Financial Issues - 07.28.2025

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Financial Issues, where we join the reality with truth,
helping you make the most of your money by honoring
God with your investments. Now listen in as we give
you the practical tools and advice you need to become
a biblically responsible investor.

Speaker 2 (00:24):
Welcome to Financial Issues. Thanks for tuning in today. We're
so glad that you're here. Financial Issues is a stewardship
ministry that equips, educates, and edifies the Body of Christ
in the ways of stewardship. So we want to share
biblical knowledge that we have gleaned from the scriptures because

(00:46):
one day we're all going to have to answer the
question about how we handled our time, talent, and treasure.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
And our desire is that.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
We and you will be called a good steward and
be told well done about how you handle the things
that you were trusted to manage, because they all belong
to God. On today's show, we're going to answer some
questions that you guys have been sending in. We've got
Jason McDowell that's coming on here shortly to discuss with us.

(01:14):
One of the components are one of the things that
were included in the Big Beautiful Bill specifically the children's accounts,
whatever they're going to be called. So we're going to
discuss that, and then we'll kind of springboard off the
stewardship verse of the Day that comes from Matthew seven
nine through eleven. It says, are which one of you,

(01:37):
if his son ask him for bread, will give him
a stone, or if he ask for a fish, will
give him a serpent. If you, then, who are evil,
know how to give good gifts to your children, how
much more will your father, who is in heaven give
good things to those who ask him. Well, whenever we
think about stewardship, we focus on how we manage what

(02:01):
we've been given or put in charge of. But before
we even get to that, we must recognize the heart
of the giver.

Speaker 3 (02:09):
So Jesus is reminding us here.

Speaker 2 (02:11):
God is not stingy, He's not reluctant to provide, He's
not withholding good things from his children. Nope, he is
a good father, better than any earthly dad. You know
Father's Day you see those cards best dad ever? Well,
that title is well locked up by our father in heaven.

(02:32):
And if we, in our sinfulness still try to provide
well for our children, and I would say that all
of us really have that desire? How much more can
we trust God to take care of us, knowing that
he can do it perfectly? So that truth should completely
change the way we steward what's in our hands because
we're not managing our resources from a place of scarcity.

(02:56):
Let me say that again. We are not managing resources
from a place of skins. Our father in Heaven owns
everything and he is very, very generous. We're not handling
resources out of fear or desperation either. We're managing from
a place of trust. When we can really get this
and get it right, we can trust God to meet

(03:17):
our needs. We can trust him to provide our daily bread,
whether that's food, income, direction and guidance, or just peace
of mind. And when we ask him, he delights in
giving us what is good for us. So what does
that mean for stewardship. It means that we can ask
for wisdom before making financial decisions. We can ask for

(03:38):
provision when the numbers don't quite add up, when there's
more month left at the end of the money. We
can ask for courage to give generously even when it's uncomfortable,
and we can be confident that our father hears us,
and that he responds, and that he will give us
exactly what we need. Ever a stone, never a serpent,

(04:01):
always something good. So today, as you steward your money,
your time, your family, your calling, ask, trust and obey
and rest in the goodness of your father, because he
gives good gifts to those who ask.

Speaker 3 (04:16):
What do you think that it's good?

Speaker 4 (04:17):
Shanna, love that you know, providing for children, that's one
of the chief commands for parents. We've got to do it.
The problem is we are evil, you know. Sadly we
are not the father that God is. As you mentioned, Shannah,
he holds the title for Father of the Year every year.

Speaker 5 (04:32):
But we do have an example.

Speaker 4 (04:33):
God gives us the example where we can provide well
for our little ones, and it comes from God himself.
He's the example of how to provide for his kids.
And we're the blessed recipients of this generosity. You know, Shanna,
I think you know. You and I are both parents,
but first and foremost we are children. Still, we're children
of God, and so we need to learn from our
heavenly Father how to provide for our children well. And

(04:54):
by God's grace, he shows us how to do it well.
Even though we'll never do it perfectly, we can truly
do it well.

Speaker 2 (04:58):
It's good news interesting here that Jason and I are
going to be talking about providing for kids and saving
and investing for kids. And you know, there's always that temptation,
I think, for us to rely on the government to
do those things for us. And I think that's one
of the things that we're going to explore here. But
it is our job as parents, it's not the government's job.

(05:21):
But sure, you have to wait, You'll have to wait
to get to the risk.

Speaker 5 (05:25):
I'm excited for that, Shanne.

Speaker 4 (05:26):
You know, it was interesting when I saw the news
about those accounts. You know, I was thinking, Okay, you know,
I've got a son who might fall in that age range.
I'm curious about it. But I'm excited to hear you
guys have to say. It'll be fun.

Speaker 3 (05:37):
Yeah, yeah, it's definitely all right. Answer some question.

Speaker 4 (05:41):
Yeah, let's do it, Channe. Let's start with Mary Lou
By the way, let me just say this. The next
two questions, both listeners they introduce it with the proper
Hawaiian greeting Aloha.

Speaker 6 (05:51):
So I appreciate that very much.

Speaker 4 (05:52):
Mary Lou was the first one to do that. She says,
Aloha Shanna. I'm self employed. I have two children, ages
eighteen and fifteen. My husband is retired, but he's still
working very minimally. I've just been listening to your show
on CSN radio when I can. I just decided this
year to become a partner. We don't have any retirement plan.
I have some money saved up and I want to
grow it. One of my children's going to start college

(06:12):
next year. Is it too late to start a college
fund now I'm fifty one years old.

