These Markets To Double Next, Gold To $9,000: The Debasement Trade Is Exploding | Jim Thorne

And we could have a replay of the regional bank crisis in the United States when Japan blows up. That is really concerning and Bent knows that. You've got listeners that let you know think that you know looking for the next five or 10 bagger. I think I think when this thing when Bitcoin goes there's going to be so much money. >> You think that Canada's economy is in a stagnation period? What can turn this around? Jim Thorne is back. He's a chief market strategist at Wellington Altist Private Wealth. And spoiler alert, Jim doesn't think that holding cash right now is a good idea. So, what is Well, he's very bullish on certain markets. We're going to find out which ones and how we should be playing this level of uncertainty right now. Jim, welcome back to the show. Good to see you. >> Good to see you, David. [sighs and gasps] >> You told uh media this week, earlier this week, that uh your fiat money is being debased by 8 to 9% a year. Tell us more and how you arrived at 8 to 9% because I'm not uh CPI isn't 8 to 9%. So where you getting that from? >> Oh, it's just going back for to the 1970s when the Nixon closed the gold window and taking a simple average of how much M2 has grown. So we're and it's still growing. I mean the M2 chart is parabolic. Uh you know debt, federal debt, government debt's parabolic. So you know even though gold has traded sideways here for a little bit. I mean, we're still in the secular bull market and gold. I mean, everybody hates Bitcoin, but that's got perfect scarcity. So, you know, and in in in these markets, what one needs if you're not a day trader, you need patience. And the fundamental thesis of, you know, the fiat money uh Brentton Woods 2.0 or Brentton Woods system that was developed after World War II, it's over. So, now we've got to negotiate, navigate the new world. So, if not for fiat money, uh, then what? A lot of people, by the way, are still sitting in treasuries waiting for market correction. Uh, but what's your play? >> No, I think I can get get you easily $440 of earnings next year. You put a 22 to 23 multiple on that on the S&P, you get to 10,000. You do you from there, you do 15% growth in earnings, and you I can get you to 14 to 15,000 by the presidential election. So, you know, that big correction that we were supposed to have this year because of the four-year cycle was negated because of the 20% correction we had the year before. David, we've never had two 20% draw years with draw down, two years in a row with 20% draw downs outside of a financial crisis and a recession. And so that big correction was we had was with Trump in the Rose Garden ceremony last year. So we're in a secular bull market. I think people need to understand that it is different this time. We are escaping secular stagnation. This is supply side economic policies focused on the real economy and real earnings. And that old playbook from Bernanki on about it's all demand. It's you know all the asset bubbles. It's about reflation and liquidity in a bubble. It's over. This is a real economic growth phase and Wall Street I think is missing it and framing it using the old playbook and they need to get to the new playbook. >> You told uh BM Bloomberg that uh yeah S&P going to 10,000 gold is going to 9,000. Okay. So before we get to gold 10,000 S&P and then 14,000 by the next presidential election. So you basically think stock markets are going to double before uh 2 years time. Now I think the last time we had this happen was during the co situation where when we had a limited quantitative easing but that's not the case now. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. What what I'm concerned about if you look out 18 to 24 months and maybe the 14 maybe it's 12 and a half by the end of 28. Um, but you're starting to see, and here's the problem, is that AI is a matter of national security. A and actually with regard to the Clarity Act, that's a ma matter of national security. So, we're going to see a massive capex boom that is going to drive productivity growth. And David, what we're seeing right now is just the operating leverage phase of that. We have yet to see productivity kick in. So the re the risk I have is that this thing is front end loaded and we really fly really too far too fast into 28 with the earnings growth and so it's earnings. This phase is going to be about real economic growth. We need to run the economy hot to deal with the debt. Nominal GDP is going to be hot. But here's the problem, David. When you look at the old playbook and and I'm sure you talk to a lot of folks that use the old playbook, when you have nominal GDP growing, real rates are or are interest rates, the long end goes steeper. That's not going to be the case this time because the economic growth is going to be generated by the supply side, not the demand side. So that's why I feel that this is like Alice in Wonderland where Trump