December 2, 2025 • 16 mins
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):
Fifty five krc D talkstation, o F the Thiky five
kr CV talk station. Brian Thomas always looking forward to
this time of the week and this moment in time
on the morning show because it's time for the inside
scoop with Bright Barton News. And as I always start
the segment with do Yourself a Favor Bookmarket B R
(00:21):
E I T B A R T dot com, you'd
be glad you get did beautiful reporting, wonderful reporting, a
lot of stuff you're not going to read elsewhere until
like a year later when the stuff they report on
bright Bird turns out to be absolutely true and where
you can read the work of John Carney, the finance
and economics editor at Bright Barton News. He has been
around the finance business for like ever his old career.
(00:41):
He started out of a blog for About Wall Street,
heading up the deal Breaker blog back in the mid
two thousands, went over the Business Insider CNBC Wall Street Journal,
where he was he was responsible for the Herd on
the Street column. His works appeared to New York Times,
New York Magazine, Fortune, New York Post, New York Sun.
I could go on, but we wouldn't be able to
(01:01):
talk about the Empower Youth Seminar that John Carney is
doing tonight on question Mark. Will interest Rates be coming down?
Welcome back, John Carney. It's a pleasure having you on
the program Sir.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Thanks for having me. You just sent me on a
nostalgia trip all the stuff I've done over the years.
That was great.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Hard to believe how time has flown, isn't it? John?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
It really is incredible. You know, when I started this,
we were just going into the two thousand and eighth
financial crisis, and you know, here we are just and
it seems like we never run out of crises. We
kept in business.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Well we're on that note, John Kearney. Isn't that sort
of kind of intentional? I mean, I've been doing radio.
Next year is my twentieth year on radio. But I've
been following politics since I was like sixteen years old.
Reagan's second election was when I really got engaged in politics,
and I've never turned back. It was a topic of
conversation and at the dinner table. I've really been engaged
(01:58):
for my entire life. So it's always in crisis. I mean,
part of I think part of the reality, well, this
is the idea, is we always kept in a mentality
of crisis mode. You know, the world's going to end,
We're all going to die, the market's going to crash,
the market's going to go up, and you know, we
don't follow up to find out, well, was that prediction true?
From last year? Is just once they announced these terrible
(02:18):
headlines that we move on and go about with our lives.
Should we ever feel like we're in crisis?
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah, no, that's a great point. Look, one of the
things that's definitely true is that the media has predicted
just about eight out of the last two crisises, meaning
there is constantly a crisis, you know, on the horizon
or actually happening. I remember the first Trump administration. We
(02:45):
were told constantly that we were going to have inflation
because of the terifts he put on China, and I
covered that every month in and out all three of
the major inflation reports that the government produces, and there
was no inflation. And it really wasn't until the pandemic
struck that finally started, when people were distracted by a
(03:07):
real crisis, that the media started to admit, oh, okay,
you know, we were wrong. There was no inflation because
of the tariffs.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
But there was inflation because of the Inflation Reduction Act
and the COVID nineteen response money and the trillions of
dollars that were thrown into the economy from printed dollars
that watered down the value of our currency.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
That's right. And they said that inflation wouldn't happen, So
they predicted the inflation that didn't happen would happen, and
the prediction, and they predicted that the inflation that actually
did happen was the worst in forty years. You know,
wasn't really happening. And by the way, we'd go away
almost immediately. Here we are five years later and we're
(03:47):
still dealing with it.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Well, the pesky reality of inflation is while the inflation
rate can go up or down, as the case may be,
I mean, I'm old enough to remember the seventies when
we had stagflation, but the prices never really go down.
I mean, you see a two percent increase in inflation,
and you've been struggling with seven or eight percent inflation.
(04:08):
It's like, I'm never going to see say, two dollars
ninety nine cent per pound beef again. I'm never going
to see a bag of chips that actually has sixteen
ounces in it for three ninety nine as opposed to
the twelve ounces you get for three ninety nine. It
just doesn't come down, that's.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Right, The prices don't come down. The most you can
hope for is that you have low inflation for a
few years, which may sort of bring you back on track.