Speaker 5 (06:16):
That's a good question, Shanna. What do you think?

Speaker 1 (06:18):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (06:18):
Great, all the way out there in Hawaii on CSN,
that's good.

Speaker 3 (06:22):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (06:23):
The CSN audience has certainly been a blessing to us,
and we hope that that continues to grow. But to
answer your question, Mary Lee, it's never too late to
do anything really. Now, what I would say, it's not
too late to start a college fund. And you know,
now's a great time if your kids are eighteen and fifteen,
you've got one right on the verge there is to

(06:45):
start exploring, you know, different ways that you know certainly
to see if you're talking get some kind of scholarship
or to see what's available. I wouldn't necessarily choose to
invest anything for either one of them, because your time
horizon is pretty short there. But I certainly they would
think it would be a good idea to open up

(07:05):
an account and just start saving money there if you
can find you a high yield savings account. There are
still some money market accounts or high yield savings account
where you can get between four and five maybe in
some cases maybe a little bit even more than five.
I don't I don't know if many of those still exist,
but you know, to start putting money back, I think

(07:26):
is a good thing, and to start now exploring the
different options that you have for where they might go,
what it's going to cost, and what kind of assistance
you can get, especially merit based assistant.

Speaker 3 (07:40):
And you know, just like we talked.

Speaker 2 (07:42):
About in the scripture to you know, God owns everything,
and he gives good gifts, and he owns the cattle
on a thousand hills and he's generous with it.

Speaker 3 (07:51):
So you've got all of that on your side.

Speaker 4 (07:56):
Yeah, you know, it's awesome, Shanna. Interestingly enough, John Paul,
who I think is all so from Hawaii. He's our
next question here, also says the Hawaiian greeting Aloha has
a similar question Shanna. So he's in ministry, in missions,
ministry development. He's looking for some help investing. He doesn't
want to spend too much time on it. He's not
a partner. Also, he says, for simplicity's sake, I'm wondering

(08:16):
if it's wise to park money in eebond's gold or
whatever will at least not lose.

Speaker 5 (08:20):
I appreciate whatever you can share.

Speaker 4 (08:22):
So I think kind of a similar sort of general
query that he's wondering here, What would you have for
John Paul Shanna?

Speaker 2 (08:28):
Yeah, So I first want to make the distinction between
saving and investing. So he mentions here that he wants
something that's not going to lose. So it makes me wonder,
is it because the money that he's talking about is
short term money? Is it money that he thinks that
he may need, you know, before the recommended eight to
ten year time horizon. So if that's the case, you know,

(08:54):
eyebonds are not so much in favor anymore. But I
would say, you know, a good high yield savings account
or a money market account for any money that is
short term. So once you have enough money saved up
short term your emergency fund we like to call it,
then you can start looking to investing. So then it
makes me also wonder is his reference to parking money

(09:17):
in something that will not lose just because he doesn't
understand how investments work, or maybe he has some fear,
maybe he's heard some things, maybe prior experience with different
types of investments that didn't turn out well. Of course,
I'm gonna suggest that he become a partner of the
ministry or at least keep listening, you know, and learn

(09:40):
things about how money can work for us. And so
if you're a partner, there's lots of videos on the
partner side that can help you understand how to invest.
When you become a partner too, you also get access
to our by list, and so there's different asset allocation
models on there. There's some great descriptions. You can decide

(10:01):
if you want to be conservative or aggressive, and you
know where you might fall in there. And then there's
some guidelines on how to construct a portfolio based on
where you determine that you. I hope that John Paul
will check that out and consider it.

Speaker 4 (10:16):
Yeah, that's awesome, and aloha to both of you as well.

Speaker 2 (10:20):
Yes, I made the mistake of taking my kids to
Hawaii for spring break one year, and I never hear
the end of it.

Speaker 5 (10:27):
That you want to go out, always want to go back.

Speaker 4 (10:29):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (10:31):
All Right, Well, folks, we got to take a break
right now, but we are going to come back on
the other side of the break. I've got Jason McDowell
with me and we're going to talk about We're going
to continue talking about kids and savings and different things
like that. So I don't think you're going to want
to miss it, So stay tuned. I'm your host, Shanna Bert.
Make sure you check out our ministry at Financial issues
dot org.

Speaker 7 (11:03):
Security is offered through ga Repel and Company, a registered
broker Dealer and Investment Advisor member FINRA and SIPC. Opinions
expressed by Shanna are hers alone and are for informational
purposes only and do not necessarily represent those of GA
Repel or the outlet on what you are listening. You
should consider how the information applies to your situation prior
to personally implementing it, and consult any financial professional you

(11:26):
work with to make sure it's applicable to your financial plan.

Speaker 3 (11:34):
Welcome back to you financial issues. Thanks for sticking with
us here. We're so glad that you're here.

Speaker 2 (11:38):
Well, before the Big Beautiful Bill passed, we talked about
just a few of the many components that were in it,
or we thought would be in it in some shape
or form, and we did talk about on one day,
we did talk about the new Trump accounts or what
they were going to call the MAGA accounts or whatever
they're going to call And we don't even really know

(11:59):
at this point. But now the Big Beautiful Bill has passed,
there's been a lot of things written about it, so
we want to I've got my friend and calling, Jason
McDowell back with us here today. So Jason, thanks for
being with us, and we're gonna kind of go through
this Trump or MAGA count or whatever they're gonna call it,
and uh kind of answer the question for us blessing

(12:23):
or blunder.

Speaker 3 (12:24):
So interesting when we get to the end of it
and you can see what we think.

