, with those set of circumstances, what do you want to own the bonds of that country? Or do you want to own gold? Especially knowing that, you know, they're busy sanctioning everybody over everything. Um, still, um, you know, is there, if I was a, any random country having been threatened by Trump, Greenland, France, Spain, England, Germany, Korea, they pulled the missiles for me, right? So, you know, they love me so much. And then when, you know, when the crap hit the fan, they pulled all my defensive missiles and came to Israel. What would you own? I would own, you own gold. And so I think that's what we're seeing. So I think, and then, oh, by the way, the Chinese who were supposed to be the worst herd of all of this, right? There were some, in some circles, this was a 5D chess move to choke off the Chinese. What did the Chinese do? You know, they bought like 80 tons. Then the next month, and when the price fell, then they bought like 100 tons. Then the price stopped falling. Then they bought 110 tons. Then they bought 140 tons. This most recent month in June, they bought 173 tons. They're literally buying like 70%, 60, no, it's closer to 70% of, of global gold mine production on a monthly basis when they're supposed to be collapsing because they don't have any oil and this and that and the other. So like that narrative is being demonstrably proven false. But I think they're also going, oh, you're going to knock gold down. Awesome. Wave it in, wave it in because, and so I think really from here on out, you know, I think gold buying is going to continue because you want to own the bonds of someone who can't afford to go to war over 4.6, 4.7%. Why? Because they're telling you if we have actually have a real war, they're going to print, they're going to print those bonds into like, oblivion to buy them all. Just buy gold.
Speaker 2So you think gold purchases are going to continue to accelerate from China? Do you, let's say this, this crisis does continue. I mean, obviously they stabilized the price. They stopped importing oil. They sold a lot from their reserves. We don't really know how big those reserves are. Do you think that that's a lever that they can continue to pull? And how long do you think it can go? I do think it's a lever they can continue to pull.
Speaker 1Number one, if I read correctly the other day, they're the biggest refiner in the world, right? So, and they can buy it in, they can buy it in yuan and dollars. And so now you can sort of play with the, you know, you buy it in yuan, you can sell it in dollars. You can, there's a lot of things you can do with a refinery and the ability to buy feedstock in two currencies. So that gives you a lot of opportunity. What have we been hearing for the past year plus? What are they flooding the world with? Solar panels and electric cars. Like, you can see what's happening there. According to at least one source, in the first half of 26, they reduced oil demand by 1.4 million barrels a day by shifting to EVs. They have the grid to be able to do that because they spent the prior 20 years investing in grid and instead of in, you know, fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And so I think they have an ability, you know, their reserves are not, their reserves are not infinite, their SPR. And when Trump got elected, I hear they, businesses ramped up cash holdings to like six months of cash because they figured a trade war was coming. Trade war came, Besant got and said, we've got all the leverage. And two months later, he folded like a cheap suit, as did Trump. Then they spent 2025 really ramping up SPR and probably longer, right? SPR holdings. War comes, they run it down. My guess is they were probably ramping up purchases with oil down in the 60s and 70s a few weeks ago. Restore, you know, and we've certainly seen, we've heard that, you know, in terms of some public on the LNG market. on the LNG side, ramp up of that. And so they seem to be doing a pretty good job of managing these. And again, does it mean they can go forever? No, does it mean they're omnipotent? No, but they don't have to be faster than the bear. They just have to be faster than the pudgy camper that's over there in Washington and in Europe and in the UK. You know, those fat campers over there, the barrels will run down faster. It's just a pain contest. And like they won the pain contest in April, right? Of April of 25, Liberation Day. We're gonna put it to them. By May, CEOs of several of the biggest retailers in the US, they went to the White House and said, there's gonna be empty shelves in three to six months if you don't stop it. Round one of the pain contest goes to China. Okay, let's go round two. We're gonna cut China off, Venezuela, Iran. Bar market goes to 466. It folds like a cheap suit. You know, 10-year yield goes to 466. So, you know, I've been very surprised. I was very surprised by what China did, to be honest. Had they not, I would have been right. Because they did what they did. I was wrong about the disruption, the oil, oil interruptions, et cetera, we're going to cause. So I think they're going to continue to have flexibility around that because they've shown a willingness to be flexible and a willingness to react. Right. They don't wait for, you know, they just go, look, it's Trump. Oil's at 65. Do we think he's going to suddenly start being rational? Nope. Buy oil. Oil's at 95, 10 years at four, seven. Do we think he's actually going to blow up his own market? No, he's Trump. He's inherently self-interested. Sell oil. So, you know, you know, whatever. I, I, I think that's what they're going to keep doing.
