Trump details all tariffs from Rose Garden on his proclaimed Liberation Day. We asked our economist and money wiz David Bahnsen how these tariffs will impact the economy and you!
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):
Previously on your Morning Show with Michael dil Jonah, there's.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Gonna be some bumps in the road, like waking up
this morning, the stock futures plummeting after the President's big announcement.
He's an economist, he's our money whiz, and so to
understand what we can expect in the market today, the
reaction to the teriffs from other countries and tariffs in general,
we turned to David Bonson with the Bonceon Financial Group.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Good morning, David, Well, good morning, Michael. Good to be
with you.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
All right, I guess the first obvious question you're already
snickering is can you tear if your way to liberation?
Speaker 4 (00:32):
No, it's called taxing, and we've always been against it
when the left did it. And the way that this
is happening now, the pretense, the absolute fantasy that this
is reciprocal tariffts against other people trying to get fairness.
It's absolutely stunning and I cannot believe I'm hearing Republicans defended.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
All right, So what do you make of Vietnam, Israel,
India already cutting there is if this is a art
of the deal.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Told us before the announcement, they were going to go
to zero, and.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Yeah, but Vietnam didn't, India didn't, Canada hasn't.
Speaker 4 (01:04):
Esterday, Vietnam would be at zero if we had done
the TPP deal, Vietnam and Japan would be at zero
percent tariffs. We turned it down that deal. They didn't
turn it down, we walked away from it. The whole
issue here is that people continue to make a mistake
about who pays for tariffs. So when they say that
they're tariffing us, what they mean is they're tariffing their
own importers on good spot from us. But of course, Michael,
(01:28):
if we buy a lot more from them than they
buy from us, then it isn't reciprocal. It's a disproportionate
hit to us. But the irony is that we now
know since the press confience yesterday, that they didn't calculate
this based on what they charge us. They included a
formula for non trade barriers and to go through and
(01:49):
do that. Everyone assumed that they went through and actually
calculated what these various non trade barriers were. Because there's
countries on there, like Singapore that don't tariff us that
now we have a very high cost with.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
So where were they calculating these non trade barriers.
Speaker 4 (02:03):
All they did is take the trade deficit with those
countries and divide it and take their exports, divide it
by trade deficit, and then they did times that by
fifty percent.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
That's what President Trump is referring to it. We're being nice.
So it's a massive hundreds of billions of dollars, the
largest tax increase I can recall in my lifetime that
American people are going to pay.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
So let's say Vietnam cuts THEIRS in half. Because Nike
seems to be taking the biggest hit here, and I
happen to know Nike does a lot. I mean, most
shoes that are Nike are made in Vietnam. So there's
two ways to look at this. What Nike is going
to do change, I'm I'm just saying, so Nike is
(02:49):
taking an immediate hit, so you'll see certain companies. What
becomes of that? So do Americans end up paying more
for Nike shoes? Do they start buying shoes elsewhere? Does
Nike start manufacturing elsewhere? How does it play out?
Speaker 4 (03:05):
Well, first of all, let's say that they were to
manufacture now in Ohio, that they could flick a switch
and all of a sudden, the world's largest and most
successful shoe manufacturer in history is able to start manufacturing
everything in Ohio tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Is that going to be the same cost as it
is in Vietnam?
Speaker 4 (03:21):
If it is, why weren't they just making him Ohio
to begin with. So you either have a choice of
costs going up to consumers because of tariffs or because
they actually do manufacture in Ohio. But why would Nike
move it to Ohio when they know that this is
all going to be a new president in three years
and it's going to cost billions upon billions of dollars
(03:43):
and take years upon years to move it, and that
it isn't passed by Congress, who, by the way, last
I checked, has the power to tax in the United
States Constitution that Republicans used to say they cared about.
This has been done under a national security emergency? Are
we under a national security emergency over washing machines.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
And Nike shoes?