and the America first Hamiltonian economic policies, right, is the rabbit hole. The the the the looking glass, right, where everything is weird is is the way Wall Street is interpreting this new era with an old lens. And the queen that keeps saying, you know, you got to run really fast to stay to stay uh where you are is because of the AI war and because we've got to start outrunning the debt debt or we're going to be in a big problem. >> Right now we have a situation where uh the debt keeps going up but interest rates also keep going up. This happened before in 2020. I keep calling back to the co period because this similarities here but in fact we did not get a sovereign debt crisis even though interest rates went up uh following COVID and the debt continued to accumulate and now people are saying the same thing. It's unsustainable. The governments are going to have to either um be fiscally more responsible. We're going to see a mini sovereign debt default here in the United States or the bond vigilantes will continue pushing yields up and that just hasn't happened. Do you buy that narrative? I think it's a little bit different this time because of what's happening in Japan and you know if we start talking about secular stagnation where it really started was out of Japan out of the 80s we have you know in quantitative easing and pushing on a string and Japan is trying to get out of secular stagnation as well and their long end is going up and you know that's response you know that's the the you know that's the we have a problem with the yen carry trade and the end. And I think that that the context that's so interesting to me, David, is the fact that the Asian crisis, the Asian currency crisis in the 1990s was really started by Sorus management when they attacked the Hong Kong peg and they they attacked it from the London office. Well, you know who the head of the London office was? Scott Bass, the the Treasury Secretary today. They attacked the Hong Kong peg. The CCP stepped in and gave the monetary authority enough money, wiped out the Chinese banks, but then the Soros group went to to to attack the Thai bot and that started the crisis. So when Bet comes in and starts basically going and and into the currency market, not telling anybody, I mean, Europe didn't even know about what happened until after the fact. He really understands the plumbing of this trade and he's concerned and he's also on the record saying we don't we can't have high interest rates. So in this period of time where we are going to transition from a period of secular stagnation to sovereign economic real growth we need to finesse it. And I think Bent and Wars are on the same page. Not saying Tiff Mlin and Lagarde and all of the Western central bankers who are Keynesian are on the same page, but those two guys get it. And so, think about the Japanese insurance companies and the Japanese uh uh banks that have JGBs that are basically at net losses right now. And we could have a replay of the regional bank crisis in the United States when Powell raised rates too much, right? But on a larger scale. So the difference from your narratives is Japan. If Japan blows up, that is really concerning. And Bent knows that. >> One thing I've noticed after interviewing so many investors, economists, and market analysts over the years is that experts rarely ask themselves what should I buy in the very beginning of the investment making decision process. In fact, they actually begin the process with a different question altogether, which is why would I own it? Before they allocate capital to any asset, they want to understand the role it plays in a portfolio, the trade-offs, and whether it aligns with their long-term goals. And I think that's a pretty thoughtful approach. So, if you've been hearing more discussions about physical gold and silver and you're wondering whether or not they fit into a long-term financial plan that's right for you, well, it's worth taking the time to understand how they work before making any investment decisions. And that's why I partner with Augusta. Today's sponsor, Augusta Precious Metals, has an experienced education team that offers personalized one-on-one educational web conferences, where they'll explain the different ways people own physical gold and silver, including how purchasing precious metals is different from owning a gold IRA. They'll help answer your questions and help you understand your options better. Whether you ultimately decide precious metals are right for you is entirely your decision. So, if you'd like to learn more, visit lintrustgold.com link in the description down below or scan the QR code here or text lin to 35052 to request Augusta's free guide. Remember, the best investment decisions don't come until you start to understand why you should own something. Yeah, Bestcent uh apparently in 2013 or 2012 made the Soros fund another billion dollars shorting the yen. Now this time he's not working the private sector. He's