Financial Issues - 08.13.2025

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
Welcome to Financial Issues, where we join reality with truth,
helping you make the most of your money by honoring
God with your investments. Now listen man, as we give
you the practical tools and advice you need to become
a biblically responsible investor.

Speaker 2 (00:24):
Good morning, folks, Welcome to Financial Issues.

Speaker 3 (00:26):
Sethi Denski here with you this morning. Great to be
back with you once again here, folks, thanks for joining
us today. Welcome to our radio, TV social media audience,
our chat audience already lively this morning. You got to
join the chat, folks, if you're not a member of
it already very easy to do it. Just go to
Financial Issues dot org and click that watch live button
that'll take you right to the chat. If you've never

(00:47):
been there before, I'll ask you to sign in. You
can sign in real quickly and then join the chat,
whether you're a partner or not. Great thing for you
to do.

Speaker 4 (00:53):
Join the funtivities. That's right, live and entertaining.

Speaker 3 (00:56):
Absolutely and Sam is here, which makes it even more fun.

Speaker 5 (00:59):
That's right.

Speaker 4 (01:00):
Sometimes I'm even in the chat. I say hello, I
might say him back exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:04):
Yeah. We have a good time there, folks, So make
sure that you do that. If you've got questions for
us as well, put them up there. Happy to be
here with you today, folks. Later in the show, I'm
gonna have Stefan Padfield. Stefan is the executive director at
the National Center for Public Policy Research. We've had him
on the show before, great great man doing some great
work in the corporate space. We're going to discuss some

(01:25):
nefarious things happening from some of these big corporations. They're
still trying to push DEI initiatives with their employees.

Speaker 5 (01:31):
Sam.

Speaker 3 (01:31):
They have not gotten the memo, so Stefan is lighting
a fire behind them to get them to you.

Speaker 4 (01:36):
Mean, major companies are lying about changing their DEI policies.

Speaker 3 (01:41):
Color me shock, pretty goofy. That's right hot, can you
believe it? So we'll be talking about that. Also, I've
got Craig Halgard. The brilliance of Craig Halgard will grace
our show once again. He's going to join later for
a live AG report.

Speaker 2 (01:52):
Folks.

Speaker 3 (01:52):
If you have questions for Craig, please get them into
the chat right now. I need to apologize because I've
seen one or two questions for Craig or topics for
Craig in the last several weeks since we've last had
Craig on, and so if you're one of those people
who had a question for Craig, we have not had
him on since you've asked that question, probably, so put
it in the chat right now, and if we have

(02:13):
time in that interview, we'll get to those questions for Craig.
He'll be coming on later in the program. We'll get
your questions and comments, of course. And the latest twist
and turn in the Trump Palell battle it continues. Trump
is now threatening legal action against the FED chair. Sam
and I were just talking before we went live, and
we were kind of surmising, you know, I wonder if
Trump is trying to keep Powell around, because it's kind

(02:34):
of nice. The enemy that you know is better than
the enemy that you don't know, and he's kind of
like a punching bag.

Speaker 4 (02:38):
He is a convenient punching bag if anything is going
wrong in the economy, even if it's not directly Powell's fault,
which most things are, because he's in the FED and
he can still blame it on Powell.

Speaker 5 (02:48):
So works out for everyone.

Speaker 6 (02:50):
Right.

Speaker 2 (02:50):
So there's been some things happening that will bring you
up to speed on that as well.

Speaker 5 (02:53):
Folks.

Speaker 2 (02:53):
Grateful for each of you. Hey, I hope that you.

Speaker 3 (02:55):
Were able to read yesterday's Partner commentary as well, a
great read from Shanna and the team, just.

Speaker 5 (03:01):
To give you a little preview of it.

Speaker 3 (03:02):
That's the first time that I had heard the phrase
ghost recession before was in reading the Partner commentary. So
go ahead and check that out when you have the chance.
And we also have a petition active right now. Folks,
we are trying to make known to Tesla that we
are displeased with the way they've touch managed Tsler, as
Trump calls them, Tesla. We're displeased with how they've managed

(03:22):
their investor funds. They have promoted the abortion industry, they've
promoted the trans ideology, and we will not stand for it.
We have almost four hundred signatures as of right now,
which is great. I'd love to cross that four hundred
threshold today. So please go and sign the Tesla petition
if you have not done so, and tell your friends
about it. Also, folks, they don't have to be investors
to sign it if they care about Christ and they

(03:44):
care about honoring God with everything He's given us, including
our money. Then this will matter to them, So you
have to sign that petition. Do it today, Do it
as quickly as you can. Let's get as many names
behind this so that when we send this to Elon
Musk and his team, it can make a really big impact.
And that's our goal with this. So do that today. Financialist.
When you go to the website, there's a pop up
there that will if you click on it just says

(04:05):
sign our Tesla petition a picture of a Tesla car,
take you directly to the petition and you can sign
it there very easy.

