Macro analyst Luke Gromen returns for Part 2 of our interview with him on the unfolding sovereign debt crisis & the likelihood of recession, which he sees as “inevitable” — largely due to higher oil prices and the collapsing commercial real estate market.
Luke also shares his outlook on which assets to consider holding in such an environment, as well as which ones to steer clear of.
Follow Luke at his website https://fftt-llc.com/
And on Twitter @LukeGromen and on YouTube @LukeGromenFFTTLLC
Adam Taggart 0:00
As you look out, rest of this year into 2024 Are the people that are saying, Hey, forget soft landing, we’re going to have no landing, right? We we’ve we’ve finessed this and we’ve avoided a recession. And they’re going to be proven right or wrong, in your opinion.
Luke Gromen 0:17
wrong in my opinion.
Adam Taggart 0:19
Okay. And do you believe that the lag effects are real and are going to increasingly express themselves here? Or is there a different reason why you think recessions inevitable?
Luke Gromen 0:30
No, I think it’s, I think oil is going to get a lot higher. And I think sooner or later commercial real estate is gonna have to be dealt with.
Adam Taggart 0:42
Welcome to Wealthion and Wealthion founder Adam Taggart. Thanks for joining us for part two of our interview with macro analyst Luke Gromen. If you haven’t yet watched part one of our discussion with Luke in which he details why he calculates the US is in the final innings of a sovereign debt crisis that will upend much of the status quo as we know it, head over to our channel at youtube.com/wealthion. And watch it there. First, it sets the context for the investment themes we discuss in this video. Okay, well, let’s get started watching part two of our interview with Luke Gromen.
Luke Gromen 1:17
For a long, long time, dollars, equal energy dot you know, treasuries equal energy. And we are seeing in real time that disconnection between the dollar and energy and treasuries and energy, you’re seeing people circumvent that right when China says, Hey, we just signed a 27 year LNG deal with the UAE or with Qatar, excuse me. And then they signed a second one, like the way the world worked from 19. She’s 1971, at least up until recently, was China sells crap to the US US cents dollars. China takes the dollars, they buy treasuries, and they hold those treasuries for a rainy day when they need to buy LNG. Right. Now, what are they doing? They’re going straight to the source and going here, you take the dollars, and you promise us we will rebuy a 27 year supply of LNG, and then we’ll do it again. Because we would rather own a 27 year supply of LNG in the ground, then we would the equivalent amount of treasuries they’re telling you what’s happening, people just refuse to see it. And that then looks over well, who buys those treasuries. But thanks, well, who buys them? If the Fed and based on nobody, the rates go up until we figure out who’s gonna buy it? For me hope that would that rate, that clearing rate doesn’t bankrupt the US government. Oops, receipts are below Ritu interest expense already, that we’re so I would say one of the seven data.
Adam Taggart 2:49
So do you see us then? Is the Japan ification of the US inevitable at this point?