But the truth is that once you have a period
of high inflation, as you said, you jump up nine percent,
then even if you get normal levels of inflation around
(04:43):
two percent after that, you're permanently at a higher price
level than you should be. You can hope that you
can grow the economy in a way that lets wages
catch up with that, but that takes a very long time. Basically,
and this is a I hate to have to deliver
this bad news to people, but we are permanently, because
(05:03):
of the irresponsibility of the Biden administration and Howells fed
during those years, we are permanently stuck at a high
price level that is not going to feel right at
least for another ten years. You're going to feel You're
still going to feel sticker shocked when you walk into
a store, or order a meal at a restaurant, or
(05:25):
try to buy tickets to something. Prices are going to
feel too high for quite a while.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
All right, Now, if John Carney was chairman of the FED,
and you could turn back the tables of time to say,
right when Biden got elected, I mean we had three
percent mortgage rates at the time, roughly right, I mean
that was extraordinarily low. And I have to say out loud,
my listeners have been listening to me for a long time. No,
but when my wife and I first bought our house,
this was nineteen ninety one. We were living in Oak Park, Illinois.
(05:53):
That's where we bought the house. Anyway, I had to
pay three points to buy down to an eight and
one eighth percent interest rate on a on a seven
to twenty three balloon. That's I mean, I'm, you know,
crime a river at six percent. I understand it's double
what it was a few years ago, but I mean
six percent still seems within the realm of reality. That's
(06:13):
the big thorn in a lot of people's side that
they got so used to these really low interest rates.
The economy was kind of booming, real estate market was booming.
Would you have raised the interest rates back then? Is
that a failure of the Fed? Back then.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Yes, the first thing I think they should have done
is made it clear that if the Biden administration went
ahead with its plans to spend trillions, that this would
be inflationary and that the FED would try to offset
this by raising rates. Look, the FED can't control, you know,
Joe Biden's spending programs, but they can do the opposite
(06:47):
what they did instead. What they did is they sent
the all clear message to Joe Biden to go ahead,
spend your trillions, and we will not interfere. We won't
raise rates, we will not make it so that we
will not try to offset this at all. And that's
what set off the wild inflation. I think if the
(07:07):
FED had been less complicit in the Biden administration's reckless spending,
if they had just even signaled that they were going
to offset it, it probably would have made Biden back
off a little bit, and then that we would have
had far less inflation. Instead, they worked hand in hand.
That was a disaster and we got this crazy inflation.
So they should have told Biden not to do it,
(07:29):
and if he went ahead and did it, then yes,
they should have raised rates much earlier, and they should
have never said that the inflation was transitory. That was
that in itself signaled to the market, to businesses, to
consumers that the Fed wasn't on top of things, that
they were going to let inflation get out of control,
and they did.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Well, this is you know, directly tied to the bond market.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Correct, that's absolutely right. Look, part of the thing is
that when the government is deficit spending like crazy and
the FED starts to raise interest rates, it actually then
makes the Feds the government's borrowing more expensive, right, and
they didn't want to do that. It raises the deficit
(08:12):
even more. And so they were trying to help Biden
by letting him do all this deficit spending while being
able to borrow cheap. That was a disaster. They should
not have been complicit with. They really needed to be.
You know, people talk about FED independence all the time.
The FED lost its independence during the early Biden administration.
(08:34):
They instead became an agent of the Biden administration. And
that was a that had disastrous results, which is exactly
what we would think would happen when they become the
agent of a you know, a pre spending political regime.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Well, in this this spending free for all and this
faux low interest rate was all supported by and covered
up and masked by the whole Oh my god, COVID nineteen,
We're all going to die, right.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
That's right. Look, they kept it it so it made
a lot of sense, especially early on in the pandemic
when they were ordering businesses to close and they basically
we're freezing the economy to say, okay, well we're going
to fight some of the downturn with very low interest rates.