Speaker 2 (12:29):
So, you know, the initial article that I read about
it that really piqued my attention, and I started jotting
down some notes and I shared it with Jason, and
you know, through uh, through a lot of research, we
found that there's a lot of different information out there
about it.

Speaker 3 (12:45):
So we've done our best.

Speaker 2 (12:46):
Jason's done a lot of research, and we've done our
best to kind of go through it and tell you
what we think we know at this point. So just
like any uh, any tax bill that comes out, UH things,
there's lots of questions with them and how you do
different things and how you navigate different things, and you know,
the IRS has to issue opinions and then sometimes it

(13:08):
has to be clarified by Congress. So we're going to
walk through what's out there right now. So Jason, let's
get started. Walk us through the nuts and bolts of
how this Trump account came out the other side of Congress.

Speaker 8 (13:21):
Yeah, you learn something new every day that you have
to unlearn some things that you thought was law, and
the government's going to tell you something else. So we'll
start with some good static information. Luckily, these type of
accounts aren't going to be effective until twenty twenty six,
so the next six months what we see, we'll see

(13:42):
what the actual result is for next year. So that
is the effective day. I'll start in twenty twenty six.
The eligibility for these accounts are start with, any child
under the age of eighteen can have a Trump account
or whatever. This account's going to be called open by
parents or other family members at a bank or financial institution.
This is considered by the law called opt in where

(14:03):
you get to choose. Now, the one that we heard
most about are the eligibility for the federal Seed Money
Pilot program that's essentially with HR one is saying that's
where the one thousand dollars is automatically put into the
into an account that's automatically opened up. For children that
were born after December thirty first of twenty twenty four,

(14:25):
but before January first of twenty twenty nine, they have
to have a Social Security number. I know it's becoming
a thing where a lot of children aren't actually getting
them where they're born. I know parents are making this decision,
but this is a requirement here, and then they have
to be a US citizen of course.

Speaker 2 (14:40):
So hold up, Yeah, that's an interesting thing, right because
you said automatically opened. There's the first question by who
you know is it? You know we've got a gutted
irs right now. You know we've funded home, WE unfunded home,
WE all of those things. And if you try to
call the Eye for any anything at all, you're going

(15:02):
to find out that you're going to be on hold
a really long time, and if you ever even get
through to someone, you might get disconnected before you get
an answer. I mean, I'm still waiting on a very
very simple change that I sent into the i R s.
Oh gosh, it's been over a year now and they
have to send me a letter periodically letting me know
that they're still working on it. But I mean, it's
just it's it's something simple like a name change. You

(15:23):
know that they can't even do that. So I think
what it says is that the Treasury is going is
supposed to have the responsibility. So hopefully Scott Besstt has
some processes in place, being a business person, hopefully he's
he knows that this is coming down the pike, and
hopefully he's got a process for getting that done. But
that sounds like a recipe for disaster that you know,

(15:46):
the federal government's going to be in charge of opening
these accounts.

Speaker 6 (15:49):
You nailed it.

Speaker 8 (15:50):
It's the churchery Department, And how do they find that
out right? That's the next question is also how do
they find that out? Well, on tax returns, if your
child has a Social Security number, then you can get
it child tax credit.

Speaker 6 (16:00):
So they're going to look at the tax returns from
twenty twenty.

Speaker 8 (16:03):
Five as my you know, of course this would be
this year, and they'll see the child included on there
for that. So that's what's being reported at least from
HR one. How they're going to do that. The next
part is the contributions. So starting in twenty twenty six,
the max parents can add is a five thousand dollars
per year and it will be adjusted for inflation starting

(16:25):
in twenty twenty seven. So another part of that is
the distributions. I went back and forth a lot. We'll
see what the outputs are for twenty twenty six, and
the official word funds cannot be withdrawn, so I don't
know if it's incapable of doing or if it's a
lot of penalties for doing so I want some clarity

(16:47):
from Congress and IRS on that, but they don't want
anything with drawn from those accounts until the account holder
or the child turns eighteen, So after eighteen though, as
it sits right now, as we're reading. It converts to
traditional IRA rules similar to IRA rules, but there are
some adjustments. So the word similar is because there's some

(17:08):
specifics in there that we're going to require CPAs hopefully
to be educated and caught up on.

Speaker 2 (17:14):
So yeah, so that reminds me of a challenge that
we can have or that we've seen happen with iras.

Speaker 3 (17:21):
Right, So, in an.

Speaker 2 (17:22):
IRA traditional IRA account, you can end up with an
IRA account that has pre tax money and after tax
money depending on how you put it in and how
it's coded, you know, when it goes in from your
employer and all of those things. Well, if you don't
give the information to your tax person whoever's doing your
tax return, and they don't record it properly, you could

(17:44):
end up losing a whole tax benefit just because the
amount of pre tax and after tax dollars weren't kept
up with correctly. So again, this could potentially be a
logistical nightmare.

Speaker 3 (18:00):
Keep going.

Speaker 8 (18:01):
Yeah, So the investments a lot in it is mutual
funds ETFs, and it has to be a US index.
So most likely right now the most common one is
going to be the S and P five hundred. There's
some other editions of what classifies as their qualified index,
but we'll just use for simple purposes the SP five hundred,
and it has to be those are going to be
the allowable investments, mutual fund and ETFs for that tracking

(18:23):
index in that case, so we can look at pros
and consu pros is kind of more like in parentheses
con as well how I look at it. So the
first thing I looked at is how many bursts were
actually taking place this year by the census right now,
it's about three point six to two million bursts in

(18:43):
the US that's been recorded. If this federal Seed program
does put a thousand just based off of to dates
numbers of twenty twenty five, are Treasury and I guess
taxpayers do right, are going to be funding the S
and P five hundred index. If that's what shows in
of about three point six two billion just based off
of all those automatic Federal Seed Pilot program accounts being

(19:07):
opened based off of tax returns there or maybe less
than that because of how they're using the tax returns.
So that's one metric. The other one is there is
no income limits for contributors.