Speaker 2And it is interesting because China had this huge property bubble. Their market has gone nowhere for a number of years. They've been willing to suffer through this period of. Down prices from, from their biggest asset classes. And I'm sure it's been hard for those people, but they haven't, they haven't folded on it. They've, they've said, this is what we need to do to get things back to normal and they're doing it. And here we can't take it for a week, two weeks of, of market pain before we fold. I mean, you talked about the CEOs coming to, to say, you know, the shelves are going to be empty to me. I think it feels so much simpler than that. It just feels like it's, it's market prices. It's purely market prices and they just can't, we can't take the pain here.
Speaker 1I would, I would, yeah, I would take it one more, which is the equity market is the economy. They actually have a real economy. We don't, and they're related. So it's a little bit of a, a, a flip statement, but she came out and I think 2018 and said, homes are for living and not for speculating. And when you look at when he gave that speech and what happened to home prices after it was. It was a distinct policy choice. We are going to deflate housing. And then you can also see loans picking up into different industrial prod, you know, basically making stuff to make sure that China 2025, which they had laid out in 2015 would happen. And so they redirected capital out of housing into goods, increasing goods supply, which is, you know, we're seeing that in competition and cars, right. corporate profit margins, et cetera. It comes down to a view of where they want their country to be in 10 or 15 years, right? So do we want, you know, America, we cater to the boomers, right? Home prices have to stay high. Equity prices have to stay high. Realistically, if either of those fall, the fiscal situation, which is already teetering, completely implodes. The Chinese, because they didn't do the dumb wars and because they don't have the social programming that we do, right? You know, people say, well, their debt to GDP is higher. Well, yeah. Do you include entitlements? Because if you do, it's not. And because they don't have the social safety net that we have, and they didn't do the dumb wars that we did for 25 years, they have more leeway to take some of that pain. And take the longer run view of where do we want to be in 2030? Because what's going to start to happen if we just let home prices run and run and run where people can't afford houses is you're going to start to have political instability. If you have, I mean, there's Peter Turchin did a book on it. T-U-R-C-H-I-N. I can't think of the name of it right now, but he looks, he created a scientific field called Clio Dynamics, which looks at basically it's wealth inequality and elite overproduction leads to political instability. And so people say, hey, it's great. The U.S. market's up and houses are up. And so it's all fine, right? Like think about what Trump, what was her name? The blonde, right? She's getting asked about Epstein. And she's like the 1,050,000, right? That tells you internally, that's the only thing they're talking about. This is our talking point, 1,050,000. That's great. But political instability is already happening. Trump's here because of political instability. Charlie Kirk got shot. That's a symptom of political instability. The CEO of UnitedHealthcare getting assassinated on the streets of Manhattan. These things didn't happen in America when I was growing up. You know, I have, I have, I have a friend of mine who has the contract for the medical examiner's office in two major or two, two major second tier cities in the United States. Okay. So anybody who gets a drug overdose, suspicious circumstances, accident, they get them. And it's a monopoly. They said, we are seeing, we are busier now than they were at the depths of COVID when people were drinking, shooting, and, and overdosing themselves to death. So you've got this sort of political stability dynamic that I think the Chinese are considering because they don't have the financing role that they have to address that we do quarter to quarter to quarter to quarter in the, in the election cycle. You know, every, every six to 12 months. And so it's smarter, like how do you stop political instability? Well, the first way you do it is you don't make houses go up and up and up. So no one can afford a place to live. Like that's a pretty good, smart way. Like if I wanted to create a revolution, I would jack up food prices. I would jack up housing prices. I would jack up healthcare prices. I would jack up education. And one of the Chinese are giving away education. Their home prices have crashed. Equity prices are down, right? So, you know, it could be a sign of the Chinese. Maybe they're afraid of, of a revolution. I don't know, but I can tell you the U S right. What do we have in New York? We have a vowed Marxist running this city of New York and
Speaker 2people are like, this is fine. That Dows at 50,000, there are mixed feelings here, uh, depending upon,
Speaker 1uh, who you're talking to. It's going to get worse. It's going to get worse because you've got a lead over production and you've got record wealth inequality. Wealth and equality America is higher now than it was in the gilded age. It's going to keep getting worse.