(09:24):
But as soon as we started to reopen things, which
means just a few months into this thing, right, they
should have said, okay, we can back off of the
ultra low interest rates. We don't need to send out
more stimulus checks. People were flooding into restaurants in places
they could with the relief of thank god, I can
(09:44):
go out again. And yet we were still sending stimulus
checks to people and the Fed was still holding interest
rates at near zero. That was a bad.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Combination, bad combination, and like all government programs, ready fire
aim replete with fraud, waste, and abuse because no one
cared where the money was going, and it went out
to a bunch of nefarious actors. Sorry for interjecting that,
John Carney, but this kind of thing has been driving
me more crazy of late than I think it ever
has in my life, as all these programs are revealed
for the fraud riddled programs that they are now. Tonight's
(10:16):
conversation it's empower you America dot org. Empower You America
dot org gets log in only begins at seven pm.
Please register in advance for the seminar. And that's where
John Carney's going to be speaking about and maybe answering
the question will interest rates be coming down? Thinking of
those that have been priced out of the homeowner market,
I don't think the housing availability is ever going to increase,
(10:38):
at least not in the near term. John, So what
impact or what effect? First off, do you think the
rates will be coming down? What are the indicators that
would suggest the FED might lower them? Or might the
Fed just leave things status quo? Which is kind of
the position I think I'm leaning toward, at least if
I had to read tea leaves. But no financial expert
of my.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
So I think the FED very likely maybe cutting at
the meeting in December, but then they are not going
to cut for probably the rest of Powell's tenure as
FED chairman. That means he leaves in May, so we
may get one more cut. Then the Fed will sit
(11:18):
tight and see how that goes through the economy. I
don't think that will do very much for the interest
rates that matter. Remember, the Fed target's a very short
term interest rate. The rates that matter are built off
of that, but they're really built on what investors think
the path of interest rates will be. So if the
(11:40):
Fed signals it's going to sit tight for longer, that
will keep interest rates higher. I'm not sure, and I'll
talk about this more tonight, but I'm not sure actually
cutting interest rates will do as much as people hope
for home affordability. That is a very tricky thing because look,
when you cut interest traits, one of the things that
(12:01):
happens is because people can borrow cheaper, they're willing to
pay more for homes, and it tends to push up
home prices. Right, So it's not the panacea that people think.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Well, John, the only thing that's going to solve that
problem is more supply. I mean, we need more supplin
we need. It's more supply of what I would call
truly affordable housing. I'm not talking about something like government
subsidized but I'm talking about, you know, don't buy a
five thousand, eight thousand square foot mansion mcmanchain. Once you
buy something that's a little bit more reasonable, smaller in size,
easier to build, a more affordable, less to maintain, less
(12:33):
to furnish. I mean, across the board, Owning a smaller
home is far more financially prudent from my perspective.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Yes, and one of the things we need those that's
a longer term problem. In other words, it's not something
that a president can fix, you know, within a year. Right,
that's a longer term building problem. It is also, frankly,
a problem that cuts across political barriers, where you have
(13:04):
environmentalists who are really worried that you might have to
build some more roads if you're going to build houses
or more houses, because each of those houses is going
to have a family that's driving, so you need more
roads out there. They don't like that because they think
it'll cause climate change to accelerate. So there's a lot
(13:25):
of barriers to trying to get it done. We can,
I believe, and I think we will over time solve
this problem, but it's not something that's going to go
away quickly. Frankly, Also, Donald Trump's immigration policies are very
helpful in this regard. I know a lot of people
say the opposite. They say, oh no, a lot of
the illegal immigrants are engaged in building, but they have
(13:47):
to but before they can build one house, they have
to live in one. And they were frankly, when you
have twelve million people come in over just a few
short years, you are using up a lot of your
housing stock. Cutting down on that will actually provide some relief.
