August 8, 2025 • 32 mins
In this episode, Todd Sheets discusses the Federal Reserve's influence on the economy, the ongoing housing crisis, and the implications of government intervention. He emphasizes the need for privatization of housing finance entities and critiques the effectiveness of government spending on infrastructure. The conversation also explores the transformative potential of AI in the economy and the importance of energy stability for future growth. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. For more visit TudorDixonPodcast.com
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. We have someone with
us here today that can talk both AI and the
Federal Reserve. And that's a hard one to choose right
now because everything going on with the FED but also
everything going on with AI. So we said we're going
to start with the FED and talk about what's going
on there because I've got Todd Sheets with me. He
is a successful he had a highly successful career in
(00:23):
investment banking, but he also wrote the book on what
really happened in the two thousand and eight crisis. So Todd,
thank you so much for joining me today.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Tudor, thanks for having me. It's delightful to be with you.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Absolutely. So we you've talked about the housing crisis in
two thousand and eight, you actually kind of put that
back on the FED. Now we're in this situation where
we're not seeing interest rates come down. Can you for
the average American, can you kind of explain what exactly
is going on, what you think should be happening.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Yeah, So, you know, the Federal Reserve controls short term
interest rates, which gives them unprecedented an extraordinary ability to
influence the economy. You know, in a credit driven economy,
you're basically controlling the cost of borrowing in finance, at
least at the short term end of the spectrum, which
(01:12):
basically allows them to influence as I think a quote
I had from the book was, you know everything from
stock prices on Wall Street, housing prices in Honolulu, you know,
everything across the board, to auto finance and Alaska. Even so,
one of the problems that we've had, and I point
this out in the book, and it goes it's much
(01:33):
deeper and goes much longer than this. But starting in
the nineteen nineties, we had the Federal Reserve stepping in
to push down interest rates in a number of situations
to try and keep globalization from having a negative, too
negative of an impact in the economy. And as this happened,
(01:54):
we started to become addicted to the idea that the
Fed could step in push into strates down really low,
and that that could help us kind of glide through
any periods of economic transitions or problems we might be having.
So this happened with the Mexican debt crisis. It happened
again later in the nineteen nineties with the long term
(02:17):
capital management situation, which was effectively the Russian debt crisis,
and so we've had a number of these situations. It
contributed to the blowoff of this of the tech stock
bubble in the late nineties, which then when that collapsed
in two thousand, the FED pushed interest rates down to
historic lows, which unwittingly came in the midst of boom
(02:40):
in housing prices that had previously been kicked off by
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack. These are the things I
go through in the book. So whatever benefit we might
have received from that in the early two thousands was
more than obliterated by the consequences of the housing bubble,
and the collapse led us into the financial crisis and
(03:02):
then the Great Recession. But unfortunately these things have not
been widely recognized. This is one of the important points
of the book, or maybe the main point of the book,
And so we become reliant on this because we failed
to understand where the real causes were. When we got
into the twenty tens, under the Obama administration, the FED
(03:23):
went right back to the same playbook that they had
been running, which, as I just pointed out, played a
huge role in the tech stock bubble. Was one of
the two major causes of the housing bubble, and then
in the twenty tens they went back to these super
low interest rates. They also started for the first time
buying long term debt to try and influence long term
(03:45):
interest rates, and these things really didn't kick off the
wave of growth that they had kind of promised or
expected from it. You know, it just led us through
another decade of stagnation. And one of the consequences this time,
we've got very high house prices again, which is now
creating an affordability problem. So I should stop here in
a second. I know I'm running on, but my perspective
(04:07):
on this is a little different than the administrations. On
many things. I'm very aligned with the administration. But my
perspective is we should not be pushing on the FED
to lower interest rates again, because that's going back to
a policy you know, that has had, you know, severely
(04:28):
underappreciated consequences multiple times, starting in the nineteen nineties and
running up here recently. So I haven't been a big
fan of Jerome pal In my opinion, he should not
have been decreasing interest rates last year during the election.
But I think at this point in time, especially with
inflation ticking up a little bit to two point seven
(04:50):
percent here recently. I think the most important thing is
that is that the FED remains vigilant and doesn't fall
back into this pattern that we've you know, seen for
you know, almost thirty years now.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
Well, so what is the solution then, because obviously we've
seen that politicians across the country are talking housing crisis,
housing crazes, housing crisis, and I keep hearing people on
both sides say, well, we want the government to come
in and build housing. That also sounds bad to me.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Yeah, I couldn't agree more. I mean, you know, we
got into these problems because of government housing policies in
the first place, enacted through Fanny May and Freddie Mack.
It was their dramatic increase in trying to push their
mission of providing financing to load a moderate income home buyers,
which kicked housing prices up beginning in nineteen ninety eight
(05:41):
well above historical norms. And that was, you know, the
beginning or the lift off phase, what I call the
book of the housing bubble. Everything coordinates just exactly to
when they started increasing their mission. So I think the
best thing we could be doing is we could be
privatizing Fannie May and Freddie Mack, but also taking away
(06:04):
the government privileges that they have, which I don't think
is what's going to end up happening right now. But
that's that's what I would advocate for. I think unfortunately,
when you go through the significant inflation in housing prices
that came over the last four to five years and
coincided with cheap money policies from the FED and the
(06:24):
Biden administration spending blowout, you know that money has to
go somewhere, and one of the places that it went
was into housing prices, which then elevated them significantly and
created this housing affordability problem. There's a couple of ways
to resolve this that don't involve the government. You know.
One is a very tough way, which is housing prices
(06:46):
collapse again and come back down more to historically.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
You're talking about like a two thousand and eight all
over again.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
I don't think that's necessarily what's going to happen now.
I mean, I felt very strongly that it would in
two thousand and eight, in part because of the lending
practices that we're going on now. I think what's more
likely is that we go through a long period of
time where housing prices just don't appreciate at the kind
of rates that people, you know, came to expect from housing,
(07:15):
where it was viewed as this.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And then if you buy a house now, you probably
in ten years won't really make a profit on it.
You're thinking, I.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Think there's a very high probability that that kind of
thing will happen. So that's why I was going back there.