working for the American people where he's supposed to be. So why do you think he stepped in to backs stop the bleeding of the yen >> because I don't think people I don't think the western central but going back to the way that they're framing it. I don't think the Keynesian central bankers and I include the Bank of Japan and the Bank of Canada and the ECP realize how dangerous this is, right? And so you know in this world high interest rates are inflationary and they are going to cause a stress on the global financial markets. Inflation high interest rates are not always deflationary. That's why I I go back to this Allison Wonderland. People are interpreting this thing as if the world is in a Keynesian slow growth environment. It's not. Japan is trying to get out of decades of secular stagnation. They're actually focused on structurally changing their economy. Hasn't happened in my lifetime. And so, yes, there are going to be people that feel that rates are going to go higher. And that's fair. That's why Bant stepped in. I think there are too many people in the Fed and on Wall Street that are using an old dated playbook that need to get up with the program. >> Okay. what you're seeing now in the US. Could we have a replay of Japan? So, basically a long-term secular stagnation of the US economy from too much debt and then a declining um dollar strength uh due to a variety of factors. If the AI productivity miracle doesn't come through, if supply side economics is a failure, okay, if let's say the Democrats run the table in the midterm elections and we get a really big socialist as the Democrats are getting be basically taken over by the socialists, we get a socialist president in 2028. Yeah. All bets are off, man. I mean, we've got too much debt. I mean, this has to be dealt with. This is dangerous. And so, you would hope that cooler heads would prevail. I am very comfortable with the fact that Bent and Worsh know what the heck they're doing. I am not so comfortable in some of the other central bankers or some of the other Fed officials that seem to be whistling by the graveyard. What do you think is their ultimate objective if they know what they're doing? >> They need to get rates down so that they can outrun debt. They need to get economic growth going. They need to get nominal GDP running, debt down, I mean interest rates down, and then we need to outgrow this. [snorts] >> So, how do they need to do that? How do they convince the Federal Reserve that inflation is not a long-term problem and is a one-off, which by the way you alluded to? Because one of the constraints for getting interest rates down is to convince the Fed to not raise rates to begin with. >> Yeah, it's it look uh I think the Fed has a reputation problem on their hands. They have too many people that are communicating and too many people that are voting that aren't subject matter experts. I'll leave it like that. Supply shocks are not inflationary. Wages are not inflationary. Okay? Tariffs aren't inflationary. That's third-year macro. And you have a lot of people on the Fed, specifically regional Fed presidents, that don't have a graduate degree in economics. Now, I I get it. I get it. I'm a PhD and I hold that against me. Okay. But what I'm really talking about was when they don't understand basic economics and they don't understand that a supply shock isn't isn't inflationary. When they understand that se that second order and third order effects are a theoretical construct that's great at a university setting when we're talking a lecture but they don't manifest itself. Then you sit there and say the big mistake is yeah they they keep raising rates. I think Worsh understands that. And I would also say, David, and I mean, and I don't want to keep pounding on the Fed too much, but if you notice the Fed governors aren't out there yapping, it's the Fed, it's a regional Fed presidents. The smart the smart adults in the room are keeping silent about this. All I am suggesting is that we need to get R into the the Fed funds rates down to neutral. Let's say 275 and go. And David, you're up in Vancouver. I'm in Toronto. And you think the the market's going to take off. Look at we're in secular stagnation up here. Rates are down to two whatever they are two and a half, right? And there's the real estate market is dead. We are entering Canada is entering secular stagnation like the Americans did in 2008 and 2009 and nobody up here tends to realize it. That's why I keep using the Alice in Wonderland narrative. There are too many people that have no clue about what's going on or to be objective about it and we're using the old playbook. >> Let's use Canada as a case study. Do you think if Tiff Mlin tomorrow drops rates to 0% this secular stagnation would go away and real estate would revitalize in Canada? >> They would have to let's put it this way. Let's let's start lowering rates to see what level real estate kicks in at. Let's put it that way. You pick zero. Let's