Luke Gromen 2:57
Do Yeah, but it’s gonna Yeah, the Japan ification of the US is gonna feel like the Argentina is Asian twin deficit nations like the US when they go Japan. They don’t get deflation, they get severe inflation. Right. So you think about Japan, you know, setting aside that we provided Japan’s defense for them for that entire time, so they don’t have to print the money to pay defense. Yep. Setting aside that they are culturally largely homogeneous homogeneous, which has makes the politics of what has happened to Japan, much easier to weather. Let’s just look at the straight economics, which are Japan runs a current account surplus. And Japan has a net international investment position of 60% Give or take of GDP to the positive, the positive, which means they have savings equal to 60% of GDP offshore. So Japan can run deflation. You’re running current account surpluses. Worst case you get this net international investment position piggy bank, you know they could sell 3% of that per year and finance their deficits for 20 years assuming no growth and returns they earn a 3% return on that they can do it almost in perpetuity. Let’s look at the United States. Twin deficits. Net may read negative net international investment position right? So we can’t run deflation because deflation is a positive real interest rate for that right but as a as having positive assets in Japan, deflation means they’re getting positive real rates of return. They can do that all friggin day long. They can do it for you. They can do it for 30 years as we’ve seen. US can’t do that for more than three months. Six months we’ve already seen why because tax receipts fall. And unlike Japan, we don’t have a piggy bank offshore to repatriate there is no piggy bank, the piggy bank is the fed the piggy bank is the Fed printing the money because foreigners have the assets here. So what’s going to happen? Yeah, we can have deflation for like that long. And then the banks have a problem or or foreigners repatriate their assets, you know, we have deflation, the dollar goes up, foreigners start selling the 18 tree and they have rates go up rates go up, and they go up and up until they hit a rate where the US government can’t afford it. And then we go to Japan and go well, let’s just repatriate the net. And oh, we don’t have a net international investment position. In fact, because the dollar is so strong foreigners are pulling their assets home to finance their their dollar debt. We don’t have it what do we do? Jerome Powell, he prints the difference.
Adam Taggart 5:56
Okay, so we’re gonna go a little bit long here, if you can, try to be brief as I can. Because because I do have a bunch of specific questions. I know folks want your, your feedback, and we’ll consider that kind of a lightning round that we’re coming up to. But real quick on this point. So the Argentina ification of America, if it indeed goes that route, and as you’re saying, we’re in the seventh or eighth inning here, so you know, you’re, you’re presumably it’s not going to be too long before we we find out how this ends, right. We’ve got a huge part of the populace that is hanging on, you know, by their financial fingernails here, right? I mean, we’ve had this policies to date have rewarded the already wealthy, right. And if we get into an Argentina like scenario, where the purchasing power of the currency really starts thinking hard. I mean, presumably, the people who own financial assets, as long as those financial assets are inflating in price commensurate with the the purchasing power decline in the dollar, they’re going to be okay. But again, that’s the wealthy. Right? How does the average guy not get screwed here? Because you mentioned earlier, you were seeing a future where maybe, maybe the scales would shift a little more, you know, back a little bit to a little more fair scenario between the haves and the have nots. But unless wages increased faster than purchasing power declines? I don’t know I don’t I don’t see how the average guy gets out. Okay, here and I’ll just wrap this question I’m handing to you in the wrapper of I put a video on this channel about a week ago or so reacting to the video that just came out. I don’t know if you saw it, but the the North men north of Richmond, kind of, you know, angry ode to the plight of the working class. You know, I think we’re already beginning to see signs of fracture in the social fabric where, you know, the none so even the middle class, but just the working class, the people that that are still doing their best to make a living and make this country run are kind of getting to the like, Screw it stage, right. So, I guess where I’m kind of going with this is does the Argent Tina ification of the economy does that also include some sort of social uprising or upheaval here is the the masses get to a point where they just can’t get by anymore.
Luke Gromen 8:33
Look, when you do dumb things, for a long time on borrowed money, sooner or later, a reckoning comes and the reckoning is here and the trigger, again, in my view is oil. Once the oil starts once oil rolls over, that’s the destabilizing thing. They can paper over a lot of stuff. They can’t paper over $6 A gallon at the corner at the corner gas station. So let me turn the question around and give us our options. Either the feds, you know, there’s there’s if we want to stop inflation, we have to slash fiscal. That’s it. Okay. So there’s only three things you can cut. Treasury spending, you gotta cut rates, which is inflationary. Okay, so we can rule that out. Or you need to cut entitlements in defense by 40 to 60%. Immediately, permanently,
Adam Taggart 9:30
which no politician will do unless absolutely last. So.