It's kind of two ways these things can get resolved
when you get prices that are significantly out of whack
with market based fundamentals, and market based fundamentals in housing
have to do with two critical things. One it's the
cost of building a new home, and second it's the
(07:44):
incomes that people have, you know, to be able to
take on a mortgage and afford home payments and that
kind of thing. And when the FED interjects and plays
these monetary games to try and boost economic activity, you
get these dislocations that happen. And the dislocation we're seeing now,
or one of them, is these high housing prices which
(08:08):
have created an affordability problem. And so one way that
can get resolved is prices stay constant while hopefully we
can get the economy growing again. And I think the
administration through AI for example, is taking exactly the right
approach in that area. And if we can get the
economy growing and we get people's incomes growing and they
(08:30):
start compounding upward and prices stay relatively flat, let's say,
then the affordability problem gets taken care of through expanding
incomes as opposed through collapsing housing prices, which would probably
we have.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
We have this situation here in town or there's a
local neighborhood and it was a one of the high
end builders had this neighborhood and they were building these
high end kind of single family condos, like separated condos,
self standing condos, and they were beautiful and they were
very they were you know, great finishes on the inside,
(09:07):
but expensive. I mean they were in the six to
seven hundred thousand range. And that builder, I guess left
the neighborhood. They knew builder got a government grant. They
came in and they started building also individual self standing condos.
But they and their two stories because they have walk
out basements, but the front of them is just a garage,
(09:31):
no upstairs, no windows, no front door, nothing. So you
have these beautiful, like tiny homes that have front porches
and doors, and then you have government housing that came
in in the same neighborhood just to garage. I mean,
and I look at this and I go, it's affordable,
but the other people in the neighborhood are obviously, I rate.
(09:53):
How did this happen? How did a government grant come
in and suddenly our neighborhood is building these these it
looks like units, they don't look like homes. I mean,
is that the future? Is that what's going to happen?
And if that's the case, what do local people get
to say about their communities being changed in that way?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Well, you know, I think this is a point where
you know, things like zoning laws and that kind of
thing are important, and it's also another point where the
idea of you know, government can help fix the problem
by one, you know, helping make housing construction more affordable,
maybe making permitting easier, you know, doing some of these
(10:31):
kinds of things that you know, fighting against the things
that have caused so many problems out in California, which
have also happened maybe to a lesser extent in other markets.
But there's still room for local zoning and efforts to
make sure that what is getting built within a neighborhood
or an area of town is consistent with what's already there,
so that you don't see property values dropping for reasons
(10:52):
like that. But I think, unfortunately, when you go through
a period where FED policy and the Biden administration's policies,
where there was all of this deficit spending, which again
was supposed to ignite growth, that money goes somewhere, and
where one of the places it went was into housing,
(11:15):
and it pushed up housing prices significantly in a four
or five year period of time, on top of what
already was bubbling under the surface because of the fed's
cheap money policies before that. And we just have to
let those things unwand and hopefully it won't be through
a housing price crash like we went through the last
(11:35):
time when it unwound, and maybe it'll be through more
stable prices for a longer period while we get the
rest of the economy growing and people's incomes grow and
they can get up to the point where they can
afford these housing prices because their incomes grow so much.
Over the next five to ten years.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
a Tutor Dixon podcast. So I want to just extend
this discussion a little bit longer because you talked about
infrastructure and the money that the Biden administration was putting
into housing. Well that was also supposedly going into internet
infrastructure and roads and bridges. And when you hear the
(12:19):
Democrats talk about what's going what the future is, they
talk a lot about we're investing in infrastructure, in roads,
in railroads and that kind of thing, and the Republicans
don't want to invest in that. And when I hear that, well, gosh,
it sounds great. You know, high speed internet and you're
going to have better bridges and you're going to have
better roads. Now, I will say, in the state of Michigan,
(12:42):
the high speed Internet was supposed to go into areas
where they didn't have internet at all, or they were
they were struggling to connect. And my neighborhood, where I
already had high speed internet, got a new form of
high speed internet rather than it going to the up
or into areas of Detroit that needed it. So I
think that it's a little bit of a mystery as
(13:03):
to whether or not the money that they say is
going into these things, is going into the right places,
or if it's just like, hey, now we have this
play money to put wherever, and we're going to get
the best contract that ultimately is kicking back into these campaigns.
Because we've seen that too. So how do we know
when they talk about investing in infrastructure that you don't
(13:24):
end up with a bunch of storage unit looking houses
in high speed internet in a neighborhood that already has
high speed internet.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
These are great questions. Probably the best thing you can
do is you focus on the deficit. And one of
the things that has happened is that we have been
living in this country for a long time and under
an enormous level of miseducation about what really caused the
Great Depression, and because of that, we came out of
(13:54):
the Great Depression with these so called Canesian ideas. That
deficit spending, which is presented as you're saying, as the
idea that the government will invest in the country and
get the economy growing again, the idea that it can
help government spending, deficit spending can stimulate our way out
(14:14):
of either a depressed economy like we had in the thirties,
or a stagnant economy like we had in the two
thousands coming out of the housing bubble collapse. Well, what
we've seen now is the massive failure of that thinking
three different times. It failed during the depression. It failed
(14:36):
probably four different times, let's say, failed during the depression.
It failed with LBJ during the Great during the nineteen sixties,
with the so called Great Society programs, which led to
big deficits. It led to the Federal Reserve monetizing those deficits,
which meant that they were buying a lot of the
(14:57):
debt or pushing down interest rates to try and support
the deficit spending that resulted from the Great Society programs
that led us into the Great Inflation of the nineteen seventies,
which wasn't resolved until Ronald Reagan finally gave Paul Volker
the political support needed to push interest rates up to
(15:17):
the high teens or almost twenty percent to try and
get it under control. And then it happened to agin
with Obama coming out of the Great Financial Crisis, where
he had the idea that if we pushed deficit spending
up and invest in infrastructure, that will recharge economic growth,
and so the Obama administration. They pushed peacetime deficit spending
(15:42):
up to an all time record eight and a half
percent of GDP for the first four years of the
Obama administration. What did we get for it. We did
not get economic growth. What we got was a near
doubling of the level of federal debt. That's what pushed
the federal debt up from just below forty percent to
(16:04):
about seventy five seventy six percent. So it didn't again
reinvigorate growth, It just created dangerous debts. Biden came along.