It creates supply for people who are legally here.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Right our financial editor John Karney talking about tonight seven
ARS seven pm Empower at You America Dot or one
more thing I have to ask you about John before
we part company this morning. In very enlightening conversation, It's
been the job market, the jobs that are out there
that are available, the level of employment. That all is
part of what the FED factors in a determining interest rates.
Do you see sort of a very quick upheaval in
(14:29):
the job market is brought about by artificial intelligence. I
mean more and more people are losing their jobs to AI.
A lot of people can be replaced now with artificial intelligence.
Is there going to be sort of a sudden mass firing,
you know, over a very much shorter period of time
than we typically see what the job market. Do you
foresee something like that happening and might that impact the
whole FED decision in the future.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
I don't think we're going to see a sudden shift.
One problem with trying to read the labor market right now.
This normally would be a jobs week where we would
have a job for on jobs Friday, first Friday of
every month. We're not going to have that this week.
We're actually, and we've been we're missing jobs reports because
of the government shutdown at the Democrats cause because they
(15:12):
wouldn't vote for appropriations. I think so it's a little
hard to tell what's going on right now, and I
don't think we're going to get a sudden AI jump.
I think the AIS immediate factor will be something on
the realm of around displacing five percent of jobs. Over
the longer term, we may get more, but that means
(15:33):
a meeting that would have twenty people will have nineteen instead,
and the economy will be able to adapt to that
relatively quickly. Over the long term, there may be a
big shift in the kind of jobs people do. But
I don't think we're going to see like half the
jobs go away sometime next year.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
It's a plus, John Carney, Tonight seven pm. Log in
and Poweroamerica dot org. Hell, log in right now so
you register. Starts at seven pm. It's going to be fascinating.
Tell your friends about it. And again, you don't have
to drive out on the roads to see this one.
It's virtual only. John, Thanks for your time today. I
appreciate you doing the empower you seminar, and appreciate everything
you're doing in Breitbart. It's just a great website and
I encourage my listeners to check it out regularly. John.
(16:16):
Until we talk again, Man, have a great day.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
This has been great, My pleasure.
Fifty five krc D talkstation, o F the Thiky five
kr CV talk station. Brian Thomas always looking forward to
this time of the week and this moment in time
on the morning show because it's time for the inside
scoop with Bright Barton News. And as I always start
the segment with do Yourself a Favor Bookmarket B R
(00:21):
E I T B A R T dot com, you'd
be glad you get did beautiful reporting, wonderful reporting, a
lot of stuff you're not going to read elsewhere until
like a year later when the stuff they report on
bright Bird turns out to be absolutely true and where
you can read the work of John Carney, the finance
and economics editor at Bright Barton News. He has been
around the finance business for like ever his old career.
(00:41):
He started out of a blog for About Wall Street,
heading up the deal Breaker blog back in the mid
two thousands, went over the Business Insider CNBC Wall Street Journal,
where he was he was responsible for the Herd on
the Street column. His works appeared to New York Times,
New York Magazine, Fortune, New York Post, New York Sun.
I could go on, but we wouldn't be able to
(01:01):
talk about the Empower Youth Seminar that John Carney is
doing tonight on question Mark. Will interest Rates be coming down?
Welcome back, John Carney. It's a pleasure having you on
the program Sir.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Thanks for having me. You just sent me on a
nostalgia trip all the stuff I've done over the years.
That was great.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Hard to believe how time has flown, isn't it? John?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
It really is incredible. You know, when I started this,
we were just going into the two thousand and eighth
financial crisis, and you know, here we are just and
it seems like we never run out of crises. We
kept in business.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Well we're on that note, John Kearney. Isn't that sort
of kind of intentional? I mean, I've been doing radio.
Next year is my twentieth year on radio. But I've
been following politics since I was like sixteen years old.
Reagan's second election was when I really got engaged in politics,
and I've never turned back. It was a topic of
conversation and at the dinner table. I've really been engaged
(01:58):
for my entire life. So it's always in crisis. I mean,
part of I think part of the reality, well, this
is the idea, is we always kept in a mentality
of crisis mode. You know, the world's going to end,
We're all going to die, the market's going to crash,
the market's going to go up, and you know, we
don't follow up to find out, well, was that prediction true?