Luke Gromen 9:34
Yeah. Tell me Tell me. Tell me what’s what’s, you know, if the pop is the is the populace going to be in any better mood? If we cut entitlements by 40 to 60%? overnight and leave them there? No. No, by the way, when you if you did that the reverberation of that would collapse the banks it would collapse the Treasury market will collapse global asset markets because again, you’re talking about, let’s say you want to stop the inflation, you gotta get to 8% deficit of GDP back to two. Alright, you gotta cut six points of GDP tomorrow permanently. Okay, great, right? Because unemployment to three and a half, we’re at like peak of the cycle. So you gotta cut six points of GDP, the great financial crisis, GDP fell, what? On a four year basis for that clap that was claps the system, you’re done. COVID COVID was an 8% decline in GDP. If I remember it, maybe nine on an annualized basis, you’re going to cut it six forever. You’re done. You’re done. That’s the thing that people don’t get. You can’t there’s no out there done. You can’t cut six points of GDP, the system collapses. And so now what do you want to do? You must stand aside, let the banks fail, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Okay, good luck. That’s why I say it’s not a barrel. Anyone, switch.
Adam Taggart 11:03
Right. But it’s, but it’s sounding increasingly at least to me, as it’s a switch of death by fire or death by ice.
Luke Gromen 11:12
It’s always been that but again, it’s, this is why I always say, Listen, we need an economic or an energy productivity miracle. We need an energy productivity miracle it is, you know, fusion, small fission, these UAPs, whatever the hell they are, there’s some sort of technology here that can be commercialized rapidly, something that drives a productivity increase, there are other productivity increases, they’re not pleasant, but but you can get out of this. Look, if we overthrow Putin, and get complete control of all of his all of his resources, and we sell them cheap. That’s a productivity miracle. If the baby boom generation passes on over the next five years, and passes their assets quickly, and passes all of their 65 trillion in wealth to their kids, so that we get rid of the entitlement, basically, over a span of three to five years, while the kids boom economic growth, because it’s like a lottery ticket when the wealth shows up in their inbox. That’s a productivity miracle. These are things like there are ways out of this. They’re extremely, they become more unlikely by the day. So that your choices inflation, or collapse, you can’t cut six points a deficit without collapsing this. That’s the part you’re gonna get. Let’s just, well, let’s raise taxes, Obama raise taxes, he raised taxes in 2014. It was called Obamacare. The Supreme Court said it was a tax increase. And so let’s talk through what happened. We The Wall Street Journal in December 2014, said that part of the Obamacare was to push health care costs on to consumers, thereby lowering US government deficits, great, a tax increase. By the middle of 2016, the US deficit as a percent of GDP was actually rising as a result of attempts to make it shrink relative to GDP, because pushing the cost off balance sheet government on balance sheet consumer reduced consumption sent the dollar higher and sent global borrowing rates higher as they printed up global dollar markets. And the deficit started rising. Like there’s no fix for this other than productivity miracle or time machine and going back and being an adult back when the Berlin Wall came down and and readjusting things on the back half of that. Right you need. That’s it? Those are your happy ending.
Adam Taggart 13:42
But both of those being unlikely, right? Yeah. So it’s like I said, sunshine and roses. I’m also I’m also laughing at the we have a lot of boomers in the viewers here. And I know you were just theorizing of ways in which we could we could close our predicament. But I guess not what I’m pretty convinced about the calling of the boomer or, ya
Luke Gromen 14:05
know, I’ve got to boomer parents Boomer mother. I love them. All right, it’s you. But people say well, what are the things you know, I frequently get asked, What would you need to see? That would make you change your view? That would be one of them. If you told me, you know, the boomer population has gone from 70 million to 10 million over the next five years, and their assets have passed down to their kids. I’m going to be wrong, the economy’s gonna be booming. Because it’s gonna float a 40 year old people who are in like peak spending years GDP is gonna be like, massive, the Feds gonna have to keep raising rates like like, that’s you have to be objective as an analyst regardless of whether you know, you can’t be emotional about the inputs, right last me what you know, what are the inputs that can make me wrong? That’s an input that would make me wrong.