This is the fourth episode. Biden came along with the
same kind of promise. You know, we're going to have
the Green New Deal, invest in all these future technologies,
and this will create so many jobs and all these
(16:25):
kinds of things. He spent additional money even though the
COVID related downturn had ended the year before Bamba, or
excuse me, before Biden came into the administration and took office.
You know, they had a spending blowout that was supposed
to rejuvenate the economy, even for none of it worked.
(16:46):
For the last twenty five years, we have barely grown
at more than two percent a year, and so I think,
to come back to your question, it doesn't work. We've
seen this time and again. The government is not a
good allocator of resources. The private sector is a phenomenal
allocator of resources. And when we get the government trying
(17:09):
to allocate too much of the nation's resources, we end
up in stagnant growth, rising high deficits and rising debts
and that kind of thing. So I.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Agree, I mean, I think that it sounds really good though,
when you're campaigning, it sounds delightful to say. I mean,
look at New York what we're seeing with mom Donnie saying,
you know what, we're going to have the government take
care of this for you. When you hear that, oh
this is fantastic. We're paying these taxes anyway. The government's
going to get our grocery prices down, the government's going
(17:41):
to rejuvenate our neighborhoods. We're going to have better housing.
It's a human right. These all of this type of
language sounds very good. And then the I think the
debt has become a situation where everybody is, well, there's
always debt, you know, so why do we care anymore?
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Yeah, Well, so what has your exactly right? What tends
to happen in these situations is you know, people start
talking about, oh, the death's a problem. Well, this might
be when it's sixty percent of GDP, and then it
gets to seventy five percent and people are saying, oh,
the death's a problem, but we don't have a collapse.
And now it's at almost one hundred percent, and it
starts to feel like, okay, well, this is like you know,
(18:21):
the little boy crying wolf or whatever it's. You know,
it's not a real problem out there, but these things
are significant problems. They can show up in significant collapses,
like we saw with the housing bubble. We heard the
same thing for a while with the housing bubble. Oh
this isn't a problem. Housing prices keep going up, you know,
until they don't. But we it can also show up
(18:44):
in other ways, and I do think the electorate has
gotten that message this time, which it can show up
in substandard rates of growth. You know, when the Reagan
administration came in and try to turn us back towards
a free market kind of agenda, which they did in
the early nineteen eighties, we went through almost twenty years
(19:07):
of accelerated growth again, but all of this started turning around.
All of that started turning around in the early two
thousands when Bush started pushing deficits bending up, and then
Obama started pushing it up even faster and expanding the
dead even faster. And so I think instead of a
full bone collapse, what we've seen is just this stagnant
(19:30):
level of growth, you know, two percent kind of growth
instead of three and a half percent in those kinds
of things. And so it's showing up in that way.
I think that's at the core of the electric frustration.
You know, that opened them up to the to Trump's
message the first time and again this last time, and
I think, you know, I think they have seen it
(19:51):
from that perspective.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
So looking at the president's policies, how do you see
the economy growing out of that? And how does AI
affect that?
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Yeah, a perfect question. I mean, especially with what's happened
here recently, I think AI has the potential to be
the next version of the Industrial Revolution. And many of
us have been miseducated about the Industrial Revolution. People talk
about robber barons and the need of the progressives to
step in and protect the little guy and all these
(20:22):
things and nothing. It's not to say that some of
that isn't didn't happen, or wasn't valid, at least in
anecdotal cases. But from a big picture perspective, the Industrial
Revolution took us through the most extraordinary economic changes and
transformation in the history of the world. I mean, at
(20:44):
the beginning of this, we were riding in horses and buggies,
and we were reading at night by candlelight, and we
had no electricity in our homes. And by the end
of it, in the nineteen twenties, you know, cars had
not only invented but become like an everyday necessity for
a thriving middle class who was going home to electrified
(21:07):
homes and reading by light bulbs in the evening. They
were on the verge of flying by airplanes. I mean,
in terms of transforming the economy, the social structure, everything,
nothing like it has ever happened. And that all happened
under a very limited government model. Government spending at that time,
throughout the eighteen hundreds and into the early nineteen hundreds
(21:30):
during peace times, averaged three percent of GDP. Today it's
almost twenty five percent. I agree, three percent, and we
ran budget surpluses, not deficits through all of that government
debt was consistently held below five percent of GDP, so
(21:50):
that if we got into a tough time like the
Civil War, World War One, you know, we had the
borrowing capacity so that we could borrow without pushing our
into the danger zone. And in spite of all of that,
you know, conservative finance, maintaining budget surpluses, government not trying
(22:11):
to invest in big ways in infrastructure and do all
these things. You know, we had the greatest growth over
a sustained period we've ever had.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
Is that because when you talk about the Industrial Revolution,
that wasn't the government doing that. That was the private
sector saying we're going to create and suddenly, you know,
like you said, we've got light bulbs and into our
plumbing and vehicles. But that wasn't the government that created that.
And I think that's something that is hard for this
generation to look at and say, well, the government needs
(22:40):
to invest in AI. But this has always been the
private sector that invests in technology absolutely.
Speaker 2 (22:48):
You know, you know, we're going back to you know,
the telegraph that was invented by Samuel Morris, Alexander Graham Bell,
and the telephone Thomas Edison, and electricity in the light bulb,
and so Henry Ford and the uh, you know, the
assembly line, which then took automobiles from being a rich
(23:10):
person's toys to being something that was for everybody. And
you know, he drove and if you kind of go
back at the early part of the nineteen hundreds when
Ford was starting to tinker around with these ideas, before
he had really implemented the assembly line, automobile, like I said,
was a rich person's toy. You know, there were a
small number of people working in the industry. If you said,
(23:33):
somebody's going to come along and create this way to
make this so much more efficient, you know that a
single person, you know, can can produce more cars than
maybe fifty people could earlier. You thought, oh, this will
be a disaster for the auto sector's employment. But what
happened was this incredible level of efficiency was also translated
(23:57):
through lower prices. So the cost of model t over
about a seven or eight year period and went from
over two thousand down to like two hundred and fifty dollars.
