Money Monday with Brian James

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
And socialist New York City longest shutdown.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Challenging Trump's terariff check in Please latest fifty five krs
the talk station.

Speaker 1 (00:11):
Eight oh five.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Here a fifty five KRSD talk station. Happy Monday, Monday, Monday,
every Monday at eight oh five talk with Brian James
Malworth Financial who loans him out for a few segments
for a listening audience. Enjoyment and edification. Welcome back, Brian James,
Hope you had a nice weekend.

Speaker 1 (00:27):
I am here again to provide enjoyment and edification. I'm
gonna tell my wife that.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
There you go as I do right day, and we
don't have to lament another Bengals loss since it didn't
play yesterday.

Speaker 1 (00:40):
So I wasn't gonna ruin things by bringing that up.
But there you become tradition. Brian. It's it's Monday. It's
time to gripe, all.

Speaker 2 (00:47):
Right, your reaction to the apparent shutdown being over. I
guess I saw what the Democrats got by way of
quote unquote concessions, not a tremendous amount. Notably the return
of the federal eployees had been laid off. They never
would have been laid off had the government not shut
not gotten shut down in the first place, so I
don't view that as much of a concession by the Republicans.
But kicking the vote on the extension of the supplements
and promising a vote in December does not mean those

(01:10):
extensions are going to get increased or extended. I firmly
doubt that they will. So what does this mean. I
think it means more that they get to go home
for vacation. They're hoping there's enough time between now and holidays,
notably Thanksgiving, to get the air traffic control situation worked out.
I'm sure they were hearing from the constituents about that,
given the thousands of flights that got canceled. They too

(01:31):
want to go home for vacation. But maybe it has
more to do with perhaps offering Obamacare subsidies directly to
individuals so they can select on the free market what
plan they want. Given the massive number of opportunities in
the private insurance market to get policies for less money
and a policy that's tailored to your specific needs. I
think that's frightened them because that means to me, the

(01:52):
end of Obamacare.

Speaker 1 (01:53):
Well, that could be and that would be a major
push for Republicans that's gone on. Yes, we're sneaking up
twenty year now on Obamacare. Maybe not quite that many,
but still that was that's how far back you have
to go to when the administration occurred. So the headline
is that yesterday the Senate voted sixty forty to advance
a funding measure known as a procedural vote. We've done

(02:14):
this before. This is how we get away with just
extending it out. We're going to kick the can just
a little bit longer. That's going to allow some debate
and move the bill forward. This is a stop gap
funding resolution that's basically going to temporarily fund the government
through January thirties. This is what when we see these
procedural votes, this is what it is. It's about kicking
the can. Let's address the immediate issue without solving the

(02:36):
primary issue. So involved in this is reversing the firings
and layoffs of federal workers done during the shutdown and
guaranteeing their back pay. That's part of the compromise. And
then a commitment, this is really the big thing, a
commitment to hold a future vote on extending the health
insurance premium tax credits. That are available under the Affordable
Care Actor Obamacare. But that's no guarantee that those ACA

(02:57):
subsidies are going to be extended in this bill. It's
got to get through the Senate completely, and then it'll
go to the House like allways, and then finally to
be signed by President Trump and that will officially end
the funding gap. So, you know, I think you're right,
that's probably what they're shooting for, But I don't know.
I'm looking at these at the the recent results of
the midterms here, and I wonder if they're going to

(03:17):
have the support that they'll need to push it through.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
Well, whether they know they have the support or not.
We were talking earlier about you know, you kind of
have to be a real weed dweller to understand the
connection between all these ins and outs and different legislation.
We I think collectively can agree most people probably do
not have all that information. For example, they wouldn't even
understand right now because most people don't that there is
a private medical insurance market out there that's thriving, something

(03:43):
that offers an alternative to Obamacare. I talk about this
with John Rohlman all the time. I speak for him.
I do a Weekend show on the whole idea, it's
there's a lot of better options out there. Even insurance
agents aren't aware of this reality. But if you give
people the money themselves, much in the same way, I'm
an advocate for letting the money follow this student as
opposed to go directly to the to the school. You
have a great argument. You're not giving money to the

(04:06):
evil insurance companies, and Democrats hate these big insurance companies.
They celebrate when the United Way CEO got his head
blown off. I mean, you know they're going to have
a tough ord of home marketing. The whole idea of
not going down this road, even though it would it
would be the demise of Obamacare from my perspective, Well.