Speaker 2 (19:17):
So parents, before you go there, let's back up just
a little bit. So what does that mean. You know,
the investment that's going to be used is an index,
an index funder and ETF a low cost I've heard
so on and so forth, But that means more money
flowing into the market, right.

Speaker 6 (19:34):
Absolutely correct.

Speaker 8 (19:35):
It's a mutual find ETF that tracks a specific index,
and if it's the S and P five hundred, it's
going to be tracking that. It's going to follow with
it if it goes up, up, down, down, tracks direct.

Speaker 2 (19:46):
I mean in the grand scheme of things, you know,
even if it is what do you say, three point
two six billion based on the number of berths and
the thousand dollars apiece, you know that is sort of
you know, it's a drop in the bucket towards the
overall size of the market. But hey, it's still taxpayer
money going into the market. So that's something that doesn't

(20:09):
necessarily excite me. The other thing that doesn't excite me
is that, you know, this big beautiful bill.

Speaker 3 (20:15):
You know, Trump was one hundred.

Speaker 2 (20:18):
Percent right on creating Doze and uncovering all the waste,
fraud and abuse and all of those things. And you know,
this really got a lot of people to get into
the camp of hey, we have to cut expenses, Well,
three point twenty six billion doesn't sound like cutting expenses
to me, So, you know, it sort of usurps the
parental responsibility for you know, taking the initiative to invest

(20:44):
for their children, to invest for the needs of their children.

Speaker 3 (20:46):
It's not the government's job, it's the parent's job.

Speaker 6 (20:49):
Keep absolutely, I agree.

Speaker 8 (20:50):
So one thing I did point out here is part
of that five thousand limit, employers can actually contribute up
to twenty five hundred of that five.

Speaker 6 (20:59):
Thousand dollars limit for parents.

Speaker 8 (21:00):
So if an employer wants to cover that, it's a
tax break for the employer, So employer can help offset
some of that if the parents can't add to it.
I thought that was unique in that case. I can
see where people would want to use it because of
an employer helping. If anything, an employers adding twenty five
hundred to it and the parents aren't. So that was
a I guess you could say a pro of it

(21:23):
from that point, and then we can go right into
the cons.

Speaker 2 (21:26):
I guess we need to get right to the question
was it a blessing or was it a blunder? Well,
I guess always free quote unquote free money always seems
like a blessing that there is no such thing as free.
Somebody pays for it somewhere and so and here's the
I think here's the nail in the coffin for me,
is the government decides what you get to invest in,

(21:48):
and they're picking an index fund. And we all know
that we have convictions to be biblically responsible. So now
they're going to force me to violate if I if
I participate in this kind of account for my kid,
They're going to force me to violate my convictions about
biblically responsible investing just to get the free quote unquote
free money.

Speaker 3 (22:08):
So I guess that kind of sums it up.

Speaker 2 (22:11):
I think Jason and I both agree that this is
more of a blunder than it is a blessing. So Jason,
real quickly, high level overview. What are some of the
options that we can do instead of this account.

Speaker 8 (22:25):
You've got the Uniform Transfers, Minors Act accounts for the
UTMA or ugmas that are out there, sodial accounts, yep,
good studiocuts there A lot of these accounts are geared
towards allowing you to use a sort of distribution for
education expenses. So without going through all the weeds, all
the different accounts, if that's kind of the focus of
the marketing of this so called Trump account, there's other

(22:46):
things there. I personally was looking at, how do I
solve for a wroth? How could I get any money into,
you know, a wroth for my kid at some point?
And the Secareact two point zero allows for five to
nine plans after fifteen years allow that to ability to
roll over to a row, so there is a way under.

Speaker 6 (23:03):
The age of eighteen to get that starting there.

Speaker 8 (23:05):
And there's some other complex things that maybe one day
we can talk about.

Speaker 6 (23:09):
You have the Coverdale essays that also help with that.

Speaker 8 (23:12):
Each of these accounts all have special rules because they
are qualified accounts, so they all have special taxation purposes,
and there needs to be a good surgical approach to
looking at each one of these. But I just think
it's a big blunder, this Trump account, and that there's
better accounts out there that this cure active point zero
actually helped, and even the BBB, this new HR one
bill also opened up some new numbers and qualification limits

(23:36):
cut off.

Speaker 2 (23:37):
We have so much more to share, but at the
end of the day, I guess the consensus is that
we're still the most free account is to just do
it on your own with a custodial account or in
your own brokerage. Well, folks, we got to go for now.
Stay tuned that we've got more financial issues to come.

Speaker 5 (24:08):
Well, folks, I hope you enjoyed that segment with Shannon
and Jason.