From last year? Is just once they announced these terrible
(02:18):
headlines that we move on and go about with our lives.
Should we ever feel like we're in crisis?
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah, no, that's a great point. Look, one of the
things that's definitely true is that the media has predicted
just about eight out of the last two crisises, meaning
there is constantly a crisis, you know, on the horizon
or actually happening. I remember the first Trump administration. We
(02:45):
were told constantly that we were going to have inflation
because of the terifts he put on China, and I
covered that every month in and out all three of
the major inflation reports that the government produces, and there
was no inflation. And it really wasn't until the pandemic
struck that finally started, when people were distracted by a
(03:07):
real crisis, that the media started to admit, oh, okay,
you know, we were wrong. There was no inflation because
of the tariffs.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
But there was inflation because of the Inflation Reduction Act
and the COVID nineteen response money and the trillions of
dollars that were thrown into the economy from printed dollars
that watered down the value of our currency.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
That's right. And they said that inflation wouldn't happen, So
they predicted the inflation that didn't happen would happen, and
the prediction, and they predicted that the inflation that actually
did happen was the worst in forty years. You know,
wasn't really happening. And by the way, we'd go away
almost immediately. Here we are five years later and we're
(03:47):
still dealing with it.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Well, the pesky reality of inflation is while the inflation
rate can go up or down, as the case may be,
I mean, I'm old enough to remember the seventies when
we had stagflation, but the prices never really go down.
I mean, you see a two percent increase in inflation,
and you've been struggling with seven or eight percent inflation.
(04:08):
It's like, I'm never going to see say, two dollars
ninety nine cent per pound beef again. I'm never going
to see a bag of chips that actually has sixteen
ounces in it for three ninety nine as opposed to
the twelve ounces you get for three ninety nine. It
just doesn't come down, that's.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Right, The prices don't come down. The most you can
hope for is that you have low inflation for a
few years, which may sort of bring you back on track.
But the truth is that once you have a period
of high inflation, as you said, you jump up nine percent,
then even if you get normal levels of inflation around
(04:43):
two percent after that, you're permanently at a higher price
level than you should be. You can hope that you
can grow the economy in a way that lets wages
catch up with that, but that takes a very long time. Basically,
and this is a I hate to have to deliver
this bad news to people, but we are permanently, because
(05:03):
of the irresponsibility of the Biden administration and Howells fed
during those years, we are permanently stuck at a high
price level that is not going to feel right at
least for another ten years. You're going to feel You're
still going to feel sticker shocked when you walk into
a store, or order a meal at a restaurant, or
(05:25):
try to buy tickets to something. Prices are going to
feel too high for quite a while.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
All right, Now, if John Carney was chairman of the FED,
and you could turn back the tables of time to say,
right when Biden got elected, I mean we had three
percent mortgage rates at the time, roughly right, I mean
that was extraordinarily low. And I have to say out loud,
my listeners have been listening to me for a long time. No,
but when my wife and I first bought our house,
this was nineteen ninety one. We were living in Oak Park, Illinois.
(05:53):
That's where we bought the house. Anyway, I had to
pay three points to buy down to an eight and
one eighth percent interest rate on a on a seven
to twenty three balloon. That's I mean, I'm, you know,
crime a river at six percent. I understand it's double
what it was a few years ago, but I mean
six percent still seems within the realm of reality. That's
(06:13):
the big thorn in a lot of people's side that
they got so used to these really low interest rates.
The economy was kind of booming, real estate market was booming.