Speaker 1 (04:21):
Let me ask you this because maybe you know more
than I do about this. Matter of fact, I'll go
ahead and say you do. Because you've shared some details,
you're kind of educate me a little bit. So my
question to you, Brian Thomas is the insurance companies are
still all behind this. So if their motivations are you know,
profit and all these other things that I that both
sides are speaking that they hate, then how does it
change when the funding mechanism changes. Aren't we still going

(04:43):
to be slaves to companies that are still basically focused
primarily on profit margin and not the end results competition.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Obamacare is supported. It's the only insurance option out there,
government controlled, it may be that is eligible for these subsidies.
That way, if you give money to people directly, every
insurance company is eligible for subsidies. And there are some
far better policies out there, far more competitive, far less
out of pocket liability and responsibility. Monthly premiums can be

(05:13):
more affordable. It's just knowing how to stack your insurance policies,
which there are people well, again like my friend John Roman,
who I do advertise for, that do this all the time.
Just allowing that subsitty to go really anywhere, like allowing
the school funding not just to go to public schools,
but to go to any school of the parent's choice.
Competition gets built and created. It forces people to run

(05:34):
a better well oil machine. It forces policy prices to
come down because they're in market competition with everybody else
for a change.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
Is it flexible enough? I mean, I'm sure we don't
know these things yet, but I'm just wondering if it's
flexible enough to cover and are people in a position
yet where they know what they need and how to
navigate through it.

Speaker 2 (05:53):
That's why you have an expert like you in financial
planning to answer the questions on behalf of the clients
that you represent, Like for example, you are sitting in
a fiduciary capacity. For those who are relying on your
services to invest their retirement funds. You owe them an
obligation to explain all this now if you don't understand it.
John Ruhlman is working for you, for example, he has

(06:16):
to explain it all and tell you exactly why what
happens under this option, what it's ultimately going to cost
you factoring in monthly premiums out of pockets. Here, if
we look at this option over here in the private sector,
we can put it together this way, and here's the
real cost benefit or the real cost to you. Here's
what you're going to be paying out of pocket. Here's
what your exposure is from a liability perspective in your

(06:36):
monthly premiums. So it's all spelled out on paper.

Speaker 1 (06:39):
Yes, I agree. Now here's a weakness in what you
just described though, that is not the term fiduciary doesn't
exist in health insurance industry. This isn't you know, to
bash anyone industry, but it's not a little different.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
That is correct operates that way. He operates that way.

Speaker 1 (06:53):
He may choose to. That's one guy, And this is
a frustration I've had with the insurance industry for a
very very very long time because they're isn't a massive
amount of money can you can make by placing a policy?
But you don't have to sign up to say I'm
doing this for you.

Speaker 2 (07:06):
Not because if you work for United Healthcare and are
selling United health Care policies, the only policy you're going
to sell is United Healthcare because you're not going to
make any money selling any other premium or another policy.
John Roman doesn't work that way. His profit is made
working by selling any insurance policy to any individual. The
advantage he has is because he's giving you sound advice

(07:27):
on the difference between them.

Speaker 1 (07:29):
I get that it's still a commission based business, and
I'm not bashing John at all. It's just the way
that that industry has always market sign It.

Speaker 2 (07:36):
Creates market incentive for others to operate the same way.
You're never going to get that with an insurance agent
who works exclusively for one company.

Speaker 1 (07:43):
Yeah, yeah, you're talking about captive versus independent. I totally
understand that. I'm talking about the compensation methodology. How do
I know for a thousand percent sure that somebody is
not picking one insurance company because it's paying the more
than another one that could be appropriate for me. That's
the risk in any fiduciary versus non fiduciary discussion.

Speaker 2 (07:59):
Well, knowing John and the team there and what they've
done for all my listeners so far, that is a
risk we're worthy of taking because that's exactly what he does.

Speaker 1 (08:08):
I get it. And again I'm not bashing John at all.
I'm just saying that's that's a weakness of that industry,
and that's what I used to sell life insurance when
I was younger and didn't understand this stuff quite as clearly.
And that was a huge conflict I saw with the
banks that I worked for.

Speaker 2 (08:21):
Yeah, you were, who are you working for?

Speaker 1 (08:23):
I am a bank. See it was National City up
and Dayton and National City became p and C. And
for those who don't know, p and C stands for
previously National City. Under Stallo's humor from the day that
that was announced.

Speaker 2 (08:35):
To understand, and I don't mean to turn this into
be commercial for him, but he's not the only one
of the world that does this. So once we're and
you can tell by the comments from our elected official
senators on both sides of the ledger, they're really not
familiar with this concept at all. They've come brainwashed into
the idea that Obamacare can't be replaced and there's no
other option out there.