move it down another percent and see what happens. Right? Let's see. Let's try to find it so that the interest rate sensitive areas in the United States and Canada are hammered. They're not causing the change in the relative price level. So why would you raise rates to basically bomb the housing market when oil at the pump is up because of their they've closed the straight of hormuz that is basic and when you talk about that you hear Fed officials talk about it or the Bank of Canada officials talk about it they completely don't understand the situation. >> Just just more on this and we'll get back to US markets. Didn't the governments want this though Jim? Didn't they say for years housing affordability is our number one concern and they didn't have to build, you know, 5 million new units or whatever. The markets are doing that for them. Aren't they rejoicing right now? Look up here. The difference is, David, we have a major the the the fly in the ointment, rightly or wrongly, is President Trump's economic sovereignty policies, you know, embracing uh Hamilton. Um and and and and what I would say to you is there is a deal on the table between the United States and Canada. I just think the structural adjustment that has to happen. We are no long, Canada is no longer a Costco competitive advanced manufacturing platform. Let's be honest, the growth aside from energy, which is just starting to kick in, is public sector, right? Look at the United States where, you know, the the employment in the in the government is dropping like a stone. Under Trudeau and Freedelland, we went on a spending spree. It's getting so bad up here that finally the economic elite are talking about the spending up here. The economic growth here is cushioned by excessive Keynesian economics. Carney and the Liberals and Mlin and the Bank of Canada are living in a dream world from decades ago and they need to pivot. And yet Canadian banks are trading at three and a half to four times tangible book. The most expensive they've ever been. Square that circle for me, David. >> Well, okay. I don't know. I don't know. Maybe maybe interest rates going up have something to do with the bank's earnings uh doing well. Uh but bottom line then uh Jim, you think that you you think you think that Canada's economy is in a stagnation period? What can turn this around? >> Structural adjustment. They've got to Carney's got to put a progrowth supply side economic focus on real economic growth. We've got to get away from we got to get we've got to start stop having these these these boondoggles and signing memor memorandums of understanding. It's about real policies to generate real economic growth in the country. We have to open up for business. We have to have it be an attractive place for global capital. And that's still not the case. Now, are there some rumblings? Yeah. But, you know, we're going to lag. And that's and but you know, the benefit is, you know, we're right next door to the most dynamic economy in the world that is leading the world in terms of economic sovereignty. There needed to be somebody, an adult in the room to sit there and say, "How do we grow out of this level of debt that we haven't seen since the Napoleonic Wars?" And the and the the Keynesian Ben Bernani solution is not good enough. It hasn't worked. So, we need to try supply side economics. We need to try sovereign economic policies, Alaha Hamilton. And that's what we're going to do in the United States. What does that look like? I >> mean, look, think about, you know, in onshoring factories, building semiconductors, bringing people back, not having excessive immigration, tax cuts, and a nice environment for capital. The benefit of this is that we're moving into the digital age. Whether or not Senator Warren and the bank lobby likes it with respect to the Clarity Act, innovation's going to continue to go. >> And so the Americans get it. I think Europe in a dream world and we're going to be dragged along up here in Canada, like it or not. >> Going back to uh markets, the yen is once again uh weakening. So that uh intervention that we saw last week pushed the yen all the way down to uh 15 or yeah all the way up rather all the way up to 157 against the USD and now it's weakening again it's going back towards 159 inching towards 160. So that didn't last very long. Uh I wonder though what would have happened to US interest rates Jim had this intervention not happened and hypothetically if the yank continued to depreciate let's say it went up to 165 166 what would have happened to us? What's going to happen? They're going to they the the the the Japanese the largest holders of US treasuries would sell. We'd have an extreme steepening of the yield curve and we'd have a crisis on our hands and Bent knows it. That's the whole point. At least he's being honest about it, right? Um you know, these people on the Fed are completely, you know, are these these these these pundits that sit there and think that the