Speaker 4 (04:06):
So we're doing this outside the United States Constitution and
we are doing something that is going to be paid
by Americans and well, inevitably if it really happens, And
that's the whole key is, we still don't know if
it's going to happen, because the language that was not
mentioned at the press conference is that full modification authority
and discretion lies with President Trump, so one individual has
(04:31):
the sole discretionary authority to change it on a whim.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
So some sectors have already gotten waivers.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
The White House phones are blowing up right now, a
company after company asking to be waived and exempted. We
don't even know what will end up happening. So that's
where markets have the worst reaction today is the news
is significantly worse that had been expected, and there's still
no certainty. We still don't know what's going to end
up happening.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
What do you think the play is here?
Speaker 4 (05:00):
I think it could get an announcement. He said something
yesterday that I caught in the middle of the presser
where I realized where he really wants to bring this.
And I'm sorry that I don't say any of this
as a compliment, but I just can only tell the truth.
I think he wants an announcement of, oh, yeah, we
got this country in this company, like what you were
doing earlier on the show about what Israel announced this
(05:21):
or Vietnam announced this.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
I think he wants to be able to.
Speaker 4 (05:23):
Say that he got big deals. So he has said
Johnson and Johnson's already going to invest fifty five billion
dollars in the US because of me. But Johnson Johnson
invested forty billion over the last four years, and now
they said fifty five billion over the next forty years.
So it's an increase of twelve to fifteen billion over
(05:44):
four years, three billion a year, which is I think
their lunch money allowance. So it's all cosmetic. It's all
to be able to simply announce stuff that in many
cases was.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Going to happen anyways. By the way, in some cases
may very well be new issues.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
But my point is that he's going to have to
find an off ramp that these types of impediments to trade.
They sound great to say we're going to help workers,
it's going to be awful for workers. They are not
going to bring this level of production manufacturing back. And
the fact of the matter is along the way the
(06:22):
impact of prices. What were the working class most mad
with President Biden about the cost of things they.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Were paying for.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Working class people are consumers too, and so I think
that he will have to find an off ramp and
get to a point of an announcement, and I think
that that's what this is all geared towards.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Doing economist and money was David Bonson obviously not a
fan of tariffs. What you're ultimately tax paid for, but
the taxpayers Okay, so politically, let's look at this. Politically
you can't. I mean, if you're going to play this
long term, you're going to have pain between now and
the midterm elections. That could backfire because one of the
(07:03):
things they elected the president do was secure the border.
He's done it, one hundred and fifteen thousand arrests, one
hundred thousand deportations, border crossings are down from one hundred
and fifty six thousand to seven thousand, right, so he's
achieved that. The next thing they elected him to do
is lower the costs of things and address inflation. This
would actually, in the short term, make things much worse.
(07:24):
That's pretty dangerous politically, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
It's existentially dangerous.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
And that's also in the context of midterm reality where
incumbent presidents generally just lose. So you already have the
odds stacked against you with one of the tightest majorities
that we've ever had. And I would add, by the way,
that the inflation thing is also in the context of
real wages. In other words, it's that prices have to
(07:52):
be contained, but people have to feel like they're making
more than their prices are going up. And if you
have a recession and wages drop, unemployment goes up, those
things are not necessarily what we're pulled in twenty twenty
four because we did have low unappoyment and we did
have growing real wages. But they will become the major
(08:15):
economic issues real quickly. You know, we don't talk about
a recession as if it's some sort of agnostic neutral,
you know, a moral event like it all of a
sudden becomes the pain that people are feeling.
Speaker 3 (08:29):
But you're right, border.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Issues and inflation were the things people were feeling and
so therefore talking about before. So there's no presidency ever
that has done well politically if the economy is bad,
whatever bad economy means, and that's the big vulnerability. Now,
what's going on here is that President Trump in his
first term had all the angels on one shoulder that
(08:53):
were reminding him how much you need a pro growth agenda,
deregulation energy, low taxes, all the things I support, all
the things that praise President Trump for a thousand times,
those voices are largely gone. The couple voices that are
still there are being drowned out. And I believe and
I pray that there's a point where President Trump realizes
that the Pete Navarros and Stephen Miller is telling him
(09:16):
it's okay if we take on a little bit of
pain here, it's all going to be for the good
in the end, that he will realize how bad that
advice is. The short term pain for long term gain
is a bad political message, But in this case it's
not a true message. There is no long term gain
coming from what has been done here, and if there
(09:38):
were going to be, you have to take it as
an article of faith. Do you think voters like to
take things as an article of faith. This is dangerous politically, Michael,
It really is. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
No, I have seen the political danger from the beginning.