Speaker 1 (08:53):
Huh huh. Wrong. There is.

Speaker 2 (08:55):
There are a multitude of them, and quite often it's
better to go down that road and check into it,
at least look out for your own best interests, because
the fool is the one who's.

Speaker 1 (09:03):
Not all right.

Speaker 2 (09:04):
We'll get back to your list of topics. Bring Oh
wait real quick, I wanted to ask you how this
apparent end of the shutdown, not that we're there yet,
how's it impacting the market? I'm looking at futures. They
haven't really been impacted by this. Was this already baked
into the cake?

Speaker 1 (09:17):
Yeah? I mean, I think with shutdowns, with them, the
market kind of always knows that it's never gonna last
forever because nobody, no politician is going to benefit and
make their constituents happy by completely shutting down permanently and
totally walking away. So the market hasn't done a whole
lot of anything. Dared. We've seen this before too, you know.
And the thing I think that is become the you know,

(09:39):
with the new political third rails is the publicly traded markets.
We're simply not going to permanently anger the leaders of
our largest publicly traded companies because there's literally nothing stopping them,
Brian Thomas from picking up and moving to another country
that is more favorable to business. That's an extreme outcome,
but I think that's always kind of in the background
of yeah, we just can't take, you know, take the

(09:59):
ball and go home and expect good outcomes. Therefore the
market kind of goes, yeah, whatever, we're going to get
through this and we can still make a profit during
this time.

Speaker 2 (10:06):
Always the case, Brian James will continue to find out
what in the hell is a low cost EFT and
how does it relate to four to one ks plus,
what's going to happen if we all get two thousand
dollars from tariffs and how might that work? And apparently
not everybody's taking all of their vacation days. Those topics
coming up with Brian James from Allworth Financial. Hope you
can stick around and also take care of yourself. It's
cold out there. Eight nineteen.

Speaker 1 (10:27):
If you have care cit talk station.

Speaker 2 (10:29):
It's Monday. We're doing that money Monday thing with Brian
James from Allworth Financial. All right, do you have to
break this down for me?

Speaker 1 (10:35):
Ignorant?

Speaker 2 (10:35):
I am on a lot of topics. Is having to
be one of them, Brian James, that's who bring you
on the show. Low cost ETFs in four to one
K retirement plan. What's this all about, Brian James?

Speaker 1 (10:45):
So, yeah, Exchange traded funds are the cool kid on
the block now. They kind of have been for about
almost thirty years, I think, so they're not brand new,
but these are vehicles that are. They're very much like
mutual funds in the traditional sense. These are investments that
you can own that well, that you buy one thing
and it owns a bunch of under things underneath it,
and that's not all that crazy to talk about that.

(11:06):
The headline today though, is that State Street, which is
one of the big providers. They have about one point
seven trillion dollars in ETFs and if you ever if
you've heard of spiders. That's the S and P five
hundred ETF that is a State Street product. But what
they're pushing for is to get more ETF like structures
into four to one case. There's been a shift for

(11:26):
a long time in traditional mutual fund offerings, you know,
think Vanguard to change their to offer in an ETF
chassis something that their mutual funds already do well. This
one's kind of going in the other direction because State
Street kind of started with ETFs, so they're pushing their
ETF structures into mutual funds. This is really about cost,
and I can't I'm kind of scratching my head a

(11:47):
little bit to look for other benefits here. The benefits
to an ETF over to mutual fund is they tend
to be dirt cheap, right in terms of something called
an expense ratio. For those who don't know, you're paying
for your mutual funds every single day via a little
payment that comes out of share price. You'll never see it,
but rest assured it's there. It's called an expense ratio,
and you want that percentage to be as low as possible.
So that's one of the big reasons ETFs are simply

(12:09):
technologically more efficient. Therefore they can be cheaper to run.
That has triggered this race to the bottom in terms
of low expense ratios. But beyond that, the rest of
it is tax efficiency. They are much more tax efficient
than a traditional mutual fund. However, that does not matter
in a four oh one K or an IRA because
those are tax sheltered. Anyway, I am not super excited

(12:29):
about this headline, so I hope nobody out there is
really really hoping their company offers this and is banking
their future on it. Is not going to be that impactful.
It's simply a big financial institution looking to get a
hold of the twelve trillion dollars. Because remember State Street
does ets primarily. That means they're not really in a
four to oh one k market.