Speaker 4 (24:11):
Always love here and their insights, especially if you have
you know, child or grandchild who's in that age range
where they could possibly you know, if there's the chance
that they could potentially use an account like that, it's
interesting stuff for sure, So go back and listen to that.
If you didn't get the chance to great to be
here with you, hope you had a blessed day of worship, folks,
and it's wonderful to have you all this morning. Let's

(24:32):
take a look quickly at what the markets did to
finish the week. They had a good week and a
good day on Friday. They looked to finish strong. By midday,
all three major averages were positive. The tech heavy Nasdaq
was leading the way, still cruising from Wednesday's strong earnings,
and if you remember Shanna sharing over eighty percent of
stocks that have reported earnings thus far beat expectations, and

(24:53):
we've got some more coming this week, which we'll get
to in just a moment. The afternoon, they were still
up late afternoon much the same, and they finished all well.
The DOUBT was up about half percent, the s and
P up about two fifths, the Nasdaq up about a quarter.
It was a winning week for the markets ending July
twenty fifth. Pre markets this morning were somewhat strong. Right
now as they've opened, they're a little bit mixed. It's

(25:14):
actually not really, it's really just the Dow Jones is
right around the flat line. The SMB five hundred is
up about an eighth of a percent, and the Nasdaq
is up about a third of a percent. The big
news from the weekend, which I think is pretty good
stuff here, is the United States reached a trade agreement
with the European Union. So President Trump and European Commission
President Ursula vonder lay And announced that the US has

(25:35):
indeed reached a trade deal with the EU. Trump said
that the deal imposes a fifteen percent tariff on most
European goods to the United States that includes cars. The
US president had previously threatened thirty percent tariffs on goods
from the European Union, and the EU also agreed to
purchase seven hundred billion dollars worth of US energy and
invest in additional six hundred billion dollars worth of investments

(25:57):
into the US above current levels. Again, Trump continues to
wheel and deal there speaking of what's going on in Europe.
By the way, folks, this is someone of breaking news,
but Trump did decrease significantly the deadline he was giving
Russia to basically.

Speaker 5 (26:10):
End the war with Ukraine.

Speaker 4 (26:12):
Originally that deadline was, I believe a fifty day deadline
that was supposed to run out sometime in September. We
just got this breaking news as of this morning that
he's now only giving Russia between ten to twelve days
to reach a peace deal with Ukraine. The punishment for
that seems to be really difficult, massive secondary tariffs on
his trade partners. Hopefully that's enough. Hopefully that's enough to

(26:35):
light a fire under President Putin and say, okay, ye,
it's time to finish this thing. It's been you know,
three and a half years of fighting a proxy war
over land that's been disputed for the last nine hundred
years might be time to call it quits here, so
good to see that as well. But that's what's happening
sort of on the international front here folks.

Speaker 5 (26:52):
Back home, This.

Speaker 4 (26:53):
Week in the economy is going to be a bit
of a busy one. So it's Fed meeting week. The
jury's still kind of out on the Central Bank will
choose to lower rates in this meeting. I think the
leanings are probably not but some Once again we've seen
some Fed officials say that they'd like to see it
lowered at this meeting. So that's gonna be Wednesday. We
don't get much today. Tomorrow we get consumer confidence and

(27:14):
job openings. Again, Wednesday's the big one. You got the
FED decision there, and then Thursday we get the Fed's
preferred gauge of inflation, that's the PCE numbers. Friday some
jobs numbers.

Speaker 5 (27:24):
Also.

Speaker 4 (27:25):
Part of what makes this such a big week as well, folks,
is it is a big week in earnings. You've got
four of the Magnificent seven stocks reporting earnings this week,
so today not much. Tuesday we get Visa, Procter, and
Gamble and United Health. Now United Health is not one
of those Magnificent seven, but That's an interesting one to
keep an eye on here, folks, because they're facing a

(27:45):
DOJ probe right now over Medicare billing. So the Justice
Department's launching an investigation Indi United Health Group due to
its Medicare billing practices. That's according to a report on Thursday.
It sits as the largest private health care sure in
the nation, and it is reporting second quarter earnings on Tuesday.
A lot of people are going to be watching those,

(28:05):
some not so confident that they'll be very good, as
it's been somewhat of a volatile really going back to
about a year and.

Speaker 5 (28:11):
A half for this company.

Speaker 4 (28:13):
The announcement on Thursday came after the Wall Street Journal
reported in May that the DOJ is conducting a criminal
investigation into the healthcare giant over possible Medicare fraud. So
we'll see if that made any impact in its quarter
two earnings. But that one reports Tuesday. That's before any
of the four of the Magnificent seven report. Wednesday we
get Microsoft and Meta among others, and then Thursday we

(28:34):
get Apple and Amazon, and then Friday, as kind of
icing on the cake, get Berkshire, Hathaway and ex On Mobile.
So It's a pretty big week for earnings this week here, folks,
so we'll be keeping an eye on it for sure,
see what the markets do with it. I did want
to just give a quick update here. You know, we
saw Trump's visit to the Federal Reserve last week. It

(28:55):
appears the President did not fire FED Chief Jerome Powell,
which made some of us kind of sad. I guess
if you remember from Thursday, So I posited two possibilities
for this meeting. Option one was that Trump would oust Powell,
which did not happen. Option two was really kind of
an accountability meeting. It was a meeting from the top dog,
the boss, checking in with the hope that maybe we'll

(29:16):
see some real change. It appears option two is what
the President went with. The jury is still out on
if we'll actually see some real positive change, though. So
Trump indicated that the meeting was positive, even going so
far as to say that he has confidence that the
Fed is ready to start cunning rates. Trump said, quote,
I think we have had a very good meeting on

(29:37):
interest rates. Pale said to me very strongly, the country's
doing well. I got that to mean I think he's
going to start recommending lower rates. Will he or won't
he remains to be seen for sure. We'll find out
on Wednesday. If he does choose to lower rates then.
But what do we make of this? It seems like
a nothing burger at first glance here, folks, But I
got to tell you this might be a slightly off

(29:59):
the wall take, but I'm going.