I don't know that I see First of all, I
think it seems to be more of a short term play.
But you know, all this talking about advisors, it's kind
of my observation that this has always been a big
issue for President Trump. Now he knew that the border
was the play to win in twenty sixteen, but he
(10:07):
was always talking about bad trade deals, how we're getting shafted.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
You know.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
I use the analogy if I did an interview with
Amanda Knox, and when you do an interview with somebody
like that, you feel this burden to ask the questions
on behalf of the listeners, if they'd have had the opportunity,
what would they have wanted to ask? And then you
always save one for yourself. And I think this, I
think this is on Trump. I think this has been
a burning issue in him. This is his deal, and
it has long bothered him.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Here because you're you're one thousand percent right, I just
want to be real clear what I meant. The issue
has bothered him since nineteen eighty five exactly, you're one
hundred percent right. But the way in which he's trying
to go about it, that the idea that we could
do these big tariffs and have just a little short
term pain, that is something that he has been convinced
(10:54):
because it was a big issue him in his first
term too, and his advisor has convinced him.
Speaker 3 (10:58):
President, and mister President, you.
Speaker 4 (10:59):
Were not going to be able to do this. It's
not going to have the impact you think it will.
The decoupling from China issue is a massive, massive deal,
and I do not believe that the presidents coming up
on his own with an estimate estimation of what the
(11:20):
economic impact will be. I think that's what's coming from advisors.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
All right, last two self is in him?
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Yeah, last two minutes. David Bonson Bonson Financial Group. Also
Dividend Cafe, which I highly recommend all of you. I
can think of Big John, one of our listeners that
uses the talk back all the time, is a huge fan.
And for those of you that love these weekly visits, man,
you'll love the Dividend Cafe Dividendcafe dot com. All right,
so real quickly, what should we expect in the next
(11:48):
I mean, what is your three to thirty day forecast
with this?
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Well, you know, I don't have a particular forecast for
what the markets will exactly do because the volatility means
by definition there's big severe updates and big severe down days.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
I think that the general direction is very negative.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
The things that are going to get hit the most
are consumer discrestionary You mentioned Nike and tech, so the
nvidios and apples and all those things that are just
heavy global players and interconnected global supply chain, and most
of the talk about, well, you know, that's fine, then
they're going to have to take their medicine until they
want to move.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Everything back on shore. The only two things I can
say there is it's.
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Not going to happen, and if it did, it would
be even more expensive. So I just think that you
have to expect short term uncertainty because if I were
to predict what President Trump's reversals or carve outs or
exceptions will be, I'm going to be wrong because I
just don't know, and I do not believe he knows.
Right now, the phones are going to ring, and then
(12:51):
he'll take somebody out, and then another thing will upset
them and it'll put somebody back in. I don't like
that kind of discussionary authority with anyone, even with a
president that I generally have a lot of good things
to say about by President Trump. If it were President
Reagan or President Coolidge, my two favorite presidents of the
last hundred years, I don't want them to have that
(13:12):
kind of individual discussion. So over the next month, if
that's what the question is I expect volatility.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
What's on the cafe this week?
Speaker 4 (13:22):
Well, I was going to write a divid cafe about
the ten year anniversary of my company leaving Morgan Stanley
and starting our own company ten years ago. Yes, something
tells me that got bumped, and it appears I'm going
to have to keep this ongoing care of focus going.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
All right, David Bonson, It is the Dividendcafe dot com
that those that want more. We'll talk again next Thursday
or sooner if conditions warrant. David Bonson from the Bouncing
Financial Group, thanks for joining us.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
Miss a little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del
Cherno
Previously on your Morning Show with Michael dil Jonah, there's.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Gonna be some bumps in the road, like waking up
this morning, the stock futures plummeting after the President's big announcement.