Speaker 2 (12:47):
They're the ones. They're doing this for their own benefit,
is what you're really trying to say.

Speaker 1 (12:51):
I've been digging this morning trying to figure out why
is this a headline? So what a company wants into
a market?

Speaker 2 (12:56):
I get it, But why would they not be a
part of the mutual fund options already, because.

Speaker 1 (13:03):
Well, they don't run mutual funds. They primarily run exchange
traded funds. So what they're doing is they're taking their
popular exchange traded funds. And they are good ones. I'm
not bashing them at all, but they're just not built
to be inside a four oh one K. You want
to be in a four oh one K, you have
to be very flexible, flexible with fractional shares. So because
somebody might be putting fifty bucks every paycheck into their

(13:23):
four oh one K and then that's got to get
split seventeen ways. ETFs are not efficient to be broken
down into fractional shares. Mutual funds are built for it.
I see, Okay, I'm not excited about this one.

Speaker 2 (13:34):
Well, then sounds like it.

Speaker 1 (13:35):
I think you made that point really clear.

Speaker 2 (13:37):
All right, Well, let's talk real quick here, because there
are a couple of talks talk about like not taking vacations
and also the two thousand dollars from tariffs. Will do
that in the next segment. Real quick here. Why I
saw the statistic and while I may not use all
of my vacation days, the weird statistic in the article
that you have from CNBC. Though the majority have access

(13:57):
to paid time off, the report found that twenty three
percent of employees didn't even take a single day of
vacation even though they had it.

Speaker 1 (14:06):
Yeah, you know, and I think that's a cultural thing, Brian.
I mean there's a lot of people around who still
kind of wave that flag. If I'm a hard worker
and that's what I'm known to be, what I will
speak to is what I see on the other side
of that, because I see a lot of people who
that was their lifestyle. It's just what they do, knows
to the grindstone take Oh sure, wear it like a
badge of pride. Those people are not happy during retirement
pride they don't know what to do with themselves. Oh,

(14:28):
it's very scary. It's scary enough to see somebody who
can't afford retirement. It's almost scarier to see the mental
impact on somebody who never thought about what that was
going to feel like, to have that huge expanse of
time to fill.

Speaker 2 (14:40):
Yeah, you know what, that makes sense. I do know
a guy who never missed not only did he never
miss a single day of K through twelve education or
college education, he never missed a single day of work,
and he built up a massive, massive retirement savings just
because he never took any time off, he didn't have
anything do after work. It's the kind of person you're

(15:01):
talking about right now. Work is their life. And from
all accounts, I think he's done pretty well in retirement.
I guess he found something to do. But yeah, I
know people like that.

Speaker 1 (15:10):
And I hope he did. But I'm sure he had
a lot of soul searching moments for that. What is
that going to feel like? That first day that the
alarm doesn't go off and I don't have to go anywhere.
That's great for twenty four hours, but then that next week,
especially in February, when it's cold and terrible outside, What
am I gonna do today? I terrifying me.

Speaker 2 (15:26):
Well, and after we're talking with you guys for long
enough to realize that I'm at least in a position
where I can retire, the whole idea of retirements scares
the hell out of me because I don't know what
I'm going to be doing.

Speaker 1 (15:35):
There, you go, that is the big mountain behind the
little mountain. The little mountain to climb is the financial part.
We all hide behind that and go, I don't have enough.
I don't have enough. I guess I'll just keep working.
But then one day and it sounds like this happened
to you. One day we realize that, Oh my gosh,
I do have enough. I can do whatever I want.
Oh my god, what do I want to do? I've
never thought about that?

Speaker 2 (15:53):
Yeah, Scarier, it's a scary future for me. I do
see sloth and lethargy playing a huge part of that,
and that is not good for my health or the relationship.

Speaker 1 (16:01):
To have goals, at least you defined your goal.

Speaker 2 (16:03):
I well, that's it. I know what the goals are
right now, but these shouldn't be those goals. Find something
to do, and why you're at it. Use up your
retirement or your vacation days. Might find some good in that,
just to exhale for a couple of minutes and take
some relaxing time. Brian James will talk about the two
thousand dollars maybe coming our way. How's that going to work?
And I want a word or two on what you
and I might expect by way of investment return over

(16:24):
the lifetime of our investment strategy, because I'm not sure
I ever expected, nor would I hope to expect, a
sixteen thousand percent return. Nancy Pelosi got that one more
with Brian James Money Monday coming.