Adam Taggart 14:55
Got it. Got it. Okay. So just as we’re going In the lightning round here, there’s a comment that was made by a financial observer. well over a decade ago, guy named Jim Capalaba. And it was back back when oil was, you know, up to $149, a barrel, whatever, right? And he said, You know what? He said, I think oil is the new Fed funds rate. Right? It’s really the thing that is going to dictate economic growth going forward. And it’s at a control of the Fed. Right? You know, it’s just you can’t print more oil, as you’ve said many times in this discussion, right. And so it seems to me that you’re picking up that mantle, right, which is going forward, the oil price is going to be much more important than whatever the Fed decides to do, because that’s the real world which drives controls economic growth.
Luke Gromen 15:47
Yeah, that’s, that’s, you know, we’ve said it before that is nature’s discount rate. Right? That is there’s a commentator in the late 1990s on the financial boards called another. And he said, it’s not well understood that the world’s assets ever embedded in the price of every asset is a full and growing supply of cheap and cheaper oil. Right like that. What’s the value of your house, you know, in an outer suburb, California with no public transport, it has one value with $1 gasoline and $15 gasoline, the value of your house in a 60 mile outside of LA suburb is a lot lower right now that predates work from home zoom, etcetera, etcetera, right there.
Adam Taggart 16:33
But, but, but that cost of energy is embedded in everything that we saw that the lumber you know, I mean, just everything right? Yeah,
Luke Gromen 16:40
everything, everything. So that’s, that’s it’s such a big, it’s such a big,
Adam Taggart 16:44
it’s nature’s discount, right. Okay. All right, lightning round now. So, we talked a little bit earlier about the lag effect, and how the recession has been pushed off, as you look out, rest of this year into 2024. Are the people that are saying, Hey, forget soft landing, we’re gonna have no landing, right? We we’ve, we’ve finessed this and we’ve avoided a recession, they’re going to be proven right or wrong,
Luke Gromen 17:13
in your opinion, wrong, in my opinion. Okay.
Adam Taggart 17:17
And do you believe that the lag effects are real and are going to increasingly express themselves here? Or is there a different reason why you think recessions inevitable? No, I
Luke Gromen 17:29
think it’s, I think oil is gonna get a lot higher. And I think sooner or later commercial real estate is going to have to be dealt with.
Adam Taggart 17:35
Okay. Okay, so let’s, let’s talk about real estate. I have a question for you here about the housing market. How long can this Mexican standoff sustain? And which way? Do you think it’ll be one? I think I know your answer. But I don’t want to put words in your mouth. Maybe before we go to the retail housing market, maybe we can just talk about how big of a time bomb do you expect commercial real estate to be?
Luke Gromen 18:01
It has the potential to be really, really big like. But again, for me. It’s just another metric where it’s a switch. Does the Fed want to let the banking system collapse? Or does the Fed want to sacrifice the value of the dollar and inflation? And the Fed has given us? No, yeah. The Fed is particularly in the last several instances, the springs, banking strains, march 2020s, off the run Treasury market crash, and the repo rate spike in 2019. In September, the Fed has been, has shown no ability or no willingness to stand aside and just wait, they’ve become increasingly proactive. So I think I look at the commercial real estate side as you’re going to get one big crack, and then that’s going to force the Fed to do something. That’s what I’m thinking of it. And that makes it really tough to trade right now. I don’t know what that crack looks like. Right? You get a major, you know, you’ve already had some gating, but you get some sort of very headline, commercial real estate. entity. Say, look, we can’t refinance, however many billions, here’s the keys.
Adam Taggart 19:23
Yeah. And just to be clear, we’re seeing that already a lot in San Francisco. That’s
Luke Gromen 19:29
exactly right. And that’s, you know, there’s sort of you know, and you know, again, I live in Cleveland, so like, people think this will Don’t worry, this will turn around, maybe there’s no, you know, that’s what they’re saying in Cleveland in 1985.