Would you have raised the interest rates back then? Is
that a failure of the Fed? Back then.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Yes, the first thing I think they should have done
is made it clear that if the Biden administration went
ahead with its plans to spend trillions, that this would
be inflationary and that the FED would try to offset
this by raising rates. Look, the FED can't control, you know,
Joe Biden's spending programs, but they can do the opposite
(06:47):
what they did instead. What they did is they sent
the all clear message to Joe Biden to go ahead,
spend your trillions, and we will not interfere. We won't
raise rates, we will not make it so that we
will not try to offset this at all. And that's
what set off the wild inflation. I think if the
(07:07):
FED had been less complicit in the Biden administration's reckless spending,
if they had just even signaled that they were going
to offset it, it probably would have made Biden back
off a little bit, and then that we would have
had far less inflation. Instead, they worked hand in hand.
That was a disaster and we got this crazy inflation.
So they should have told Biden not to do it,
(07:29):
and if he went ahead and did it, then yes,
they should have raised rates much earlier, and they should
have never said that the inflation was transitory. That was
that in itself signaled to the market, to businesses, to
consumers that the Fed wasn't on top of things, that
they were going to let inflation get out of control,
and they did.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Well, this is you know, directly tied to the bond market.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Correct, that's absolutely right. Look, part of the thing is
that when the government is deficit spending like crazy and
the FED starts to raise interest rates, it actually then
makes the Feds the government's borrowing more expensive, right, and
they didn't want to do that. It raises the deficit
(08:12):
even more. And so they were trying to help Biden
by letting him do all this deficit spending while being
able to borrow cheap. That was a disaster. They should
not have been complicit with. They really needed to be.
You know, people talk about FED independence all the time.
The FED lost its independence during the early Biden administration.
(08:34):
They instead became an agent of the Biden administration. And
that was a that had disastrous results, which is exactly
what we would think would happen when they become the
agent of a you know, a pre spending political regime.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Well, in this this spending free for all and this
faux low interest rate was all supported by and covered
up and masked by the whole Oh my god, COVID nineteen,
We're all going to die, right.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
That's right. Look, they kept it it so it made
a lot of sense, especially early on in the pandemic
when they were ordering businesses to close and they basically
we're freezing the economy to say, okay, well we're going
to fight some of the downturn with very low interest rates.
(09:24):
But as soon as we started to reopen things, which
means just a few months into this thing, right, they
should have said, okay, we can back off of the
ultra low interest rates. We don't need to send out
more stimulus checks. People were flooding into restaurants in places
they could with the relief of thank god, I can
(09:44):
go out again. And yet we were still sending stimulus
checks to people and the Fed was still holding interest
rates at near zero. That was a bad.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Combination, bad combination, and like all government programs, ready fire
aim replete with fraud, waste, and abuse because no one
cared where the money was going, and it went out
to a bunch of nefarious actors. Sorry for interjecting that,
John Carney, but this kind of thing has been driving
me more crazy of late than I think it ever
has in my life, as all these programs are revealed
for the fraud riddled programs that they are now. Tonight's
(10:16):
conversation it's empower you America dot org. Empower You America
dot org gets log in only begins at seven pm.