Speaker 2Yeah. It's interesting. The Chinese as well, you know, I was invested in some of their, uh, consumer lending names. There's just seeing incredible loan growth and the Chinese by and large, um, it's not a debtor society and it's people paid back their loans at incredible rates. Um, and, but the Chinese cracked down on it. They said, we don't, we don't want to have so much of a, a credit consumer credit driven economy because it creates these, these negative feedback loops when, when the tide goes out and they just, they stepped in and they, they shut down on a lot of the loan growth and a lot of the stuff that made that made the whole thing work. Um, yeah. And the CCP doesn't like competition, right? Because at the end of the
Speaker 1day, if you're making loans to the people, you're in control of the people, not the CCP. They don't
Speaker 2like that. Yeah. Well here, the market seems to be, seems to be in control. So we've talked about gold. We've talked about bonds. So what about the dollar? I mean, you said you think they're gonna have to, to whack the dollar, get it down, um, to, to help fix some of these problems. I mean, how is that gonna happen with, uh, with yields just continuing to rise and rise and rise? What are they gonna have to do to get
Speaker 1the dollar down? Yeah. And with oil where it is, right? Like you had a moment you could do it and then you did this dumb war and now you can't, you can't, you can't, you can't devalue the dollar with oil at 85. Come on. You're right. You know, very, very clearly over the last three, four years, as long as oil is between 60 and 80, the treasury market's fine. Once it hits 85, it starts a dysfunction. Yields go up. You gotta get it down. So if you're, you know, for Besson who came out in early 25 said judge us by the 10 year. Well, how you doing buddy? You're not doing good. The three arrows are all in the toilet and the 10 years at four, seven, nice job. Heck of a job, Brownie, right? Okay. Um, so how are they gonna do that? They're in a bit of a pickle, right? I think the way you do it is ultimately you let a momentary risk off. Um, the challenge is, is, is that's like, you know, that's like trying to, you know, just have a small explosion by lighting a gasoline soaked rag and a nitroglycerin plant. Like we just want a small explosion. So we're just gonna, it's tricky. Uh, I think you need political cover. So you're gonna need risk off for a moment. And then you can, you know, but paradoxically send the dollar higher that creates a debt feedback loop. That's gonna send yields higher. You're gonna get a moment where yields go down and then they're gonna go up at the long end on that, just like they have repeatedly. Because again, your biggest marginal 40% of the notes and bonds net issuance since 2022 has been bought by Cayman islands hedge funds since 2022 that's fed white paper last October. What do, what do Cayman islands hedge funds do? You know, number one, they managed to a monthly mandate. So anytime volatility goes up anywhere, they, they, they de gross their entire book. What do they sell? They sell treasuries because they're the ones that, you know, a lot of them are doing the bigger ones. Certainly you're doing this hedge fund relative basis trade. That's who's buying all these treasuries. And that's why in the short run, why treasury yields, long, long yields go up on risk off. Now, you know, you got very fickle creditors, so how do they get it down? I think you're gonna need a risk off and then you're gonna need something that looks a lot like what we saw post COVID, which is, you know, de facto yield curve control, you know, and, and,
Speaker 2with fiscal stimulus. And that'll do it. Is that a dip you would be a buyer of? I mean, we talked about how reactive both the elected government and our central bankers have been to any sort of instability in prices. I mean, you look at comparing to 2008, how much faster during COVID they got the dollar swap lines out. They talked about backstopping the credit markets. Now we've got the president, if we get oil above a certain point, the war is off. We're incredibly reactive. And any dip, whether it was Liberation Day or the Iran war or COVID, I mean, the greatest dip buying opportunity that many of us have ever seen. Is the next dip going to be one that you want to buy? I think all the dips are ones you want to buy in dollar terms.