United States can handle a higher interest rates or Japan can higher handle higher interest rates. They're living in a dream world. And you know, uh, but you know, it's great for clicks and it's great for selling newsletters, I guess, but you know, he stepped in. No, David, it's dangerous. We've got too much debt. We can't afford, we can't handle higher interest rates. Let's just be honest. And so this, you know, this other thing, everybody freaking out about the communication strategy of of of worse. you just sort of sit there and go, why don't we just all do work and why don't we stop taking what the the Fed says to leakers, you know, the whisperers, and let's not do some objective work and question what they're doing. >> I think >> Go ahead. >> Can you look at this incident as a shot to the bow to all the bond bears out there who think rates are going to go up higher because this is basically an indication that the federal government is willing to engage in some sort of yield curve control, which you talked about before. >> Yes. Now, >> and I don't want to and I would I that Scott Bent's a Hunter Killer. He's not some PowerPoint person or he's not some Fed official that learned about financial crisis in some boondoggle committee in Jackson Hole. He lived it. He started it. He's been there. Maybe he's won some, maybe he's lost some, but he's been in the engine room when all this stuff went down. You respect that type of experience. And when somebody like that starts talking and moving, pay attention. Yes, it was a shot across the bout. And I think the folks in the in on Wall Street that want to test this guy are going to be sorely missed. I I saw sor make a bad mistake. So I take him at his word. He has all my respect and he has earned it. We are lucky to have a guy like that at the head of the treasury. >> So he's bought yen by the order of I don't know who knows a couple billion. 5 to 10 billion is a speculation. What else could they do to cap the long end of the curve from going up more? >> Oh, they could do whatever they want. They could create money out of thin air. They could they could do whatever they needed to do to support make sure that the US long end does not go too high. So when you say yield curve control, David, all bets are on the table. And so when you see that, for me, that's where you got gold making a nice little pop. >> You know what I mean? Silver made a nice pop. And I and and if people would do research and realize that Bitcoin doesn't have, you know, Bitcoin can survive without the Clarity Act, right? Bitcoin is ready to go. So, it's back to the old trade, right? It's Bitcoin, gold, and silver. And, you know, if you've got your if you've got listeners that let you know, think that, you know, looking for the next five or 10 bagger. I think I think when this thing when Bitcoin goes, there's going to be so much money. And you know, narrative follows price. You can't give it away right now, but everything is lining up for Bitcoin to have a nice significant run here. >> Wait a minute. I'm going to come back to Bitcoin just a minute. But on gold, right, you said 9,000 gold. This is the US government bond yield. Inverse correlation with gold. So right now this pop in gold that we saw in the last week and a half that's signaling that the long end of the curve is perhaps going to be capped. Okay. Wait, what am I doing here? This is not the yield uh US 10year. Uh are you are you are we then looking at potentially uh uh the 10year to go back to where it was before gold started sliding because that's what that's what that's what uh it needs to take, right? Because gold inversely correlated. Yes. >> Right. So, let's get let's get the rates down. Um, I think the old playbook no longer works with gold, Bitcoin, and silver. And I think what you really need to sit there and and say think is like the shot across the bow happened. That was it. Whether they yield curve control, they reflate, they monetize debt, they do whatever. Uh that was Scott Bent giving doing the Mario draggy. We will do whatever it takes to make sure yields don't go higher. You guys want to you know folks well you guys want to go you know pile into micron or some other parabolics chart or some you know small micro cap. I think people are missing a massive trade and they're thinking way too hard about this. Right. Scott Band has basically said he will do whatever it takes. And yet people are just sitting there and doing nothing. And and and let's be frank David he's going to have to do more. He's going to have to do more. >> That was just that that was just the appetizer if that. >> What is Bitcoin doing right now? It's at 63,000. You know what's interesting is Bitcoin did not pop as much as gold on this revelation since a week ago. I think people are are are still >> I don't think people are I I think people are being held hostage by Elizabeth Warren. And if that's the case, that's fine. I mean, I think you're seeing whales accumulate. You're seeing