Speaker 5 (30:00):
To go for it.

Speaker 4 (30:01):
I'm actually a little bit concerned about the relatively peaceful
waters between the President and the Federal Reserve Chair. I'm
concerned about the President that this could set for the future.
I'm all for political leaders coming together, and like it
or not, I'm calling the Federserve chair political leader because
even if they claim to be a political we all
know that's not true. But it concerns me so right

(30:22):
now we have a fiscally strong presidential administration in the
White House. I think we can all agree with that.
I don't particularly like the FED, but at least I
like the fact that it claims to be and to
throw it a bone, tries to be independent from any
political party or group. Again, we said that they really
don't do that, but they try to do that. If
we're going to have a Federal Reserve, though, I think

(30:45):
it's good that it is independent from any political administration,
and I also think that there's some goodness in there
being a little bit of a tug in a little
bit of a tug of war here. Now, if you
had the right administration and the right Federal Reserve, of
course I want them to work together, but in a
fallen world usually that's not going to happen. Here's my
concern really that if we had an administration that is

(31:08):
not fiscally responsible, which we've had a lot of those,
and if it decided to team up with the FED,
like we're seeing, not really seeing it in full here,
but seeing it in part here, and then you have
the FED all too eager to join forces with a
non fiscally responsible administration. I can't imagine the result that

(31:29):
that would be for the fiscal health of the United States.

Speaker 5 (31:32):
So the precedent that this sets is more what I'm seeing.

Speaker 4 (31:35):
I kind of like a little bit of tug of
war between the Federal Reserve and the White House. I
think there's some health there. I think there's built in
accountability there. It's probably nothing, but I think I like
it more when the President of the FED are a
little bit at each other's throats because it will at
least keep one of them, if not both of them accountable.
Really is kind of what I'm saying all that to say,

(31:55):
looks like Jerome Powell will indeed finish out his term.
We probably won't get a an oust there, you know,
unless something breaks in the next couple months or something
like that. But just to keep in mind there, folks, again,
his term runs out I believe in May of twenty
twenty six. So that's what we're looking like there from
that meeting there, you know, hopefully. I'm not really sure

(32:17):
what I hope with this, except that we can see
some improvement in the Federal Reserve. If we're not going
to get a complete dismantling of the Federal Reserve. And
again we've talked about how maybe that's maybe maybe the
FED is the least evil of all the evils. If
we're not going to get that, then what we need
to get us some accountability, and hopefully we can get
that from.

Speaker 5 (32:31):
This for sure.

Speaker 4 (32:32):
All right, folks, we got the ad coming up here
just a moment. Let me say hello to so many
of you. George, good to see you, Nelson as well,
Lisa James, there's yes, James from South Carolina. Good to
see you there, Eddie and Tennessee. Hope you're doing well.
Uncle John is there as well. Do we have both
George's in the chat? I know we have multiple George's,
just like we have multiple Brian's there. Great to see
you guys. I think I mentioned Nelson, Lisa. Well, oh

(32:55):
we got Facebook.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Yeah, Philip, Alejandro and Ronnie joining us this morning.

Speaker 4 (33:00):
You're rock of morning you guys. That's awesome. Thank you
Elijah for that. Robert I know is there from Texas
as well, so good to see you all. On John
from Alabama. All right, folks, we've got the agriport coming
in here with Craig Howgard and then we'll come back
on the other side of the break talking about with
some the latest name stock phrase.

Speaker 5 (33:14):
This is Craig how Guard with your financial issues.

Speaker 9 (33:16):
Egg update for July twenty eight what Corn futures were
lower Friday as weather continues to favor a large US
crop as a result of December corner. Was opennion three
quarters lower at four dollars and nineteen cents for bushel.
Soybeans were lower as favorable weather and competition from South
America more than off sets any optimism around a Chinese
trade deal and strong US domestic consumption. China continues to

(33:39):
purchase South American soybeans, buying twenty two soybean vessels from
Brazil last week. November beans finished today three and a
quarters cents lower at ten twenty one. The wheat market
traded low straight across the board. Russian harvest is underway,
and that couple with a weaker corn market makes it.

Speaker 5 (33:55):
Tough to be bullish.

Speaker 9 (33:55):
Wheet futures Minneapolis September we was three quarters of a
cent lower at five eighty four and three quarters. Kansas
City was down two at five twenty six and a
half went Chicago three and a quarter cents softer at
five thirty eight and a quarter. Common futures continued their
aimless trek sideways. December futures ended the session forty eight
points lower, closing at sixty eight twenty three. Livestock futures

(34:17):
were mixed. We had October live cattle a dollar higher
two hundred and twenty three dollars and fifteen cents per hundredweight.
September feeder cattle rose by two dollars and fifty five cents,
closing at three hundred and thirty two dollars and twenty
cents per hundred and we had october leenhawk futures fifty
cents lower and ninety dollars and sixty cents per hundredweight.
After the close, the monthly Cattle on Feed report came

(34:37):
out and the numbers were bullish. Placement numbers were lower
than expected. In fact, feed lots with over one thousand
head capacity placed one million, four hundred and forty one
thousand head of cattle on feed in the month of June.
It's one hundred and twenty three thousand less than a
year ago. The decline in June followed a one hundred
and fifty nine thousand head declined in May. Since the
start of the year, placements of cattle and feed lots

(34:58):
with over one thousand head capacity are running five hundred
and thirty nine thousand cattle behind year ago numbers. Class
threw Mite futures put in a new life of contract,
but then bounced off that log, just closing slightly lower.
At the closing bell, Augus's futures were down three points
at seventeen twenty three. Well, this has been Craig holl
Guard with your financial issues.