Speaker 1Equities are still down 30% from 2022 in gold terms. And they're down 40% from 2000 in gold terms. And I think that is, you know, as long as China is China, I think that's the new regime, right? Where even if we want to beat down gold and sort of make a statement about the dollar, what are the Chinese doing? They're just showing up and waving it in every month more and more. And we can't afford to have a force majeure issue in London or in New York in physical gold. And so ultimately the Chinese are driving the boat on gold. Chinese are watching all this and going, this is a disaster. Like we did this, like in the King dynasty, like 400 years ago, we know how this goes. You know, it's like the back of the future. I've seen this one. Those are the Chinese right now. I've seen this one. I know how this goes. So they're going to keep buying gold because there is no mystery how this is going to go. And probably silver too, by the way. And so dips should absolutely be bought in dollar terms. And, but in gold terms, I think, I think the next five years, I think we're gonna look back in five years and I think the S and P is going to be up big and goal or in dollar terms. I think it's
Speaker 2going to be down in gold terms. What do you have for your price target for, for gold over the next
Speaker 1year? I think it probably gets back and probably through all time highs. Um, I mean, that's actually a pretty big rally from here. So I don't know. I don't like to be that aggressive, so let's, let's say it goes back to 5,000 and, you know, eventually, um, because I, I also think part of it too, like the other thing about the Chinese is a very gradualism, right? They're not, they don't do big splashy things like the Americans do, right? It's very subtle, right? We drop bombs and wipe out, you know, the family or the ruling family of Iran. Chinese are much more subtle than that. Um, and they're there, they've done the same thing, as it relates to gold. Um, you know, they were on the ropes a bit in the third quarter of '23. And what happened? Like they changed the rules a bit and spreads in Shanghai blew out gold premiums, blew out. And we wrote a report at the time for clients are using gold to defend the yuan. And we were right. That's exactly what happened is basically, okay, the yuan's under pressure. We're just going to empty London and New York gold vaults until the pressure's removed. And it was, and it was, and, uh, and they didn't, it was so, uh, by, I, I bring that up by way of saying, I don't think like they're going to be, you know, a lot of gold people like, oh, they're going to make it 10,000 tomorrow. Probably not. That's not their style, but their style is it'll be 5,000 in a year and it'll be 6,500 in two years, three years, it'll be 8,000 in four years. And it'll be 10,005 years, you know, in the essence, and people have gone up from 7,000 to 11,000 or something and yeah, S and P up in dollar terms, down in gold terms. Um, because that's the one thing, the other thing that, that a lot of the, sort of the, the China hawks cycle, oh, property's gone nowhere. Stocks are gone nowhere. Tell me how gold's done in China. Cause that's, that's one of their biggest savings. It's also a huge capital base for the bank banking system. How's gold done? Oh, well that's gone. That's up four X in the last six years. And oh, by the way, the same people looking for a collapse in the one against a dollar have completely missed a collapse in the one against gold, which is what's happening. And it it's literally the way the system's designed for the one to fall against gold over time. So, um, because that's how they're internationalizing the one they've said that repeatedly for 10 years, 11 years, 12 years. So, uh, that's how I, that's how I think about equities. It's it's dollar terms, gold terms. Uh, I think ultimately good for Bitcoin too, but not yet.
Speaker 2Yeah. We haven't talked much about Bitcoin. What's what's happening there. Uh, I think there's obviously a huge, uh, five-year comp problem. I think that that's, you know, something with Bitcoin, obviously you have the, the store of wealth, the people who want to get a hard asset outside of the dollar system, but at the same time, it's a highly, still a highly speculative asset. And you've got all of these other speculative assets right now that people are making money on. You're seeing, uh, streamers who used to cover me, coins are covering AI stocks. How much of the, of the slowness in Bitcoin, do you attribute to there's another flashy shiny thing in the room right now for speculators to go and tell their
Speaker 1friends about, I think that's a big part of it. I think you've got, you know, that, that, that thing, you know, flashy, flashy competition syndrome. You've got a civil war going on in Bitcoin of sorts, right. Between the BIP versus non-BIP and like, I'm a Bitcoin guy. I like it. I've owned it. I don't have time to figure out what's what I don't like, just tell me when you stopped like beating the heck out of each other and what, what we're doing. Um, you've got some increasing still, you know, credible concerns about, um, when quantum becomes an issue potentially for a part of the base of Bitcoin out there. And to me, the other, you know, you've also got the four-year cycle issue, which suggests we have more downside from here, given historical precedent, um, you know, through the, maybe the fourth quarter, early fourth quarter this year. And then you've, for me, the biggest hangup for me still is it's still trades like a tech stock days when NASDAQ's up, it's up when NASDAQ's down, it's down, except for this