Speaker 1 (16:36):
Up fifty five a twenty eighty nine.

Speaker 2 (16:38):
To fifty five K city talk station Brian Time with
Brian James from all Worth Financial talking Money Monday and
what's the story in this two thousand dollars tariff check.
I know that Supreme Court and hearing oral arguments about
the legality and authority of Donald Trump to levy taxes
or tariff's rather individually, is not looking good for the
Trump administration basedup on the comments and questioning of the justices,

(16:59):
but that decision hasn't come down yet. In the meantime,
tariffs are still out there. Of course, we've entered into
some trade negotiations as a consequence of him unilaterally doing
the tariffs but putting aside his authority to do it.
It has worked, so unringing the bell, if they indeed
have to, is going to be extremely complicated matter. But
it seems like Trump's trying to pivot, telling the American
people that know, you're going to benefit from this, and

(17:21):
we're going to give you two thousand dollars more, maybe
less directly as a consequence of the billions and billions
of dollars we're bringing in in tariffs. Do you see
this is actually happening. If the Supreme Court says it's
okay for him to do this, I suppose really is
a critical element to know whether this is going to
go forward.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
Brian, Well, he's tying it too, as we were talking
about earlier. He's tying it a little bit to the
health insurance discussion over a dismantling Obamacare. And then you know,
why not just give people money and let them choose
their own or do or buy an HDTV or whatever
they're going to do with their couple thousand dollars, you know,
freedom to spend whatever you want. Yeah, And I think
he's really just kind of laying the groundwork to make

(17:58):
people aware that if you report this, there could be
money showing up in your mailbox. I mean, what better
way can a politician ever get gain favor for anything?
Does this buying votes? Brian James, are you kidding me? Quite? Literally?
Money in your mailbox? Right, we can do. Then there's
a little bit of history for this. It would effectively
work like a stimulus payment, which we've seen before. March

(18:19):
of twenty twenty, we had the Cares Act and that
was twelve hundred dollars per adult five hundred bucks per
child that actually did happen. This was early in COVID,
so you know, there was such chaos and people don't
really remember it. Then later that year, December of twenty twenty,
there was another push for two thousand dollars checks that
kind of just came and went. And earlier this year,
remember we had the dozed dividend that we were supposed
to get that was going to be five thousand dollars

(18:40):
per household, except that just kind of went away. When
that whole dose thing didn't move the needle very much,
Elon Musk got bored with it. So we'll see what
comes of this, you know, But I really I feel
like it's just greasing this kid, so there will be
there will be less of a public hue and cry
over the things that he really wants to get done.
And because as we've seen very very recently with the
snap payments, it only takes one or two judges to

(19:01):
throw a monkey wrench in the works in both directions. Right, Yeah,
we had it overturned and then it was unoverturned and
I don't know where we are now.

Speaker 2 (19:08):
It's been They were ordered to pay one hundred percent
of the SNAP benefits beginning today unless the Supreme Court
pronounces otherwise. Now, they allowed Trump to move to keep
things in place with the freeze on Friday evening, but
that was a single judge saying we're going to leave
its status quo until this decision comes out. This decision
was what came out last night, and the Appellate Court

(19:29):
said you got to pay one hundred percent of the
SNAP benefits, which I think helped the Republicans in these
negotiations yesterday. Because you've taken assuming that court order stayed
in place, maybe the administration doesn't appeal it, then all
of the people who are going to get harmed because
of SNAP stopping no longer can complain. So there's a
giant chunk of people forty million or so who no
longer care about the shutdown as having impacted their bottom line.

(19:52):
So you've taken that out, leaving I guess those who
are traveling on airplanes and looking forward to holidays to
be screaming and yelling. And that includes a lot broad
a number of people who actually might influence elections, including
corporate business owners, individuals with enough money to go on
vacation and actually utilize air traffic. That's my theory on
that matter. No, I think I think you're probably right.

Speaker 1 (20:12):
What's the largest segment of the population that's going to
be the loudest, and it's the ones that are getting
directly hurt by Well you've just taken that away, and
a little sugar on top, here's a chance at a
two thousand dollars check. Now he has also indicated this
is this is going to exclude high income individuals. I'm
not sure exactly what high income means. Who knows this
is None of this isn't writing yet. So we'll see
what comes down the pipe. And we have talked about

(20:32):
this before again that that whole doze dividend. Here's the
thing that his government is doing that's going to result
in money in your pocket. While that didn't exactly happen.
So we're going to see, you know, here's the thing
the government's doing. We're bringing in tariffs and here's a
chunk of the action for taxpayers. Yeah, you know, does
allow through and see what happened? That was in the detail.