And as that happened, demand exploded, and auto industry employment
actually exploded along with that as demand was created. And
so the point of all of this is this is
(24:19):
the kind of thing that can happen with artificial intelligence
if we take the right approach to it. And I'm extreme.
I've been writing about this in my substack pieces here recently,
and then the administration just came out with their plan,
their AI Action Plan this week, which is exactly following
this model. It's the idea of creating deregulations and giving
(24:43):
the industry. You know, we are fortunate to have what
I've called the pole position in the AI race, so
that you know, because we've led the world through technology
development and through the development of the Internet, We've got
the venture capital community and these big tech companies who
are leading the world into artificial intelligence. And the approach
(25:07):
that Trump administration is taking is we've got to make
sure that government doesn't throw up unnecessary roadblocks that in
a way that keeps us from winning this race, which
is absolutely critical not only for the economy and creating
high paying jobs and having them here in the United States,
(25:27):
but also so that you know, we can continue to
lead the world in this perspective, and from a defense perspective,
it's incredibly important. You know, the last thing in the
world we want is for these jobs to be in China,
and for China to be the one that's leading in
the defense applications of all these.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
I think there's a lot of fear around AI for
multiple reasons. I mean, obviously the reason of what can
it create, but also, as you said, people are concerned
that AI will take over well, just as they were
concerned that the Industrial revolution would takeover blue collar jobs.
Now it's AI is going to take over all of
the white collar jobs. But as you see states like
(26:07):
my state of Michigan, we we're losing jobs all across
the board. AI is an opportunity to say, boy, that
can be managed from anywhere. There can be these data
centers anywhere, but there is an energy cost or an
energy supply concern, and that is where I do think
that the government needs to make sure that we are
(26:29):
or an energy dominant country. And that's what Donald Trump
is trying to do. How do you see that plane
into this AI race.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Yeah, that's a perfect point, and it's a big part
of their new agenda. This AI action Plan is not
only to you unleash innovation among the companies so that
we can continue to lead the race and have those
companies and those jobs predominantly happening here in America, but
also continuing with the approach of you know, leading in
(27:01):
energy development and realizing our energy potential so that we
have the energy that is needed to power this AI
boom and it doesn't have to get off short again.
So yeah, I think that that's a critical, critical part
of it. It's a big part of you know, developing
the energy infrastructure, which I think they mean importantly enabling
(27:22):
the private sector to develop the energy intersector, you know,
not trying to energy sector, not trying to have the
government step in and do the private sector's job.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. It's been kind of a hindrance
for AI in this in the United States because there
has been a question for so long will energy be
available with the climate and then that was a big
part of Biden's administration was you know, climate change and
(27:53):
climate control and control energy and change energy over. And
then as you're changing energy over to on reliable sources,
there are companies who are creating AI and companies who
are developing AI, and they say, well, what if this
is not stable in these states that are saying we're
getting rid of traditional forms of energy before we have
(28:13):
new forms of energy that are reliable, and I think
that's been a concern that that's going to drive it overseas,
and it seems as though the Trump administration is saying,
you know, we're done with all of that. We're going
to ensure that energy is here to stay. But there
have to be some concerns in the private sector that
if Democrats get back into control, they're going to do
(28:34):
that same thing, and then we're going to have questions
about whether or not the energy will be there to
support this and if we can continue to lead in
this industry.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Yeah, I think that, you know, those are reasonable concerns.
Hopefully what will happen here is that we can free
up the energy that starts creating these jobs, and that
allows AI to get started and we can get the
kind of growth going again that this country has been
waiting for for you know, almost thirty years now twenty
(29:03):
five years. And if that happens, it makes it much
more difficult to come back with these other messages, which
I think lead us down the wrong path as we
were on for such a long period of time there.
So the real key is to get this growth going.
The fears about it are very understandable, you know, any
of us, You know, we like to operate with a
(29:23):
feeling that like we've got a sense of how things
work and that they work well for us, and you
know that things we depend on will be there. But
there are these times that we just have to have faith,
you know that that that the growth of the system,
if we unleash it will take care of things. As
I made a point in one of my pieces, the
(29:44):
AI genie is out of the bottle, whether we want
it to be or not. It can be developed here,
it can be developed in China, but it's out of
the bottle. And the best thing for us to do
is to is to kind of follow the model of
the Industrial Revolution, which is to let this development and
expansion have And I believe it will create far more
(30:08):
jobs than it replaces. And there's already stories out there
about how much more efficient it can make people. And
if we're leading that efficiency curve, then that will make
us more competitive with low wage labor markets like China
or Vietnam and those kinds of things. So if we
have American manufacturing workers who are benefiting from AI and
(30:31):
I'm already hearing stories about these kinds of things all
of a sudden. If we're on the leading edge of that,
they can get pay to higher wage because AI is
helping make them so much more efficient than workers who
aren't on the leading edge of that, and that helps
move those jobs back here as well. So I'm very
(30:51):
optimistic about where all this is going, and especially given
the approach that the Trump is administration is taken.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Well, this is all very interesting. I know you are,
like you said, you're writing about this. You've got this
on your substack page. Tell people where they can find that,
because I think we're all kind of going, Okay, what
does this mean? This is something new. I'm sure it
was the same in the Industrial Revolution. This is all new.
What should we expect? So how can people follow you?
Speaker 2 (31:17):
Yeah? So substack is a place My newsletter is free there.
It's called on Wealth and Progress. So if you go
to substack dot com and search for Toddsheets on Wealth
and Progress, that's one place. I'm also putting out kind
of short mini podcasts each week, so you know, if
you go to Spotify or YouTube, you know there's like
a fifteen minute little version of the substack pieces that
(31:39):
are there for people that would rather listen to it
audio on a you know, audio format. And then, as
you mentioned, my book two thousand and eight, What Really
Happened is out there also available Amazon or Barnsannoble dot com.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Thank you for coming on today, Todd Sheets, thanks so much.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Tutor, Thank you. I appreciate it so.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Much, absolutely, and thank you all for joining the Tutor
Dixon podcast. For this episode and others, go to tutordisonpodcast
dot com. You can subscribe there or the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts, and check
out the whole video on Rumble or YouTube at Tutor
Dixon and join us next time. Have a blessed day.