year, it's underperformed the NASDAQ massively for the first half of this year. And then it has actually outperformed the NASDAQ a bit in the last two, three weeks, um, because it's already been knocked down. Now, I don't, I'm very nervous about anything tech related. I don't like the setup there at all. And so basically for me to kind of, you know, I, I owned a lot of Bitcoin. It was a huge part of my liquid net worth. I sold most of it, almost all of it. Um, last year, um, 96,023, 24 ounces of gold. We're still sitting here 14, 15 ounces of gold, 65,000. Um, I'm not buying it back with what I see the risks on tech. Cause I just, you know, yes, Bitcoin's already sold off, but if we really get a risk off that we need for Warsh that I think we need for Warsh to have the political cover, to cut rates aggressively, weaken the dollar, all these things, and this newly emergent competitive setup from China, um, look, if we have a two, three month stretch where the NASDAQ really gets hammered, I don't want to own Bitcoin on that. And I'll be, I'll be happy to be wrong if that's the case. Look, if Bitcoin goes up in that, I'm going to be dead wrong, but I just have not seen anything in the last several years to suggest that if the NASDAQ really gets waylaid for a month or two or three months, that now that, that, that Bitcoin's going to somehow, you know, scream to do now when they start backstop and NASDAQ, or when it gets NASDAQ gets bad enough that they're it's becoming apparent. They're going to have to backstop it. That is where I want to be adding back to Bitcoin and I might be being too cute by half, but I think that's where this whole thing's going. That's, that's how I see it playing out. And then I want to own, I want to low, I want to be loaded up Bitcoin to the gunnels and, you know, then I'll take my chances. I just think the price is going to be lower than where it is today. You think that
Speaker 2Bitcoin is going to be a play over gold? Yeah, I would, I mean, history would suggest that. Yeah. We have a fed meeting coming up. As you said, the first, uh, the first date with the market worked out. And, and he said, you're not getting any and, uh, everybody interpreted it as, as quite hawkish. Um, but he's also said that he doesn't want to be giving a lot of guidance. I mean, what do you think the chances are that he kind of, um, whipsaws the market around and goes back the other way, just to sort of teach us all a lesson about taking his words too seriously. I mean, do you think that we're, we're set up here with, with everybody expecting hikes into the end of the year for Warsh to kind of wiggle around a little bit and, and, and make the market unwind all of that
Speaker 1pricing? I have no edge here. So take everything I am about to say on it with, with a, with a block of salt, the fiscal situation suggests he can't hike rates this year, full stop. The oil market suggests he should hike rates full stop. The tech market suggests he should be cutting rates aggressively full stop. If he cuts rates re-hikes rates long end yields are probably going higher either way which is only going to then so if i'm him i never would have taken this job you know unless they're like depositing 100 million dollars in a swiss bank account or something for him to be the bad guy right or something like that but even then i don't know that i would do it because my reputation is worth more to me than 100 million dollars so anyway i don't know what he's gonna do but i feel pretty strongly that every movie makes there's gonna be something wrong with it like he's got options but they're just all unpleasant raise rates the 25 basis points might be enough to kick the legs out from under what's going on in ai i mean look what we're watching like you said earlier today okay well don't do anything then okay well now oil picks back up you know and inflation picks back up lose the line and even more yeah what are you gonna do like and it ultimately you know the fix is simple it's just not politically easy it's it's you know those entitlements have to go away and there's no way you can make them go away okay so if the entitlements won't go away then the war's got to go away and the defense department's got to go away but it's got to go away without a recession i can't do that and okay well then the last options you got to cut rates when you shouldn't be cutting rates and buy a bunch of bonds when you shouldn't be buying those bonds devalue the heck you know yield curve control devalue the heck out of the currency those are your options um and you know so to you so to your point right this is the first yeah this is the first day last month was the first date here's the second day i think he still plays hard to get but i think he plays hard to get in an easy to get way right where there's some mystery like hey just stay with me you know it's gonna be just give me a little time it's gonna be it's i'm gonna be canceled by me too luckily by the uh unfortunately by the end of this conversation apparently but um luckily it's not a couple years ago at any rate um i think he's he's trying to ride two horses with one ass for another another couple another you know till the next meeting i don't even know when that is i should but i don't but it's probably what six weeks eight weeks oh yeah 68 weeks september or something like that um but it's great right it's like the old rush song if you know if you don't even if you don't make a choice you still made a choice yes perfect line for powell he's he's gonna have to flop a card one way or another he flops a card on wednesday yep and he's got three you know it's not like this is like you know these aren't important constituents right this is oil and inflation the treasury market and and an ai which is this like the key driver to economic growth over the last two years right so you're like one of them is going to be unhappy at least and maybe two and you know that'll set us