start smart money accumulate. What you're not seeing is the FOMO. So, like I keep trying to say to people, don't buy parabolic charts. Buy the charts where the fundamentals are getting stronger and the smart money is buying. And that's Bitcoin. And what will happen is I mean as Graham says right the short term it's a it's a it's a voting machine and the long term it's a weighing machine. I mean if we're going to go get a yield curve control and we're going to reflate uh uh to make sure the yields don't go to finesse this transition period. I mean, gold does have some inelasticity in terms of supply is in inastic supply, but Bitcoin has perfect, right? Perfect inelasticity. There's no more supply. So, eventually they're going to come around to it and then when it does, it's going to go it's it's going to be an intense rally. So, like you know, I've been saying about gold a couple of years ago, just keep accumulating. It's going to kick in. The math works. The fundamentals are there. Bitcoin's been pretty much as a narrative dead all year. It's down 30%. Traded sideways, never broke back above 90,000 for any substantial amount of time. And like I said last week, gold popped on interest rate capping or some sort of intervention. And now Bitcoin is still there. So I don't know. Are we waiting for the Clarity Act? Are we what what's the what's the trigger here? What what what's the Bitcoin market waiting for? I think people are waiting for I I honestly think it's people waiting to start doing some work here. Fundamental work. It'll happen. I mean, I get that to me. The chart that you're giving me right there, David, that's a bullish chart. I don't like buying high and and and selling low. If the fundamentals are getting stronger, you accumulate the fundamentals will eventually kick in. I mean, if it if the Americans if if if the if if the United States wants to seed the future of industrial policy to Elizabeth Warren and the extreme progressive left wing of the Democratic party, then that is a signal for all of us. I don't think it's going to happen. The SEC is going to step in. But having said that, you know, it's it's it's there. The trade is there. We are going to move into digital, the digital world. Blockchain is there. And if you can't buy it here, don't buy it when it's, you know, at X or 2x or 3x from here. >> I notice you said Bitcoin, not all of crypto. Is that true? >> Yeah. I don't I like cryp, you know, Bitcoin and Ethereum. I'm not into all this other stuff. I think there's going to be I think it's going to be a couple of winners, three or four winners. I think Wall Street is coalesing around Bitcoin and Ethereum. I think Wall Street is trying to delay so that they don't get their their cake, they don't get their lunch. You look at David just you just got to go to the Fred site. I mean, stable coins have been paying interest since they've been around since 2018 2019. There's record cash in checking and savings deposits in com and and and in in banks in the United States. How they can float this specious argument that stable coins paying interest is going to drain uh deposits is beyond me. But it is what it is, right? I mean, respect the market and I look at it as an opportunity, not as a a risk. I think you should be thinking about doing your work right now. And if you can't buy it here at 63 to 65 after an 11-month bare market, then you know you're going to buy what a sailor say. Everybody buys Bitcoin at the price that they think it is. But I you look at the data and whales are accumulating this. And who is selling the weak hands? And I would suggest the weekends are basically gone. So Clarity Act gets passed. I hope it does. It should it should get done. But if not, the SEC will step in with other regulators to ensure that the United States has a leadership position in digital assets and the and and the lead pole position for that is Bitcoin. Now, you either want to wait for it for it to happen and chase it as it breaks out. If you're a trader, God bless you, but I'm a long-term investor and and I'll just sit there and and do and drip at it every month, buy a little bit more Bitcoin and and accumulate, >> right? So the the the fiat debasement narrative that was the that was a narrative for Bitcoin. Like you said, price follows narrative. Sorry, narrative follows price other way around. Um do we still need that narrative to buy Bitcoin? If you were to convince somebody at a dinner table why they should look into Bitcoin today. 