Please register in advance for the seminar. And that's where
John Carney's going to be speaking about and maybe answering
the question will interest rates be coming down? Thinking of
those that have been priced out of the homeowner market,
I don't think the housing availability is ever going to increase,
(10:38):
at least not in the near term. John, So what
impact or what effect? First off, do you think the
rates will be coming down? What are the indicators that
would suggest the FED might lower them? Or might the
Fed just leave things status quo? Which is kind of
the position I think I'm leaning toward, at least if
I had to read tea leaves. But no financial expert
of my.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
So I think the FED very likely maybe cutting at
the meeting in December, but then they are not going
to cut for probably the rest of Powell's tenure as
FED chairman. That means he leaves in May, so we
may get one more cut. Then the Fed will sit
(11:18):
tight and see how that goes through the economy. I
don't think that will do very much for the interest
rates that matter. Remember, the Fed target's a very short
term interest rate. The rates that matter are built off
of that, but they're really built on what investors think
the path of interest rates will be. So if the
(11:40):
Fed signals it's going to sit tight for longer, that
will keep interest rates higher. I'm not sure, and I'll
talk about this more tonight, but I'm not sure actually
cutting interest rates will do as much as people hope
for home affordability. That is a very tricky thing because look,
when you cut interest traits, one of the things that
(12:01):
happens is because people can borrow cheaper, they're willing to
pay more for homes, and it tends to push up
home prices. Right, So it's not the panacea that people think.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Well, John, the only thing that's going to solve that
problem is more supply. I mean, we need more supplin
we need. It's more supply of what I would call
truly affordable housing. I'm not talking about something like government
subsidized but I'm talking about, you know, don't buy a
five thousand, eight thousand square foot mansion mcmanchain. Once you
buy something that's a little bit more reasonable, smaller in size,
easier to build, a more affordable, less to maintain, less
(12:33):
to furnish. I mean, across the board, Owning a smaller
home is far more financially prudent from my perspective.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Yes, and one of the things we need those that's
a longer term problem. In other words, it's not something
that a president can fix, you know, within a year. Right,
that's a longer term building problem. It is also, frankly,
a problem that cuts across political barriers, where you have
(13:04):
environmentalists who are really worried that you might have to
build some more roads if you're going to build houses
or more houses, because each of those houses is going
to have a family that's driving, so you need more
roads out there. They don't like that because they think
it'll cause climate change to accelerate. So there's a lot
(13:25):
of barriers to trying to get it done. We can,
I believe, and I think we will over time solve
this problem, but it's not something that's going to go
away quickly. Frankly, Also, Donald Trump's immigration policies are very
helpful in this regard. I know a lot of people
say the opposite. They say, oh no, a lot of
the illegal immigrants are engaged in building, but they have
(13:47):
to but before they can build one house, they have
to live in one. And they were frankly, when you
have twelve million people come in over just a few
short years, you are using up a lot of your
housing stock. Cutting down on that will actually provide some relief.
It creates supply for people who are legally here.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Right our financial editor John Karney talking about tonight seven
ARS seven pm Empower at You America Dot or one
more thing I have to ask you about John before
we part company this morning. In very enlightening conversation, It's
been the job market, the jobs that are out there
that are available, the level of employment. That all is
part of what the FED factors in a determining interest rates.
Do you see sort of a very quick upheaval in
(14:29):
the job market is brought about by artificial intelligence. I
mean more and more people are losing their jobs to AI.
A lot of people can be replaced now with artificial intelligence.
Is there going to be sort of a sudden mass firing,
you know, over a very much shorter period of time
than we typically see what the job market. Do you
foresee something like that happening and might that impact the
whole FED decision in the future.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
I don't think we're going to see a sudden shift.
One problem with trying to read the labor market right now.
This normally would be a jobs week where we would
have a job for on jobs Friday, first Friday of
every month. We're not going to have that this week.
We're actually, and we've been we're missing jobs reports because
of the government shutdown at the Democrats cause because they
(15:12):
wouldn't vote for appropriations. I think so it's a little
hard to tell what's going on right now, and I
don't think we're going to get a sudden AI jump.
I think the AIS immediate factor will be something on
the realm of around displacing five percent of jobs. Over
the longer term, we may get more, but that means
(15:33):
a meeting that would have twenty people will have nineteen instead,
and the economy will be able to adapt to that
relatively quickly. Over the long term, there may be a
big shift in the kind of jobs people do. But
I don't think we're going to see like half the
jobs go away sometime next year.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
It's a plus, John Carney, Tonight seven pm. Log in
and Poweroamerica dot org. Hell, log in right now so
you register. Starts at seven pm. It's going to be fascinating.
Tell your friends about it. And again, you don't have
to drive out on the roads to see this one.
It's virtual only. John, Thanks for your time today. I
appreciate you doing the empower you seminar, and appreciate everything
you're doing in Breitbart. It's just a great website and
I encourage my listeners to check it out regularly. John.
(16:16):
Until we talk again, Man, have a great day.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
This has been great, My pleasure.
Brian Thomas News
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.