Speaker 2 (20:49):
Because I would think money flowing into government with through
tariffs or taxation or any other mechanism would be part
and parcel of the power of the perse And unless
Congress and acts legislation to allow the return one of
these tariffs to us in any way, shape or form,
that it's going to require congressional action and approval.

Speaker 1 (21:04):
You would think, you would think. And with all the
talk too, just over this administration, the prior administration, all
the bluster about the deficit, I would love to see
one ounce of these dollars go toward paying down the
debt we already have, yes, as opposed to encouraging us
to go make more of it.

Speaker 2 (21:21):
Thank you, Brian James. You and I in agreement completely
on that. That's a pesky challenge for generations to come
that death.

Speaker 1 (21:27):
We wish there were more of us in agreement. Really,
we'd rather have our checks in our mailbox. All right.

Speaker 2 (21:31):
Well, I'm an agreement on the idea of earning sixteen
thirty percent rate to return on my investments.

Speaker 1 (21:36):
Brian James.

Speaker 2 (21:36):
That's not a regular occurrence with all Worth Financial, is it?
Because that sounds extraordinary to me. I mean, I'm of
the mind that you know I should expect around eight percent,
hopefully more. But I Nancy Pelosi back in eighty seven,
which she took off as head roughly eight seven hundred
and eighty five thousand dollars total portfolio between her and
her husband. She announced the retirement and apparently she now

(21:58):
has one hundred and thirty million thirty three million she's
sitting on, which was calculated as a sixteen nine and
thirty percent raady to return the Dow Jones over the
same period of time two thousand, three hundred. Now, they
didn't put the SMP in there, but I can't imagine
the S and P being closer to sixteen thousand than
twenty three hundred.

Speaker 1 (22:16):
Well, yeah, story, let me put pen to paper. No,
the S and P five hundred is not close to
sixty percent. They'll carry the one and then this goes
over here and no, that's not a close number. Yeah.
And so it is a very very very lucrative gig
to be tied to the US Congress because you get
a whole boatload of insider information and there's just not

(22:36):
a lot of law. We just don't have the structure.
We've never had the political will to stop this from happening,
because of course, the ones who would decide to make
the laws are the ones who would who would be
hurt by them. So guess what's not gonna happen anytime?

Speaker 2 (22:48):
Fox watching the hen House there, Brian James, although you
and I are not allowed to inside trade. Yeah, well exactly,
we would get that thrown into jail if we insider trade, correct.

Speaker 1 (22:57):
I mean like when we we we managed portfolios. Here,
we move exchange ttraded funds around there. There's a no
fly list, but advisors are not allowed to touch this
ETF or at that ETF because we're about to move
money around at a portfolio level for our entire firm.
But that's not does not apply if you are in
a member of Congress. Now this does both. Pelosi's numbers
are ie popping, for sure, and she's always had her

(23:17):
hands in a whole lot of things. She's not the
only one. I got a list here all the different names,
and they're both flavors. It's on both sides of the aisles. Absolutely,
game works happens on both sides. It would be great
if we would put a law in place, and we did.
There's the Stock Act that came out in twenty twelve
that limits the some limit somewhat how much these people
can do, but the fine can be like two hundred bucks,

(23:38):
and nobody's ever been prosecuted under it. That's why you've
never heard of it.

Speaker 2 (23:42):
Let's see two hundred and fifty bucks or sixteen thousand
percent return. I'm gonna go with the ladder, knowing full
well that I can cover the nut on the any
any against net that out.

Speaker 1 (23:53):
If you net out the two fifty dollar fee, gonna
work in your favor.

Speaker 2 (23:57):
Brian James. Glad we got in with a little bit
of smile on her face and a couple of points
on agreement.

Speaker 1 (24:01):
Brian James.

Speaker 2 (24:02):
Look for to next Monday, another edition of Monday Monday.
I appreciate it all worth loaning you out for the segments.
I hope you have a great week. My friend.

Speaker 1 (24:07):
We're gonna have to talk about the Bengals next Monday.

Speaker 2 (24:09):
That we will, good or bad. It'll be a topic
right out of the gate.

Speaker 1 (24:13):
Definitely be acknowledged.

Speaker 2 (24:14):
Thanks for the football game, Yes there was. Thanks brother,
we'll talk say thirty six right now, fifty five? Care
to see the dox lation talkstation? Joe opened the phone line.
Somebody wants