Speaker 5 (04:10):
It takes about fifteen seconds.

Speaker 3 (04:12):
There's not a lot, a whole lot of economic data
out today, folks. Tomorrow we get the PPI numbers, so
a little more inflation info there, but in terms of
the numbers, not much today. We'll take a look at
the markets quickly here. Though yesterday there was a relatively
positive CPI report before the opening bill. We talked about
it yesterday. I was kind of a mixed bag, but
the markets seem to feel pretty good, mainly due to

(04:33):
the fact that they seem to think that this could
be indicative of the possibility of rate cuts. Yay, rate cuts.
So we'll see if that happens in September. But the
market seemed please.

Speaker 4 (04:43):
Everyone's emotional wellbeing is hinging on those rate cuts. Either
they're going to be elated or plunged into the absolute
hit of despair.

Speaker 3 (04:51):
So goofy hope, wait and see hopefully that's not the
case for us here at financial issues. But yeah, you
can see that with most other investors on Wall Street.
You see the market, it's they're just hanging with baited breath.
Yesterday they were really pleased. All three indices were up
over a percent. The Dow Jones finished one point one percent.
SB five hundred was a little over that. The NASDQ
was one point four percent. Both the S ANDB five

(05:11):
hundred and the NASDAK can positive hit new records, as
they've been doing with great frequency these last several weeks
of trading sessions. Pre markets this morning, as I refresh
my screen, here real quickly, slightly on the rise, still
so pricing into open each of them above a quarter
percent positive, So we'll see what happens there as they

(05:32):
open in about twenty minutes from now or so. All right, Sam,
let's take a look at one of these headlines.

Speaker 1 (05:38):
Here.

Speaker 3 (05:38):
We did get the small Business Optimism index that came
out yesterday increased slightly.

Speaker 5 (05:42):
What can you tell us about.

Speaker 4 (05:43):
This, right, it's not just the markets that are feeling good,
but small businesses are also feeling pretty good as well,
although they do have some reservations which we'll get to.
But let's look at these numbers. So the small business
optimism reached a five month high in July, jumping to
one hundred point three. Now you might be asking what
on earth does that mean. So for reference one hundred,

(06:04):
that's considered a baseline, and anything above one hundred, which
we're narrowly above one hundred, that's considered generally a positive
outlook for the economy. So we're in a narrow positive
category here, although there are uncertainties. The uncertainty index also
rose by eight points to ninety seven, which is pretty
high as small businesses continue to worry about the impact

(06:26):
of tariff policy, although it should also be noted that
that number is down from a near record high of
one hundred and four in March, which is when the
tariffs were first coming on the scene. Meanwhile, business is
concerned about poor sales are also now at their highest
level since February of twenty twenty one, while at the
same time, a significant portion of businesses are also reporting
problems with labor quality.

Speaker 3 (06:48):
So once again, Sam, kind of like with the numbers
we got yesterday, CPI a little bit of a mixed
bag here, I think with the sentiment there. But you know, folks,
I like to see the optimism up here.

Speaker 5 (06:57):
I'm sure you do as well.

Speaker 3 (06:59):
You know, small businesses, we have a great appreciation for
them here at the Ministry. They are the backbone of America.
Tremendous love and respect and appreciation for the small business
owners in our audience. I know there are many of
you out there, and if you don't mind, if you're
on the chat, say hello, tell us that you're a
small business owner. You don't have to be self serving
about it. Don't feel like it's self serving. But we'd
love to just hear from you and get to celebrate

(07:19):
you because we.

Speaker 4 (07:19):
Well, let us know if you're optimistic too, And do
you have this new degree of uncertainty because of the tariffs.

Speaker 3 (07:24):
We love to know absolutely. I think that's a great
thing for you to do. We'd love to be able
to give you a shout out there. As for this
uncertainty index, Sam I think it's not a surprise because
it seems like on some level everyone is a little
bit uncertain with the tariffs. Everyone, like we just talked
about everyone on Wall Street, they're waiting to hear what's
going to happen with the tariffs. They're waiting to see
if there's a chance at a rate cut. There's uncertainty everywhere, folks.