Speaker 5 (35:17):
Egg update.

Speaker 1 (35:18):
We'll be right.

Speaker 9 (35:19):
Back with more financial issues after this.

Speaker 7 (35:31):
The opinions and recommendations expressed on this program do not
necessarily represent the opinions of the station or any of
the program's sponsors. Additionally, all products or services offered by
the program sponsors may not be known by the program.

Speaker 4 (35:48):
Hey, folks, did want to give a shout out here
Elijah Kelly running the audio board for us, So thankful
for him. Sam Case has been out of vacation. He's
going to be back tomorrow though, So excited to have
Sam back. But Elijah, thanks for filling in.

Speaker 1 (35:59):
Men.

Speaker 5 (36:00):
Always great to grow back to the old days.

Speaker 4 (36:02):
While yeah do this a lot with absolutely Yeah, that's
good stuff.

Speaker 1 (36:07):
Man.

Speaker 4 (36:08):
All right, folks, The markets here real quickly, one more
time before we get to that meme stock stuff. Pretty
much the same here Dow Jones right below the flat
line SMP right above Nasdaq about a third of a
percent positive as we're looking. All right, folks, So what
some people were calling the latest meme stock craze took
place on Thursday. You remember we talked about Krispy Kreme

(36:28):
and we talked about GoPro. Well, there was another one
that came late in the week. I'm calling this the
Sydney Sweeney spike of American Eagle stock. So late last
week the quick hit investors were able to take charge
of American Eagle. Now, many people are saying that this
was not actually your typical memestock craze. There were some

(36:49):
things different about it, and I'll explain that in a minute.
The spike was not driven by a targeted effort at
the hand of meme lords, but rather a targeted marketing
campaign involving a popular young actor by the name of
Sidney Sweeney. So it's American Eagle Clothing company. They hired
this young actress to promote their denim style jeans and jackets.
That caused the stock to drive upward as much as

(37:10):
eleven percent on Thursday. Keep in mind, for the year,
AE was down significantly around thirty five percent, so they
were looking for a shot in the arm.

Speaker 5 (37:18):
They got it.

Speaker 4 (37:19):
Many economists believe it was simply with the use of
old fashioned racy advertising, where you have an attractive young
actress posing in seductive outfits seductive poses, and it made
the stock shoot up. It happened to work at least
temporarily for sure, folks. There's a lot to dissect from this.
Let me say this right off the bat, because this
really kind of is a you know, it brings together

(37:41):
a lot of different things. It brings in short term investing,
it brings in wokeism, it brings in I think, you know,
kind of the old fashioned vices of lust and different
things like that. But I will say there were many
in the liberal media who were irate at this because
at its core it is most certainly not woke advertising. Conversely,
there were many in conservative media who were celebrating this.

(38:03):
They were like, it's we're going back to the old days.
This is great where we no longer have androgynous, overweight
models modeling clothing and we're pretending like we're calling it beautiful.
Where now we have a female actress, an attractive female actress,
you know, modeling clothing. A lot of conservatives were celebrating
this because lately what had been happening was clothing outfitters

(38:26):
were leaning into the woke stuff, and so they were
putting I saw why it was ridiculous, and please, folks,
please don't look this stuff up, by the way, because
it's not worth your time. But there were some Calvin
Klein advertisements of overweight men modeling women's underwear, and of
course it was from an LGBTQ perspective, and the wokesters
were calling this beautiful. And we obviously know that there's
some level where beauty is actually objective. Certain things are

(38:49):
beautiful and certain things are not. Overweight men and women's
underwear is not beautiful. Okay, it's just not.

Speaker 5 (38:56):
It's just not.

Speaker 4 (38:57):
There is a subjectivity to beauty as well to a
certain degree. But I think we would all agree that
this is built into the foundation of the fabric that
God created, that there are things that are good, true,
and beautiful and things that are not. There is a
level of objectivity to beauty. These advertisements were not woke.
They kind of harkened back to the twentieth century days

(39:18):
where you'd have the classic you have a sultry dressed
woman selling products, cars, beer, clothes, things like that, usually
to catch a large male audience, and oftentimes it worked.
Now American Eagle evidently figured this out. It's not hard
to figure out. It's a marketing campaign that's worked for millennia.
It's called sex cells. But that's what was happening here.

(39:38):
Woke people were upset by it. A lot of conservatives
were thrilled by it. Let me tell you this, folks,
and forgive me in advance if this turns into a rant,
but I have to speak about this for a moment.
There's much to criticize with this ad campaign. And I
say that as someone who also hates wokeism. Okay, I

(39:59):
hate it. I hate wokeism. I don't like it. I
think it's ugly. I think it's gross. I think it's detrimental.
I think it's counter to the biblical worldview. But I
am not in favor of advertising sultraally dressed women as
a way to make sex sell. I'm not okay with
that either. This is an outworking of a concept we've

(40:22):
discussed at length before on the show, folks. I believe
it's from the pit of Hell, truly ghastly. It's a
worldview that at times we as Christians will align politically with, though,
and that's not a bad thing.

Speaker 5 (40:34):
Sometimes we have to align.

Speaker 4 (40:35):
Politically with this worldview, but we can't align politically with them.
What I should say is we can't align spiritually with it.
It's called christless conservatism. Christless conservatism. Let me say that again,
this worldview christless conservatism is what was being outworked here
that many conservatives were giddy at this ad simply because

(40:57):
it was not woke.