Adam Taggart 19:45
Okay, all right. So, what was it that you see commercial real estate could be one very big additional shoe to drop. I still kind of put that into the lag effect category. Because these guys are coming up to refinancing, they’re just like, Oh my God, my my cost of debts, like more than twice as what it was a year and a half ago, right?
Luke Gromen 20:05
Yeah. And oh, by the way, the banks are saying, Yeah, we need an extra, you know, $10 million of equity, you know, or $100 million of equity, you know, cut us a check or no deal. Right? They don’t have that. Guys don’t have the equity. Are you kidding me? They’re commercial developers. Most of these guys were one and 10 times levered, you know, five times over.
Adam Taggart 20:22
Okay, so big, big potential shoe to drop. Alright, retail housing market. You know, we have mortgage rates over 2x, where they were a year and a half ago, we have kind of a frozen market. Right now, this Mexican standoff that you talked about? How do you think it’s going to resolve?
Luke Gromen 20:45
I mean, it, it’s a question of time, it will resolve down in my view, if the Fed stays here. Because asset prices, I think will roll over, right, ultimately, you know, like, I have friends, you know, they bought a place down in Florida, I guess, a year ago, and their broker had told them that, you know, they hadn’t, the broker had not done a deal with a mortgage on in like, eight months or something. Like, it was just all cash all the time. And so that, I think, you know, as long as you get asset prices stable, that can go on for a while, as you know, boomers buy their kids houses and stuff, right. Like, you know, my wife and I have talked about it where, you know, our oldest son’s senior in college, you know, he gets out and he goes somewhere, like, we’re not going to rent, you know, we’re, you know, not that there’s anything wrong with rents, but then rents are inflated, so we will subtract, yeah, well, I’m rent from us. Why? Why would we learn from somebody else, we have rent from us, we’ll buy the house. And then, you know, we’ll have to pay the rent to us and rent to own will, however, work that out. But I think there’s a lot of that going on, you know, again, boomers and the silent generation of 75% of the wealth in this country. And you know, they’ve had finite time until they die they want to kids, etc. I don’t think they really care about rates.
Adam Taggart 22:07
Okay. Is it just the last point on this? So? Are you concerned about how the extent to which housing could resolve downwards? Like, you know, are we going to be seeing people losing all their equity and that type of stuff? Or do you think it’s going to be more mild than that?
Luke Gromen 22:31
No, I think it’s gonna be a lot more mild than that, because I take a look at where the exposure like and to be clear, I don’t think how I don’t think housing will resolve downward because I think the government’s gonna break away sooner, right, is let’s look across the big pools of capital, who has fixed rates and who doesn’t, right, consumers have fixed rates, corporates have turned their debt out quite a bit. US government hasn’t turned it out. And the banks really happened. So like, you know, I’m making over two points between my mortgage and my money market. Yeah. But that means there’s a banks and we’re bleeding two points. And practically speaking, since it’s a mortgage, it’s effectively the government bleeding and the government just printing it. Right. So that’s, that’s the that’s the trade off. So I think, I don’t think the housing market will result down because I think the US government is going to be forced to force the fed into printing money to finance the government well before the housing market breaks on the downside, because homeowners are locked in and fixed rates because of the installed base of assets, that the boomers and the silent generation have to help smooth over for their kids in particular. You know, that’s, that’s how I that’s I and I, like I said, I think we’re in the seventh eighth inning of that, so I think we are t minus a year to the Feds has to resume QE or something like that.
Adam Taggart 24:01
Okay. Okay. All right. And then last and probably greatest area of interest of most of the viewers. All right, so what does all this mean for the financial markets? Right as we have investors we’re trying to navigate this future that Luke has just laid out is likely going to happen here have certainly taken from you so far. Probably not a fan of bonds, or at least not a fan of long duration bonds maybe you’re a fan of short term you know US Treasuries just to get the nice safe Tebow yield. I’m guessing you’re pretty bullish on oil. Oil related investments. What What else do you like and do not like?