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. We have someone with
us here today that can talk both AI and the
Federal Reserve. And that's a hard one to choose right
now because everything going on with the FED but also
everything going on with AI. So we said we're going
to start with the FED and talk about what's going
on there because I've got Todd Sheets with me. He
is a successful he had a highly successful career in
(00:23):
investment banking, but he also wrote the book on what
really happened in the two thousand and eight crisis. So Todd,
thank you so much for joining me today.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Tudor, thanks for having me. It's delightful to be with you.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Absolutely. So we you've talked about the housing crisis in
two thousand and eight, you actually kind of put that
back on the FED. Now we're in this situation where
we're not seeing interest rates come down. Can you for
the average American, can you kind of explain what exactly
is going on, what you think should be happening.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Yeah, So, you know, the Federal Reserve controls short term
interest rates, which gives them unprecedented an extraordinary ability to
influence the economy. You know, in a credit driven economy,
you're basically controlling the cost of borrowing in finance, at
least at the short term end of the spectrum, which
(01:12):
basically allows them to influence as I think a quote
I had from the book was, you know everything from
stock prices on Wall Street, housing prices in Honolulu, you know,
everything across the board, to auto finance and Alaska. Even so,
one of the problems that we've had, and I point
this out in the book, and it goes it's much
(01:33):
deeper and goes much longer than this. But starting in
the nineteen nineties, we had the Federal Reserve stepping in
to push down interest rates in a number of situations
to try and keep globalization from having a negative, too
negative of an impact in the economy. And as this happened,
(01:54):
we started to become addicted to the idea that the
Fed could step in push into strates down really low,
and that that could help us kind of glide through
any periods of economic transitions or problems we might be having.
So this happened with the Mexican debt crisis. It happened
again later in the nineteen nineties with the long term
(02:17):
capital management situation, which was effectively the Russian debt crisis,
and so we've had a number of these situations. It
contributed to the blowoff of this of the tech stock
bubble in the late nineties, which then when that collapsed
in two thousand, the FED pushed interest rates down to
historic lows, which unwittingly came in the midst of boom
(02:40):
in housing prices that had previously been kicked off by
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack. These are the things I
go through in the book. So whatever benefit we might
have received from that in the early two thousands was
more than obliterated by the consequences of the housing bubble,
and the collapse led us into the financial crisis and
(03:02):
then the Great Recession. But unfortunately these things have not
been widely recognized. This is one of the important points
of the book, or maybe the main point of the book,
And so we become reliant on this because we failed
to understand where the real causes were. When we got
into the twenty tens, under the Obama administration, the FED
(03:23):
went right back to the same playbook that they had
been running, which, as I just pointed out, played a
huge role in the tech stock bubble. Was one of
the two major causes of the housing bubble, and then
in the twenty tens they went back to these super
low interest rates. They also started for the first time
buying long term debt to try and influence long term
(03:45):
interest rates, and these things really didn't kick off the
wave of growth that they had kind of promised or
expected from it. You know, it just led us through
another decade of stagnation. And one of the consequences this time,
we've got very high house prices again, which is now
creating an affordability problem. So I should stop here in
a second. I know I'm running on, but my perspective
(04:07):
on this is a little different than the administrations. On
many things. I'm very aligned with the administration. But my
perspective is we should not be pushing on the FED
to lower interest rates again, because that's going back to
a policy you know, that has had, you know, severely
(04:28):
underappreciated consequences multiple times, starting in the nineteen nineties and
running up here recently. So I haven't been a big
fan of Jerome pal In my opinion, he should not
have been decreasing interest rates last year during the election.
But I think at this point in time, especially with
inflation ticking up a little bit to two point seven
(04:50):
percent here recently. I think the most important thing is
that is that the FED remains vigilant and doesn't fall
back into this pattern that we've you know, seen for
you know, almost thirty years now.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
Well, so what is the solution then, because obviously we've
seen that politicians across the country are talking housing crisis,
housing crazes, housing crisis, and I keep hearing people on
both sides say, well, we want the government to come
in and build housing. That also sounds bad to me.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Yeah, I couldn't agree more. I mean, you know, we
got into these problems because of government housing policies in
the first place, enacted through Fanny May and Freddie Mack.
It was their dramatic increase in trying to push their
mission of providing financing to load a moderate income home buyers,
which kicked housing prices up beginning in nineteen ninety eight
(05:41):
well above historical norms. And that was, you know, the
beginning or the lift off phase, what I call the
book of the housing bubble. Everything coordinates just exactly to
when they started increasing their mission. So I think the
best thing we could be doing is we could be
privatizing Fannie May and Freddie Mack, but also taking away
(06:04):
the government privileges that they have, which I don't think
is what's going to end up happening right now. But
that's that's what I would advocate for. I think unfortunately,
when you go through the significant inflation in housing prices
that came over the last four to five years and
coincided with cheap money policies from the FED and the
(06:24):
Biden administration spending blowout, you know that money has to
go somewhere, and one of the places that it went
was into housing prices, which then elevated them significantly and
created this housing affordability problem. There's a couple of ways
to resolve this that don't involve the government. You know.
One is a very tough way, which is housing prices
(06:46):
collapse again and come back down more to historically.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
You're talking about like a two thousand and eight all
over again.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
I don't think that's necessarily what's going to happen now.
I mean, I felt very strongly that it would in
two thousand and eight, in part because of the lending
practices that we're going on now. I think what's more
likely is that we go through a long period of
time where housing prices just don't appreciate at the kind
of rates that people, you know, came to expect from housing,
(07:15):
where it was viewed as this.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And then if you buy a house now, you probably
in ten years won't really make a profit on it.
You're thinking, I.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Think there's a very high probability that that kind of
thing will happen. So that's why I was going back there.