Speaker 5 (41:00):
They were having a field day.

Speaker 4 (41:01):
They were loving the fact that you had this, you know,
kind of old fashioned, basically softcore pornographic ad because it's
not woke. Yay, and very much the same if you
were following. Last year, several prominent conservative female influencers appeared
in a luid calendar called Real Women of America was

(41:22):
sponsored by a conservative, ultra right beer company. That's the
name of this company, I assume trying to fight back
against bud like for all their woke stuff. It's marketed
to conservative dads under the guise of celebrating American beauty,
but what it really was was conservative female influencers, including
sadly some profession Christians like Riley Gaines and others, dressed

(41:43):
in really inappropriate swimsuits. That's not okay. That's not okay.
We don't want to fight wokeism with softcore porn.

Speaker 5 (41:54):
That's stupid.

Speaker 4 (41:57):
It was your run of the mill lingerie calend but
because it's fighting back against wocism, now all of a sudden,
it's okay.

Speaker 5 (42:05):
No, it's not.

Speaker 4 (42:06):
It's not okay. American Eagle just did the same thing.
It's actually kind of lazy marketing. It worked for them.
It shot their stock up a little bit. They certainly
haven't recovered from where they were down from. The christless
conservatives loved it. As long as it fights wocism, it's good.
What they did is they replaced one poison with another poison.

(42:27):
They replaced the poison of wokism with another poison, of
sexualization of women to satisfy lustful desires of men.

Speaker 5 (42:34):
That's not good. They're content with it.

Speaker 4 (42:38):
I'm not. I'm not content with this. I want to
fight wocism as much as the next guy, but not
this way. Not like this, folks, and christless conservatism produces this.
I hate christless conservatism almost as much as I hate liberalism.

Speaker 5 (42:58):
It's a joke.

Speaker 4 (43:00):
Now, Will we as Christians sometimes align politically with non
Christians who agree with our political values?

Speaker 5 (43:07):
Of course? Is that bad?

Speaker 1 (43:08):
No?

Speaker 5 (43:08):
It's not.

Speaker 4 (43:09):
But we cannot align spiritually. We have nothing in common spiritually.
They don't love Jesus Christ. I don't care if they
want closed borders or they like guns. Those things are wonderful,
but they don't love Jesus Christ. It's the equivalent of saying,

(43:31):
I'm refusing to drink a bottle of chlorox because I
know it's bad for me. I'll just drink a bottle
of gasoline instead. That's what it is. That's the christless
conservative model. So often wokeism is poisonous, folks, so is
christless conservatism. What christless conservatism did in this instance was
it took certain values that are good, virtuous values of conservatism,

(43:54):
like feminine beauty. Okay, feminine beauty is a good thing.
It's a wonderful thing that women have an innate beauty
about them that men do not. There's nothing attractive to
me about the male body, okay. But without Christ is
the anchor, it turns something beautiful into something wretched and perverse.

(44:18):
The poisons are different. Wocism is not the same as
you know, this soft core pornographic lust. But at their core,
they're both toxic, and as Christians, we got to stand
against both of them, and we have to fight wocism,
but not with these weapons.

Speaker 5 (44:37):
Not like this.

Speaker 4 (44:40):
Don't settle for it, folks, don't settle for the christless
conservative trash don't be Yeah, we need.

Speaker 5 (44:48):
To reclaim something far better. Truthfully, it's what we need
to do.

Speaker 4 (44:51):
A biblical ethic of marriage and sexuality where the marriage
bed is kept pure, Where yes, feminine beauty is elevated,
masculine strength is elevated, but not where women are sexualized
in such a way. Where men lead and honor and
protect and love their wives, where men you have eyes

(45:14):
for no one but your wife. My wife is my
standard of beauty. She is the standard for me. Where women,
where you display the inward beauty of a gentle and
quiet spirit, and outwardly you are modest for the glory
of God.

Speaker 5 (45:32):
That is true beauty, folks.

Speaker 4 (45:37):
I apologize for the little rant there, but it really
it irks me a lot when we see conservatives fighting
back with useless weapons. The only way to fight this
stuff is with Christ. That's the only way we're going
to win. By the way I should mention to you,
American eagle stock not biblically responsible. Okay, so we don't

(45:59):
want any part of it, whether it was doing really
well or not. The woke stuff is not good. Neither
is the porn. Let's settle for something better. How about
a biblical ethic of marriage and sexuality. I hope we
can be good stewards of that interesting stuff happening here, folks.
I appreciate each of you so much. I hope that

(46:21):
you enjoyed today's show. We'll be back God Willing again tomorrow.
Remember to keep an eye as well this week on
the Partner commentary. Also, if you haven't got a chance
to listen to the Partner Conference call, I hope that
you'll do that. It was posted late last week, so
make sure that you listen to it. If you haven't
gotten a chance to. Shanna gave some great, great analysis
in there and answered a lot of questions.

Speaker 5 (46:42):
If your question was one of those ones, make sure
you listen.

Speaker 4 (46:44):
Also, folks, you got to remember everything we have belongs
to the Lord. Let's be good and faithful stewards with
all of it. I appreciate each of you so much.
God bless you, and Lord Willing. Will do it again
tomorrow until next time. I'm set you didn't skip to
see you for more financial.

Speaker 5 (46:57):
Issues next time.

Speaker 1 (47:11):
If we ever forget that we're one nation under God,
then we will