Luke Gromen 24:42
Yeah, so I like what we’ve been talking about for most of this year is a barbell strategy, which is, personally am overweight, cash, overweight, short term treasuries. I am then also overweight gold. I’m overweight Bitcoin. And I’m overweight us electrical infrastructure, equities. I am over, I own some energy, I own oil and some oil related equities. And trying to think if there’s anything else I’m missing, you know, we’ve talked about the we’re still bullish on electrical vehicle related metals, and I own a little silver. But that’s sort of it’s sort of this barbell strategy, because I think it’s really critical to understand what’s happening. People say it’s different this time, and they see you as you should never say it’s different this time. But it actually is, on some levels different this time, by the by the scale an order of magnitude. And, like, if someone tells you they know exactly how things are going to go over the next 12 months run, like run in the other direction, because I’m as you know, as deep and all this is, and I can, I can see very clear to, you know, yeah, could we get a deflationary crash? Sure, do I think it will last very long, it better not. And that’s why I want that cash flow short term treasuries, you know, because I want to have some liquidity I want to have, you know, some some optionality. I have zero conviction, and in sort of the very short term, how it can play out, I have extremely high conviction, and how ultimately play out which is, the Feds gonna have to print the money to finance the government, and it’s going to be very inflationary for a sustained period of time, it will probably be explicit yield curve control in the United States and bondholders who have won no matter what, for 40 straight years, are going to lose no matter what, on a real basis, probably 10 years, I mean, people forget that the average real rate on bonds was negative from 1900. Until 1981, and then it was positive. And it was like, oh, bonds want to talk about great, and then it was massively negative 2022. It’s negative again. So I think, you know, for me long duration and in particular, Western sovereign bonds. I don’t know why you’d be involved. I don’t know why you’d be involved. You know, what would change my mind if the US came out and said we’re gonna cut 40 60%? entitlements? 40 60% of defense tomorrow, permanently. We’re bringing the boys home sorry, boomers, you got enough money, move on. Okay, now you’re now you’re speaking my language I can I can I can buy long term treasuries at whatever, where are we at 4.3 in the tenure, but otherwise, like, Are you kidding me? Why, you know, it’s as a good friend of mine business, who’s I guess Bloodsport, like, great. You know, I trade them have fun. But it’s, you know, what, take 4.3 on 10 years when you can get five I’m short term makes no sense to me.
Adam Taggart 28:01
Got it. Got it. And so presumably, your gold and your Bitcoin holdings, there are really the play against the Fed getting forced to print?
Luke Gromen 28:10
Yeah, I think those two will be the best, the best. And I think gold is a derivative energy play, because, again,
Adam Taggart 28:18
the carpet takes energy to get out of the ground. Yeah,
Luke Gromen 28:21
that’s exactly it. And you can’t you know, if we’re in peachy boilers, I think we are as the evidence increasingly suggests we are you can’t, treasuries can no longer be the primary reserve asset. And so the question is, what’s the next primary reserve asset? And, and all other candidates out there, with the exception of gold, either cannot be or do not want, right? So the pound can’t have it, the yen can’t have it. Euro and the one do not want that exorbitant privilege that turns into an exorbitant burden. And you’re left with gold. And you can see central banks buying gold you can and they’ve been doing so for nine years, they bought more treasure, they bought more gold and treasuries in the last nine years.
Adam Taggart 29:04
I’m just asking this because I’m sure there’s going to be comments beneath this video asking about it. If I don’t. Thoughts then on this, this purported new BRICS currency that’s going to be a basket of commodities priced in gold. Any general thoughts? But would that be a favorable commodity if indeed were launched? Given the reasons that you’re just talking about there?