It's kind of two ways these things can get resolved
when you get prices that are significantly out of whack
with market based fundamentals, and market based fundamentals in housing
have to do with two critical things. One it's the
cost of building a new home, and second it's the
(07:44):
incomes that people have, you know, to be able to
take on a mortgage and afford home payments and that
kind of thing. And when the FED interjects and plays
these monetary games to try and boost economic activity, you
get these dislocations that happen. And the dislocation we're seeing now,
or one of them, is these high housing prices which
(08:08):
have created an affordability problem. And so one way that
can get resolved is prices stay constant while hopefully we
can get the economy growing again. And I think the
administration through AI for example, is taking exactly the right
approach in that area. And if we can get the
economy growing and we get people's incomes growing and they
(08:30):
start compounding upward and prices stay relatively flat, let's say,
then the affordability problem gets taken care of through expanding
incomes as opposed through collapsing housing prices, which would probably
we have.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
We have this situation here in town or there's a
local neighborhood and it was a one of the high
end builders had this neighborhood and they were building these
high end kind of single family condos, like separated condos,
self standing condos, and they were beautiful and they were
very they were you know, great finishes on the inside,
(09:07):
but expensive. I mean they were in the six to
seven hundred thousand range. And that builder, I guess left
the neighborhood. They knew builder got a government grant. They
came in and they started building also individual self standing condos.
But they and their two stories because they have walk
out basements, but the front of them is just a garage,
(09:31):
no upstairs, no windows, no front door, nothing. So you
have these beautiful, like tiny homes that have front porches
and doors, and then you have government housing that came
in in the same neighborhood just to garage. I mean,
and I look at this and I go, it's affordable,
but the other people in the neighborhood are obviously, I rate.
(09:53):
How did this happen? How did a government grant come
in and suddenly our neighborhood is building these these it
looks like units, they don't look like homes. I mean,
is that the future? Is that what's going to happen?
And if that's the case, what do local people get
to say about their communities being changed in that way?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Well, you know, I think this is a point where
you know, things like zoning laws and that kind of
thing are important, and it's also another point where the
idea of you know, government can help fix the problem
by one, you know, helping make housing construction more affordable,
maybe making permitting easier, you know, doing some of these
(10:31):
kinds of things that you know, fighting against the things
that have caused so many problems out in California, which
have also happened maybe to a lesser extent in other markets.
But there's still room for local zoning and efforts to
make sure that what is getting built within a neighborhood
or an area of town is consistent with what's already there,
so that you don't see property values dropping for reasons
(10:52):
like that. But I think, unfortunately, when you go through
a period where FED policy and the Biden administration's policies,
where there was all of this deficit spending, which again
was supposed to ignite growth, that money goes somewhere, and
where one of the places it went was into housing,
(11:15):
and it pushed up housing prices significantly in a four
or five year period of time, on top of what
already was bubbling under the surface because of the fed's
cheap money policies before that. And we just have to
let those things unwand and hopefully it won't be through
a housing price crash like we went through the last
(11:35):
time when it unwound, and maybe it'll be through more
stable prices for a longer period while we get the
rest of the economy growing and people's incomes grow and
they can get up to the point where they can
afford these housing prices because their incomes grow so much.
Over the next five to ten years.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
a Tutor Dixon podcast. So I want to just extend
this discussion a little bit longer because you talked about
infrastructure and the money that the Biden administration was putting
into housing. Well that was also supposedly going into internet
infrastructure and roads and bridges. And when you hear the
(12:19):
Democrats talk about what's going what the future is, they
talk a lot about we're investing in infrastructure, in roads,
in railroads and that kind of thing, and the Republicans
don't want to invest in that. And when I hear that, well, gosh,
it sounds great. You know, high speed internet and you're
going to have better bridges and you're going to have
better roads. Now, I will say, in the state of Michigan,
(12:42):
the high speed Internet was supposed to go into areas
where they didn't have internet at all, or they were
they were struggling to connect. And my neighborhood, where I
already had high speed internet, got a new form of
high speed internet rather than it going to the up
or into areas of Detroit that needed it. So I
think that it's a little bit of a mystery as
(13:03):
to whether or not the money that they say is
going into these things, is going into the right places,
or if it's just like, hey, now we have this
play money to put wherever, and we're going to get
the best contract that ultimately is kicking back into these campaigns.
Because we've seen that too. So how do we know
when they talk about investing in infrastructure that you don't
(13:24):
end up with a bunch of storage unit looking houses
in high speed internet in a neighborhood that already has
high speed internet.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
These are great questions. Probably the best thing you can
do is you focus on the deficit. And one of
the things that has happened is that we have been
living in this country for a long time and under
an enormous level of miseducation about what really caused the
Great Depression, and because of that, we came out of
(13:54):
the Great Depression with these so called Canesian ideas. That
deficit spending, which is presented as you're saying, as the
idea that the government will invest in the country and
get the economy growing again, the idea that it can
help government spending, deficit spending can stimulate our way out
(14:14):
of either a depressed economy like we had in the thirties,
or a stagnant economy like we had in the two
thousands coming out of the housing bubble collapse. Well, what
we've seen now is the massive failure of that thinking
three different times. It failed during the depression. It failed
(14:36):
probably four different times, let's say, failed during the depression.
It failed with LBJ during the Great during the nineteen sixties,
with the so called Great Society programs, which led to
big deficits. It led to the Federal Reserve monetizing those deficits,
which meant that they were buying a lot of the
(14:57):
debt or pushing down interest rates to try and support
the deficit spending that resulted from the Great Society programs
that led us into the Great Inflation of the nineteen seventies,
which wasn't resolved until Ronald Reagan finally gave Paul Volker
the political support needed to push interest rates up to
(15:17):
the high teens or almost twenty percent to try and
get it under control. And then it happened to agin
with Obama coming out of the Great Financial Crisis, where
he had the idea that if we pushed deficit spending
up and invest in infrastructure, that will recharge economic growth,
and so the Obama administration. They pushed peacetime deficit spending
(15:42):
up to an all time record eight and a half
percent of GDP for the first four years of the
Obama administration. What did we get for it. We did
not get economic growth. What we got was a near
doubling of the level of federal debt. That's what pushed
the federal debt up from just below forty percent to
(16:04):
about seventy five seventy six percent. So it didn't again
reinvigorate growth, It just created dangerous debts. Biden came along.