5 years ago it was fiat debasement. What is it now? >> Well, you got that right. There's one fiat debasement. Two, structural demand. Once Elizabeth Warren goes away, then you'll have every asset allocator in the United States. Nobody has two to three to f two, let's say three to 5% of Bitcoin in their portfolio, even though it increases the sharp ratio and they teach about it in the CFA. Three, you got the business cycle ISM going positive and running strong. That's always worked. Four, you got the four-year Bitcoin cycle. And five, the old theory is bit is gold leads Bitcoin. So, I mean, I'm of the old school that price leads narrative. When the when the selling stops and these guys stop playing with it and buy it at 63 and sell it at 65 and the wave starts going, then one of those five narratives, David, will be something that you'll hear 247 on MSN and and so be it. I I'm willing to wait and realize that fundamentals are going to be there, but the fundamentals are there for gold as well and as well as silver too. >> Okay. On inflation, uh at what point would you start to consider inflation a more long-term phenomenon rather than a one-time uh tick up due to a supply shock in the Middle East. In other words, tomorrow we're speaking ahead of tomorrow's CPI report. We're speaking on Tuesday. uh all eyes are on whether or not the CPI is going to move the Fed's decision one way or another. Uh but your take has been that look, it's a one-off and it doesn't really matter all that much. At what point would you change your mind on that? >> When I So I I'm I'm I'm taking I I'm taking at a page out of Bent and Wor is what they are saying. Let's look at the market signals. Let's look at the break evens two five 10 year break evens and the 5year 5year forwards. They're all telling you that inflation is not a problem. Okay? So, if the market indicators that I follow suggests that inflation was a problem, I'd be concerned. Look at True Flation, which is a private company that does real time inflation. >> There's no inflation, right? And all I am suggesting is let's get rates down to the neutral level. And to your previous point, let's get rates to the point where real estate can be a contributor to G GDP and not be in a recession. And you'll ask me what level is that is? Well, we'll know, right? It's like pornography. What do they say about pornog? We'll know when we see it. Well, what rate will it be in Canada? We'll know when he should start cutting and find out what that is. in the United States. We should find out what that level is. But we need the interest rate sensitive area in both economies to get some oxygen put into it. And the central bankers in both countries have made historic mistakes by misclassifying and misdiagnosing inflation. >> What should the correct policy be right now from from from the Federal Reserve? And this is you have to consider what you just said. Central banks have made massive policy errors in the past by misjudging inflation. They've also misjudged the bigger picture such as the case was the ECB at in 2007 when they raised rates just because the oil price went up. This is right before Leman crashed. That turned out to be a major error. What what is a bigger picture right now? What they should be doing? >> Well, I say we got to move to neutral and let's use and let's use market forces as our example. I think yeah I think Mlin did let's give him some a hat tip is they cut rates in Canada and and real estate didn't recover. So we've got to continue to cut rates before we start to see life in real estate in the interest rate sensitive areas. Right. I think in the United States that might be 275 and I think in Canada that's about a percent lower. But we've got to get to the point where the economy can breathe in the interest rate sensitive area can can contribute to economic growth. and let's get to that area and then stop. >> Okay? And then and then let the economy adjust. And that's all I've been saying. And you know, you people forget that with Joe Biden and and and Yellen doing what they did and spending like drunken sailors. I mean, they blamed the Phil they used the Phillips curve. They said wages were causing inflation. I mean, I had to sit through I've never sat through so much bad economics by pundits and central bankers in my life. And you know, we then we just ignore it. We live in a postfactual world is one of the things I talk about. So, you know, we need to get interest rates down so that the interest rate sensitive area can basically kick in. Now, it might need to get lower just to kick it in and start going and then we bring it back up. But what's what's wrong with it? But the point is, David, housing is not the source of inflation. Right. That's the point. Commercial real estate isn't the source of inflation. Like come on. I mean, this is basic common sense stuff. >> Are you So, so are you are you right now just on real estate in Canada? Would you be a buyer of a house right now? Let's say you had to let's say you had to buy a home. Okay. Would you do it now or would you wait? >> Well, location, location, location. And I would sit there and say we're very close to a bottom, but that still doesn't mean deterioration. If deterioration stops, that means it's a recovery up here. Everybody's looking at the job numbers going. I go, it's okay. So the deterioration doesn't stop. The economy is still weak. So yes, I would look if it was a good house, if it was a good location, it was fairly valued, if you could afford it, yes, I'd start looking right now and start kicking tires. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. uh on uh the AI buildout. By the way, this just came in yesterday on the 10th of August. Nvidia partners with Apollo, Black Rockck, Blackstone, KKR, Goldman Sachs, Brookfield, basically some of the largest private equity firms in the world to mobilize over $500 billion of third party capital for the buildout of AI infrastructure over time. Now, you said that we are still in the midst of the largest capex buildout in history, but at what point does this stop? Would higher interest rates stop the loans from coming in? when when I I think I think when it would be is when when when you've got some really smart people allocating capital to the AI capex buildout, right? I mean, think of the companies that you just mentioned and they're managed by very, very, very smart people. And so, we're still in the early stages of where Wall Street and smart individuals are willing to allocate capital to it. Eventually, that's going to stop, David. Right. And so let's just be honest with ourel and saying that this this isn't going to last forever. But at the same point in time, I think the very interesting thing about Nvidia is is by gosh, is Nvidia going to end up being like GE Capital, right? And Jack Welsh and are we going to basically look at Capex and G and the infrastructure a lot differently? And maybe we are. But if that's the case, then you know, like I said, you we could have a growth era into early next decade. >> Yeah. >> And and and and and then if it's earnings growth, you know, think about it. $600 a share. What happens if you get to $7 to $800 >> earnings per share in the S&P 500, David, and you put a 22 multiple on it, right? So, I cannot foretell the thing I I've learned from Canes is there's a difference between risk and uncertainty. And we live in the world of uncertainty. I know I don't know the future. >> I know it doesn't last forever. But what I can tell you is some really smart people are continuing to allocate capital to to to the AI infrastructure bill. We're still in the early phases. We haven't seen the productivity growth. But having said that, you've got a lot of semiconductor and AI bottleneck names that are very expensive, have had parabolic moves and need to grow into their valuations, which is okay, >> right? So that's why you when you go through and where's the next move, where's the next big trade? Unfortunately, I go back to the chart that you showed me on on the crypto side saying here's an area that's hated but still going to participate in lag. Hey, maybe this is going to be contribute and maybe it's going to participate in lag. But, you know, let's put it this way. Um, you know, Micron's probably a double from here, right? Gold's probably a double from here. >> Yeah, >> but that's but the S&P 500's a double from here. So these names are beta when you think about it. >> That's my final question to you. Stock market's probably a double from here. Gold's probably a double from here. Individual semi stocks, micron might be a double from here. What is not a double from here? In other words, what are you not bullish on? >> Wow, that's a good question. I uh I think everything I think the rising tides are going to lift all boats here. I think you want to be uh open-minded. Uh, I think you want to for those of your your your viewers, I I think you've got to watch the charts. You've got to sell parabolic moves and I think you just need to rotate capital and there's going to be rolling bull markets and there's going to be rolling bare markets. But I think the thing I learned in the 90s when I just joined in got into the business from u academia was a lot of careers were ended by guys in teams trying to be too fancy. I think you can just buy big high quality names in whatever sectors you want and you'll be fine. Like CAT, you know, I think Microsoft is very interesting here. Palunteer had a great number. It's expensive. You know, Corning, you know, look at the charts gone. You know, I like I think Nvidia and Abago here are interesting because of the charts in the sense they're back to their 200 day exponential moving average upward sloping. So my answer to you would be you need to be tactically active. You need to rotate and you need to let the charts be your guide. >> Yeah. Okay. Thanks so much, Jim. Appreciate your thoughts. Where can we follow you? >> Uh Dr. J strategy on X. my conscious stream of thought there and then um Wellington Altus. All my stuff is there at at Wellington Altus. >> Okay, thank you. We'll put the links down below. So, please do follow Wellington Altus and and Jim there. Uh I do I do want to say that I follow your ex regularly. I I I I subscribed and uh you have a lot of interesting posts. So, um do follow Jim on X. Thanks so much and please do like and subscribe and follow this channel as well. See you next time, Jim. Take care, Jimmy. Bye-bye.