He's an economist, he's our money whiz, and so to
understand what we can expect in the market today, the
reaction to the teriffs from other countries and tariffs in general,
we turned to David Bonson with the Bonceon Financial Group.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Good morning, David, Well, good morning, Michael. Good to be
with you.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
All right, I guess the first obvious question you're already
snickering is can you tear if your way to liberation?
Speaker 4 (00:32):
No, it's called taxing, and we've always been against it
when the left did it. And the way that this
is happening now, the pretense, the absolute fantasy that this
is reciprocal tariffts against other people trying to get fairness.
It's absolutely stunning and I cannot believe I'm hearing Republicans defended.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
All right, So what do you make of Vietnam, Israel,
India already cutting there is if this is a art
of the deal.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Told us before the announcement, they were going to go
to zero, and.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Yeah, but Vietnam didn't, India didn't, Canada hasn't.
Speaker 4 (01:04):
Esterday, Vietnam would be at zero if we had done
the TPP deal, Vietnam and Japan would be at zero
percent tariffs. We turned it down that deal. They didn't
turn it down, we walked away from it. The whole
issue here is that people continue to make a mistake
about who pays for tariffs. So when they say that
they're tariffing us, what they mean is they're tariffing their
own importers on good spot from us. But of course, Michael,
(01:28):
if we buy a lot more from them than they
buy from us, then it isn't reciprocal. It's a disproportionate
hit to us. But the irony is that we now
know since the press confience yesterday, that they didn't calculate
this based on what they charge us. They included a
formula for non trade barriers and to go through and
(01:49):
do that. Everyone assumed that they went through and actually
calculated what these various non trade barriers were. Because there's
countries on there, like Singapore that don't tariff us that
now we have a very high cost with.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
So where were they calculating these non trade barriers.
Speaker 4 (02:03):
All they did is take the trade deficit with those
countries and divide it and take their exports, divide it
by trade deficit, and then they did times that by
fifty percent.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
That's what President Trump is referring to it. We're being nice.
So it's a massive hundreds of billions of dollars, the
largest tax increase I can recall in my lifetime that
American people are going to pay.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
So let's say Vietnam cuts THEIRS in half. Because Nike
seems to be taking the biggest hit here, and I
happen to know Nike does a lot. I mean, most
shoes that are Nike are made in Vietnam. So there's
two ways to look at this. What Nike is going
to do change, I'm I'm just saying, so Nike is
(02:49):
taking an immediate hit, so you'll see certain companies. What
becomes of that? So do Americans end up paying more
for Nike shoes? Do they start buying shoes elsewhere? Does
Nike start manufacturing elsewhere? How does it play out?
Speaker 4 (03:05):
Well, first of all, let's say that they were to
manufacture now in Ohio, that they could flick a switch
and all of a sudden, the world's largest and most
successful shoe manufacturer in history is able to start manufacturing
everything in Ohio tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Is that going to be the same cost as it
is in Vietnam?
Speaker 4 (03:21):
If it is, why weren't they just making him Ohio
to begin with. So you either have a choice of
costs going up to consumers because of tariffs or because
they actually do manufacture in Ohio. But why would Nike
move it to Ohio when they know that this is
all going to be a new president in three years
and it's going to cost billions upon billions of dollars
(03:43):
and take years upon years to move it, and that
it isn't passed by Congress, who, by the way, last
I checked, has the power to tax in the United
States Constitution that Republicans used to say they cared about.
This has been done under a national security emergency? Are
we under a national security emergency over washing machines.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
And Nike shoes?