This is the fourth episode. Biden came along with the
same kind of promise. You know, we're going to have
the Green New Deal, invest in all these future technologies,
and this will create so many jobs and all these
(16:25):
kinds of things. He spent additional money even though the
COVID related downturn had ended the year before Bamba, or
excuse me, before Biden came into the administration and took office.
You know, they had a spending blowout that was supposed
to rejuvenate the economy, even for none of it worked.
(16:46):
For the last twenty five years, we have barely grown
at more than two percent a year, and so I think,
to come back to your question, it doesn't work. We've
seen this time and again. The government is not a
good allocator of resources. The private sector is a phenomenal
allocator of resources. And when we get the government trying
(17:09):
to allocate too much of the nation's resources, we end
up in stagnant growth, rising high deficits and rising debts
and that kind of thing. So I.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Agree, I mean, I think that it sounds really good though,
when you're campaigning, it sounds delightful to say. I mean,
look at New York what we're seeing with mom Donnie saying,
you know what, we're going to have the government take
care of this for you. When you hear that, oh
this is fantastic. We're paying these taxes anyway. The government's
going to get our grocery prices down, the government's going
(17:41):
to rejuvenate our neighborhoods. We're going to have better housing.
It's a human right. These all of this type of
language sounds very good. And then the I think the
debt has become a situation where everybody is, well, there's
always debt, you know, so why do we care anymore?
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Yeah, Well, so what has your exactly right? What tends
to happen in these situations is you know, people start
talking about, oh, the death's a problem. Well, this might
be when it's sixty percent of GDP, and then it
gets to seventy five percent and people are saying, oh,
the death's a problem, but we don't have a collapse.
And now it's at almost one hundred percent, and it
starts to feel like, okay, well, this is like you know,
(18:21):
the little boy crying wolf or whatever it's. You know,
it's not a real problem out there, but these things
are significant problems. They can show up in significant collapses,
like we saw with the housing bubble. We heard the
same thing for a while with the housing bubble. Oh
this isn't a problem. Housing prices keep going up, you know,
until they don't. But we it can also show up
(18:44):
in other ways, and I do think the electorate has
gotten that message this time, which it can show up
in substandard rates of growth. You know, when the Reagan
administration came in and try to turn us back towards
a free market kind of agenda, which they did in
the early nineteen eighties, we went through almost twenty years
(19:07):
of accelerated growth again, but all of this started turning around.
All of that started turning around in the early two
thousands when Bush started pushing deficits bending up, and then
Obama started pushing it up even faster and expanding the
dead even faster. And so I think instead of a
full bone collapse, what we've seen is just this stagnant
(19:30):
level of growth, you know, two percent kind of growth
instead of three and a half percent in those kinds
of things. And so it's showing up in that way.
I think that's at the core of the electric frustration.
You know, that opened them up to the to Trump's
message the first time and again this last time, and
I think, you know, I think they have seen it
(19:51):
from that perspective.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
So looking at the president's policies, how do you see
the economy growing out of that? And how does AI
affect that?
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Yeah, a perfect question. I mean, especially with what's happened
here recently, I think AI has the potential to be
the next version of the Industrial Revolution. And many of
us have been miseducated about the Industrial Revolution. People talk
about robber barons and the need of the progressives to
step in and protect the little guy and all these
(20:22):
things and nothing. It's not to say that some of
that isn't didn't happen, or wasn't valid, at least in
anecdotal cases. But from a big picture perspective, the Industrial
Revolution took us through the most extraordinary economic changes and
transformation in the history of the world. I mean, at
(20:44):
the beginning of this, we were riding in horses and buggies,
and we were reading at night by candlelight, and we
had no electricity in our homes. And by the end
of it, in the nineteen twenties, you know, cars had
not only invented but become like an everyday necessity for
a thriving middle class who was going home to electrified
(21:07):
homes and reading by light bulbs in the evening. They
were on the verge of flying by airplanes. I mean,
in terms of transforming the economy, the social structure, everything,
nothing like it has ever happened. And that all happened
under a very limited government model. Government spending at that time,
throughout the eighteen hundreds and into the early nineteen hundreds
(21:30):
during peace times, averaged three percent of GDP. Today it's
almost twenty five percent. I agree, three percent, and we
ran budget surpluses, not deficits through all of that government
debt was consistently held below five percent of GDP, so
(21:50):
that if we got into a tough time like the
Civil War, World War One, you know, we had the
borrowing capacity so that we could borrow without pushing our
into the danger zone. And in spite of all of that,
you know, conservative finance, maintaining budget surpluses, government not trying
(22:11):
to invest in big ways in infrastructure and do all
these things. You know, we had the greatest growth over
a sustained period we've ever had.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
Is that because when you talk about the Industrial Revolution,
that wasn't the government doing that. That was the private
sector saying we're going to create and suddenly, you know,
like you said, we've got light bulbs and into our
plumbing and vehicles. But that wasn't the government that created that.
And I think that's something that is hard for this
generation to look at and say, well, the government needs
(22:40):
to invest in AI. But this has always been the
private sector that invests in technology absolutely.
Speaker 2 (22:48):
You know, you know, we're going back to you know,
the telegraph that was invented by Samuel Morris, Alexander Graham Bell,
and the telephone Thomas Edison, and electricity in the light bulb,
and so Henry Ford and the uh, you know, the
assembly line, which then took automobiles from being a rich
(23:10):
person's toys to being something that was for everybody. And
you know, he drove and if you kind of go
back at the early part of the nineteen hundreds when
Ford was starting to tinker around with these ideas, before
he had really implemented the assembly line, automobile, like I said,
was a rich person's toy. You know, there were a
small number of people working in the industry. If you said,
(23:33):
somebody's going to come along and create this way to
make this so much more efficient, you know that a
single person, you know, can can produce more cars than
maybe fifty people could earlier. You thought, oh, this will
be a disaster for the auto sector's employment. But what
happened was this incredible level of efficiency was also translated
(23:57):
through lower prices. So the cost of model t over
about a seven or eight year period and went from
over two thousand down to like two hundred and fifty dollars.