Luke Gromen 29:27
I don’t think they’re going to launch any sort of separate currency. I think what they’re ultimately going to do is agree that gold buys more commodities in their block than it does in London and New York. And then they’ll just stand back and let free markets do the rest. Which is to say, if Russia, China and Iran all agree that an ounce of gold buy 60 barrels of oil in the BRICS block and Shanghai and Moscow And it’s only 30 Barrels an ounce in the heavily paper Western markets in the UK and in New York. Every hedge fund on the planet is going to say okay, I’m gonna short 30 barrels of oil. In London or New York, I’m gonna take the cash proceeds, I’m gonna buy an ounce of gold and take the ounce of gold to the BRICS bloc. I’m gonna get 60 barrels of oil from the Russians and the Iranians and anyone else participating. I will then sell 30 Barrels cover my short and London or York, I’ll get 30 Free barrels, I can then sell Wash, rinse, repeat risk free arbitrage What could possibly go wrong? And of course, what can possibly go wrong as New York and London get cleaned up gold inventories remarkably fast declare force majeure, and the BRICS will have just used their oil to devalue the dollar against gold by half. And that’s some version of that. Do I think that’s coming this week? Probably not. Do I think that’s where the world is heading? Yeah. Why do I think that? Because in a way, when Russia started buying gold, for the reserves, an ounce of gold bought eight barrels of oil, 10 barrels of oil. Now it’s 30. That number I think is going it has gone up? I think it will continue to go up over time.
Adam Taggart 31:17
All right. Great. Gotta love to delve into that a little more deeply. But time Luke has been so generous and giving us an hour and a half now, folks. Well, Luke, thanks. It’s always wonderful having you on the program. It’s always a very intellectual discussion. It’s always very fascinating discussion. Thank you for coming back on my friend, for folks that have enjoyed this discussion. And for the few who maybe this was the first time they’ve gotten introduced to you and your work. Where can people follow you and your work in the future?
Luke Gromen 31:47
Sure. Yeah, they can check out our website FFTT dash llc.com. They can also check out twitter feed at Luke Grohmann, Luke gr o m, e n.
Adam Taggart 31:57
All right, great. And Luke, can we edit this, I will put the URLs to those up on the screen so folks know where to go, folks. We’ll also put links in the description to the video below. just in wrapping up here real quickly, folks. Obviously, that is a very murky, Mercurial, highly volatile future that Luke is laid out for us here. Certainly to have lots of twists and turns surprises for all of us. I’m sure Luke would even say himself, he said, you know, these things are really hard to predict, especially in the shorter timeframes. So as usual, I’m just going to reiterate, we highly recommend that viewers here, work under the guidance of a good professional financial advisor in crafting a personalized portfolio plan that takes into account all of the issues that Luke has been talking about here. And I’ll tell you, they’re really, it’s a small minority of financial advisors out there that do so make sure you find you know, an advisor that does take all that stuff into account. If you’ve got a good one who’s doing all this for you great stick with them, they are quite rare. If you don’t, or you’d like a second opinion from when it does consider scheduling a free consultation with financial advisors that Wealthion endorses to do that just fill out the short firstname.lastname@example.org only takes you a couple of seconds, totally free to have these discussions with them. There’s no commitment to work with these guys. It’s just a free public service. They offer to help as many people as possible, as many people position as prudently as possible, in advance of the things that Luke thinks may be coming down the road for all the reasons that he discussed here. If you enjoyed having Luke on this program, and likely haven’t come back on, please vote your support for that by hitting the like button, then clicking on the red subscribe button below, as well as that little bell icon right next to it. Luke, I want to thank you again, I’ll give you the last word here. Any parting bits of advice for the viewers?
Luke Gromen 33:43
No, I think it’s really just critical to be conservatively levered, or unlevered. In which case, you know, I think that goes a long way when helping people not just survive, but prosper and the volatility that I think is unfortunately probably going to be a feature in coming years.
Adam Taggart 34:09
All right. Thanks so much. So again, just a wonderful time really appreciate you giving us so much time. Everyone else thanks so much for watching.