Speaker 4 (04:06):
So we're doing this outside the United States Constitution and
we are doing something that is going to be paid
by Americans and well, inevitably if it really happens, And
that's the whole key is, we still don't know if
it's going to happen, because the language that was not
mentioned at the press conference is that full modification authority
and discretion lies with President Trump, so one individual has
(04:31):
the sole discretionary authority to change it on a whim.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
So some sectors have already gotten waivers.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
The White House phones are blowing up right now, a
company after company asking to be waived and exempted. We
don't even know what will end up happening. So that's
where markets have the worst reaction today is the news
is significantly worse that had been expected, and there's still
no certainty. We still don't know what's going to end
up happening.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
What do you think the play is here?
Speaker 4 (05:00):
I think it could get an announcement. He said something
yesterday that I caught in the middle of the presser
where I realized where he really wants to bring this.
And I'm sorry that I don't say any of this
as a compliment, but I just can only tell the truth.
I think he wants an announcement of, oh, yeah, we
got this country in this company, like what you were
doing earlier on the show about what Israel announced this
(05:21):
or Vietnam announced this.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
I think he wants to be able to.
Speaker 4 (05:23):
Say that he got big deals. So he has said
Johnson and Johnson's already going to invest fifty five billion
dollars in the US because of me. But Johnson Johnson
invested forty billion over the last four years, and now
they said fifty five billion over the next forty years.
So it's an increase of twelve to fifteen billion over
(05:44):
four years, three billion a year, which is I think
their lunch money allowance. So it's all cosmetic. It's all
to be able to simply announce stuff that in many
cases was.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Going to happen anyways. By the way, in some cases
may very well be new issues.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
But my point is that he's going to have to
find an off ramp that these types of impediments to trade.
They sound great to say we're going to help workers,
it's going to be awful for workers. They are not
going to bring this level of production manufacturing back. And
the fact of the matter is along the way the
(06:22):
impact of prices. What were the working class most mad
with President Biden about the cost of things they.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Were paying for.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Working class people are consumers too, and so I think
that he will have to find an off ramp and
get to a point of an announcement, and I think
that that's what this is all geared towards.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Doing economist and money was David Bonson obviously not a
fan of tariffs. What you're ultimately tax paid for, but
the taxpayers Okay, so politically, let's look at this. Politically
you can't. I mean, if you're going to play this
long term, you're going to have pain between now and
the midterm elections. That could backfire because one of the
(07:03):
things they elected the president do was secure the border.
He's done it, one hundred and fifteen thousand arrests, one
hundred thousand deportations, border crossings are down from one hundred
and fifty six thousand to seven thousand, right, so he's
achieved that. The next thing they elected him to do
is lower the costs of things and address inflation. This
would actually, in the short term, make things much worse.
(07:24):
That's pretty dangerous politically, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
It's existentially dangerous.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
And that's also in the context of midterm reality where
incumbent presidents generally just lose. So you already have the
odds stacked against you with one of the tightest majorities
that we've ever had. And I would add, by the way,
that the inflation thing is also in the context of
real wages. In other words, it's that prices have to
(07:52):
be contained, but people have to feel like they're making
more than their prices are going up. And if you
have a recession and wages drop, unemployment goes up, those
things are not necessarily what we're pulled in twenty twenty
four because we did have low unappoyment and we did
have growing real wages. But they will become the major
(08:15):
economic issues real quickly. You know, we don't talk about
a recession as if it's some sort of agnostic neutral,
you know, a moral event like it all of a
sudden becomes the pain that people are feeling.
Speaker 3 (08:29):
But you're right, border.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Issues and inflation were the things people were feeling and
so therefore talking about before. So there's no presidency ever
that has done well politically if the economy is bad,
whatever bad economy means, and that's the big vulnerability. Now,
what's going on here is that President Trump in his
first term had all the angels on one shoulder that
(08:53):
were reminding him how much you need a pro growth agenda,
deregulation energy, low taxes, all the things I support, all
the things that praise President Trump for a thousand times,
those voices are largely gone. The couple voices that are
still there are being drowned out. And I believe and
I pray that there's a point where President Trump realizes
that the Pete Navarros and Stephen Miller is telling him
(09:16):
it's okay if we take on a little bit of
pain here, it's all going to be for the good
in the end, that he will realize how bad that
advice is. The short term pain for long term gain
is a bad political message, But in this case it's
not a true message. There is no long term gain
coming from what has been done here, and if there
(09:38):
were going to be, you have to take it as
an article of faith. Do you think voters like to
take things as an article of faith. This is dangerous politically, Michael,
It really is. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
No, I have seen the political danger from the beginning.