Speaker 2up for the third day which could be real doozy i want to close with a question about about sequence saying and what you're watching and how you think this is all going to unfold what is the area that's going to start this is it the ai trade on unwinding is it losing the bond market is it more conflict the the forever war um in the middle east what what is it that you think people should be paying most attention to to sort of see the path forward that you're talking about unfold
Speaker 1i don't know and that's what scares me that's why i'm sitting you know personally of my liquid net worth i don't know that's what scares me that's why i'm sitting you know personally of my liquid net worth nearly sixty percent in cash t-bills and gold bullion because i don't know um i've got like a bunch of of you know flies flying around looking for a windshield so what's the windshield is it the japanese bond market i don't know is it supply chains now that we're sort of reclosing hormuz i don't know is it the uk bond market i don't know is it the german bond market i don't know is it the u.s bond market i don't know is it this war i don't know is it you know the fact that russia has been helping target u.s assets and and can continue to do so and we're out of patriot missiles and something untoward goes boom i don't know is it ukraine and iran getting into it now and all of a sudden you know i don't know there are so like and again i wouldn't care i wouldn't care it's too strong i would care a lot less about any of these things if we were trading at 2002 pe multiples or or low and levels of sentiment if we were trading it to 2008 you know if we were trading at 1980 right we're like a 42k schiller pe like it's it's la la land and that's why you know even though i would expect gold to sell off as if any or all of these things go boom in the short run i think gold actually would go still go down because you're still a financialized instrument i look at all these things and like it's just so crystal clear i want to have the gold position there because we know in two years dollar you know stocks higher in dollar terms lower in gold terms like gold is now the reference point to sort of everything in my view uh as a result of all the the untenability of all these issues the untenability of wars like he's got to make a choice and they all suck there there's no good choice right like you know do you want to shoot yourself in the head in the heart or in the nuts pick like uh uh nine no no you have to shoot one pick
Speaker 2that's where he is so between stocks the dollar and the bond market which one do you think is a bigger bubble right now the biggest bubble
Speaker 1i guess is still the bond market on a real basis right it's to to to to because to own long-term bonds you have to believe that your own government is going to defund itself defund the defense department defund the most political powerful political constituencies and crash the stock market which would crash the bond market if they tried it by the way just to preserve the real value of the bond market like there is zero chance that's going to happen and so to me the only question on the bond market is like what is the yield that they ultimately ycc at that's like that's the most interesting thing to me about the bond market the rest of it like i i if you want to own bonds by gold and i think that's eventually that's where the market's going to go like you you if you want to own duration own gold because gold is just a zero percent yielding bond of infinite duration finite issuance and infinite face value why would you own a 10-year treasury which is you know 4.6 yielding infinite supply finite face value finite yield value you're not going to be able to do that and i think as more you know central banks have gotten that they got that 12 years ago u.s banks are like no chinese banks are like yeah wave it in chinese people wave it in yeah i get we get it we get it most of the emerging most of the you know the global south like we get it wave it you know the western western and it's not just a u.s problem it's it's the germans it's the uk there are these sort of they're all on the same page like oh no these bonds these are you know these are valuable i'm reading about the south sea bubble right now it's like i'm reading this book about the south sea bubble right now it's like i'm reading this book about the south sea bubble right now it's like i'm reading this book about the south sea bubble book i'm 100 pages into a 220 page book and i must have laughed out loud like literally 15 times already because it's just like oh my god this is all just happening again yes i've seen
Speaker 2this one i've seen this one yeah yeah exactly yes indeed well luke we will leave it right there people can find your writing for your clients that you talked about today at forest for the trees that's fftt-llc.com as well you're on x you're on youtube whatever your favorite social media platform they can follow you there luke thank you so much for joining us
Speaker 1thanks for having me on max it was a great conversation i appreciate it hope you enjoyed
Speaker 2today's interview remember to check out the fundrise income fund click the link in the description to learn more about the strategy and assets until next time
PodcastTranscript AI