And as that happened, demand exploded, and auto industry employment
actually exploded along with that as demand was created. And
so the point of all of this is this is
(24:19):
the kind of thing that can happen with artificial intelligence
if we take the right approach to it. And I'm extreme.
I've been writing about this in my substack pieces here recently,
and then the administration just came out with their plan,
their AI Action Plan this week, which is exactly following
this model. It's the idea of creating deregulations and giving
(24:43):
the industry. You know, we are fortunate to have what
I've called the pole position in the AI race, so
that you know, because we've led the world through technology
development and through the development of the Internet, We've got
the venture capital community and these big tech companies who
are leading the world into artificial intelligence. And the approach
(25:07):
that Trump administration is taking is we've got to make
sure that government doesn't throw up unnecessary roadblocks that in
a way that keeps us from winning this race, which
is absolutely critical not only for the economy and creating
high paying jobs and having them here in the United States,
(25:27):
but also so that you know, we can continue to
lead the world in this perspective, and from a defense perspective,
it's incredibly important. You know, the last thing in the
world we want is for these jobs to be in China,
and for China to be the one that's leading in
the defense applications of all these.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
I think there's a lot of fear around AI for
multiple reasons. I mean, obviously the reason of what can
it create, but also, as you said, people are concerned
that AI will take over well, just as they were
concerned that the Industrial revolution would takeover blue collar jobs.
Now it's AI is going to take over all of
the white collar jobs. But as you see states like
(26:07):
my state of Michigan, we we're losing jobs all across
the board. AI is an opportunity to say, boy, that
can be managed from anywhere. There can be these data
centers anywhere, but there is an energy cost or an
energy supply concern, and that is where I do think
that the government needs to make sure that we are
(26:29):
or an energy dominant country. And that's what Donald Trump
is trying to do. How do you see that plane
into this AI race.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Yeah, that's a perfect point, and it's a big part
of their new agenda. This AI action Plan is not
only to you unleash innovation among the companies so that
we can continue to lead the race and have those
companies and those jobs predominantly happening here in America, but
also continuing with the approach of you know, leading in
(27:01):
energy development and realizing our energy potential so that we
have the energy that is needed to power this AI
boom and it doesn't have to get off short again.
So yeah, I think that that's a critical, critical part
of it. It's a big part of you know, developing
the energy infrastructure, which I think they mean importantly enabling
(27:22):
the private sector to develop the energy intersector, you know,
not trying to energy sector, not trying to have the
government step in and do the private sector's job.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. It's been kind of a hindrance
for AI in this in the United States because there
has been a question for so long will energy be
available with the climate and then that was a big
part of Biden's administration was you know, climate change and
(27:53):
climate control and control energy and change energy over. And
then as you're changing energy over to on reliable sources,
there are companies who are creating AI and companies who
are developing AI, and they say, well, what if this
is not stable in these states that are saying we're
getting rid of traditional forms of energy before we have
(28:13):
new forms of energy that are reliable, and I think
that's been a concern that that's going to drive it overseas,
and it seems as though the Trump administration is saying,
you know, we're done with all of that. We're going
to ensure that energy is here to stay. But there
have to be some concerns in the private sector that
if Democrats get back into control, they're going to do
(28:34):
that same thing, and then we're going to have questions
about whether or not the energy will be there to
support this and if we can continue to lead in
this industry.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Yeah, I think that, you know, those are reasonable concerns.
Hopefully what will happen here is that we can free
up the energy that starts creating these jobs, and that
allows AI to get started and we can get the
kind of growth going again that this country has been
waiting for for you know, almost thirty years now twenty
(29:03):
five years. And if that happens, it makes it much
more difficult to come back with these other messages, which
I think lead us down the wrong path as we
were on for such a long period of time there.
So the real key is to get this growth going.
The fears about it are very understandable, you know, any
of us, You know, we like to operate with a
(29:23):
feeling that like we've got a sense of how things
work and that they work well for us, and you
know that things we depend on will be there. But
there are these times that we just have to have faith,
you know that that that the growth of the system,
if we unleash it will take care of things. As
I made a point in one of my pieces, the
(29:44):
AI genie is out of the bottle, whether we want
it to be or not. It can be developed here,
it can be developed in China, but it's out of
the bottle. And the best thing for us to do
is to is to kind of follow the model of
the Industrial Revolution, which is to let this development and
expansion have And I believe it will create far more
(30:08):
jobs than it replaces. And there's already stories out there
about how much more efficient it can make people. And
if we're leading that efficiency curve, then that will make
us more competitive with low wage labor markets like China
or Vietnam and those kinds of things. So if we
have American manufacturing workers who are benefiting from AI and
(30:31):
I'm already hearing stories about these kinds of things all
of a sudden. If we're on the leading edge of that,
they can get pay to higher wage because AI is
helping make them so much more efficient than workers who
aren't on the leading edge of that, and that helps
move those jobs back here as well. So I'm very
(30:51):
optimistic about where all this is going, and especially given
the approach that the Trump is administration is taken.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Well, this is all very interesting. I know you are,
like you said, you're writing about this. You've got this
on your substack page. Tell people where they can find that,
because I think we're all kind of going, Okay, what
does this mean? This is something new. I'm sure it
was the same in the Industrial Revolution. This is all new.
What should we expect? So how can people follow you?
Speaker 2 (31:17):
Yeah? So substack is a place My newsletter is free there.
It's called on Wealth and Progress. So if you go
to substack dot com and search for Toddsheets on Wealth
and Progress, that's one place. I'm also putting out kind
of short mini podcasts each week, so you know, if
you go to Spotify or YouTube, you know there's like
a fifteen minute little version of the substack pieces that
(31:39):
are there for people that would rather listen to it
audio on a you know, audio format. And then, as
you mentioned, my book two thousand and eight, What Really
Happened is out there also available Amazon or Barnsannoble dot com.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Thank you for coming on today, Todd Sheets, thanks so much.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Tutor, Thank you. I appreciate it so.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Much, absolutely, and thank you all for joining the Tutor
Dixon podcast. For this episode and others, go to tutordisonpodcast
dot com. You can subscribe there or the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts, and check
out the whole video on Rumble or YouTube at Tutor
Dixon and join us next time. Have a blessed day.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!