I don't know that I see First of all, I
think it seems to be more of a short term play.
But you know, all this talking about advisors, it's kind
of my observation that this has always been a big
issue for President Trump. Now he knew that the border
was the play to win in twenty sixteen, but he
(10:07):
was always talking about bad trade deals, how we're getting shafted.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
You know.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
I use the analogy if I did an interview with
Amanda Knox, and when you do an interview with somebody
like that, you feel this burden to ask the questions
on behalf of the listeners, if they'd have had the opportunity,
what would they have wanted to ask? And then you
always save one for yourself. And I think this, I
think this is on Trump. I think this has been
a burning issue in him. This is his deal, and
it has long bothered him.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Here because you're you're one thousand percent right, I just
want to be real clear what I meant. The issue
has bothered him since nineteen eighty five exactly, you're one
hundred percent right. But the way in which he's trying
to go about it, that the idea that we could
do these big tariffs and have just a little short
term pain, that is something that he has been convinced
(10:54):
because it was a big issue him in his first
term too, and his advisor has convinced him.
Speaker 3 (10:58):
President, and mister President, you.
Speaker 4 (10:59):
Were not going to be able to do this. It's
not going to have the impact you think it will.
The decoupling from China issue is a massive, massive deal,
and I do not believe that the presidents coming up
on his own with an estimate estimation of what the
(11:20):
economic impact will be. I think that's what's coming from advisors.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
All right, last two self is in him?
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Yeah, last two minutes. David Bonson Bonson Financial Group. Also
Dividend Cafe, which I highly recommend all of you. I
can think of Big John, one of our listeners that
uses the talk back all the time, is a huge fan.
And for those of you that love these weekly visits, man,
you'll love the Dividend Cafe Dividendcafe dot com. All right,
so real quickly, what should we expect in the next
(11:48):
I mean, what is your three to thirty day forecast
with this?
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Well, you know, I don't have a particular forecast for
what the markets will exactly do because the volatility means
by definition there's big severe updates and big severe down days.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
I think that the general direction is very negative.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
The things that are going to get hit the most
are consumer discrestionary You mentioned Nike and tech, so the
nvidios and apples and all those things that are just
heavy global players and interconnected global supply chain, and most
of the talk about, well, you know, that's fine, then
they're going to have to take their medicine until they
want to move.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Everything back on shore. The only two things I can
say there is it's.
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Not going to happen, and if it did, it would
be even more expensive. So I just think that you
have to expect short term uncertainty because if I were
to predict what President Trump's reversals or carve outs or
exceptions will be, I'm going to be wrong because I
just don't know, and I do not believe he knows.
Right now, the phones are going to ring, and then
(12:51):
he'll take somebody out, and then another thing will upset
them and it'll put somebody back in. I don't like
that kind of discussionary authority with anyone, even with a
president that I generally have a lot of good things
to say about by President Trump. If it were President
Reagan or President Coolidge, my two favorite presidents of the
last hundred years, I don't want them to have that
(13:12):
kind of individual discussion. So over the next month, if
that's what the question is I expect volatility.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
What's on the cafe this week?
Speaker 4 (13:22):
Well, I was going to write a divid cafe about
the ten year anniversary of my company leaving Morgan Stanley
and starting our own company ten years ago. Yes, something
tells me that got bumped, and it appears I'm going
to have to keep this ongoing care of focus going.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
All right, David Bonson, It is the Dividendcafe dot com
that those that want more. We'll talk again next Thursday
or sooner if conditions warrant. David Bonson from the Bouncing
Financial Group, thanks for joining us.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
Miss a little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del
Cherno
Popular 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.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!