(07:46):
If you need some encouragement here, if you need a
little boost in your step, go back and listen to
the interview I did with Art Ali last week. I
had them on the program on Tuesday, August fifth, in
the second segment. So if you go to Financial Issues
dot Org, you click on you hover over the watch button,
you go down to episodes on demand, scroll down to
the August fifth episode, and listen to what Art said
about It. Gives some great insight and very positive insight,

(08:08):
I think, on what we're seeing regarding this economy and
what the Trump administration is ultimately doing.

Speaker 5 (08:14):
And so if you're.

Speaker 3 (08:15):
Feeling a little bit skittish about it, go back and
listen to that. I think it'd be a great thing
for you to do. You know, Sam, I found this interesting,
this business Optimism index. It's a fascinating reading and similar
in a lot of ways to some of the other
economic readings that we get that are really just based
on how people feel. That's really what it is. It's
based on how people feel. It's related to actual hard numbers,

(08:36):
but it's based more on feeling. It's the way that entrepreneurs,
the way that the way that small business owners are
feeling in any given day. And you know, I think
a measure of a good business owner is that they
understand listen, feelings are a part of human nature, but
they're able to rise above the feelings a little bit
and they know they're playing the long game honestly, much

(08:58):
like good investors. I tend to find that if you're
investing in these publicly traded companies, there's a lot of
similarities with being a small business owner. In some sense,
you are a part owner of these companies. Now, your
ownership might be much smaller in scope than a small
business owner would be if he owns one hundred percent
or fifty percent or just over fifty one percent of
a small business something like that, but there's still some

(09:20):
similarity there. I think a far better metric than emotion.
I think that's really the lesson for this first segment
of the show. A far better metric than emotion when
you're talking about financial decisions is wisdom, prudence, fortitude, common sense.
Those things will get you a lot further.

Speaker 4 (09:34):
And part of that wisdom is understanding how people are feeling.
The famous conservative phrase is facts, don't care about your feelings.
But the counter to that is that feelings are a
fact for people, and they are going to influence how
people behave. And when you're an investor in making decisions,
you have to understand what is going on. It's that
behavioral aspect of investing that that does influence the market.

(09:55):
People are not always being rational in their decision making,
and you have to take that into a count.

Speaker 3 (10:00):
Yeah, and it's a good lesson for us two folks.
You know, personally, our hearts are naturally deceitful. They can
be easily deceived, and so we have to guide and
lead our hearts. We have to direct them in the
right direction towards God and not towards fear and greed
in those other things that we see in the markets.

Speaker 5 (10:17):
Here.

Speaker 4 (10:17):
By the way, I don't think that small businesses are
necessarily being irrational with some of this stuff because they
do have to game out how much product they're going
to import, what they're going to sell, and these tariffs
do make things difficult. Even though they're mostly settled, there
still is some wiggle and the joints with big players
like China, and that does give pause of what's.

Speaker 5 (10:35):
My next move going to be. If I'm a small business.

Speaker 3 (10:37):
And regardless of how good or bad the economy is,
it could be the best in the world. It's still
hard to be a small business owner. It's a hard
thing to do. So we commend those of you who
are them. That's great. We'll talk more about this on
the other side of the break here, folks. Happy to
have you on financial issues this morning. It's a good
day to be together. We'll be back at this.

Speaker 2 (11:06):
Hey, folks, welcome to Financial Issues. Welcome back here.

Speaker 6 (11:08):
Good to be here with you.

Speaker 2 (11:09):
Hey, chat.

Speaker 3 (11:10):
I just want to remind you, guys, Craig Howgard's coming
on in fifteen minutes. If you've got questions for Craig,
now's the time to put him in. I really just
want to make sure that I can have a chance
to look over those questions before Craig gets on. So
if you've got him for Craig during this segment. Get
those questions in there. James from South Carolina. Great to
see you, George, just north of James in North Carolina.
Hello George Nelson in Louisiana, saying I sold some physical

(11:32):
gold and I don't regret it. This was several years ago,
put it in aggressive positions and have done well.

Speaker 5 (11:37):
Good job Nelson. That's awesome, man.

Speaker 3 (11:39):
Good to see Grant in the chat. Our Grant is
in there, as is Claude, as is Jason. Great to
see you, Jason. Nathan from Mississippi. Uncle John is there
as always. The Brian Brigade. I see Brian from Virginia.
I haven't seen Brian from Missouri a lot recently.

Speaker 4 (11:53):
That should be a band.

Speaker 5 (11:56):
That's exactly right. That's exactly right.

Speaker 2 (11:58):
Andy.

Speaker 3 (11:58):
Good to see you as well from Kansas. If you're
in the chat, folks, make sure to say hello this morning.
All right, Sam, let's get to the fun stuff with
Trump and Pal.

Speaker 5 (12:07):
The latest news.

Speaker 3 (12:08):
Apparently there's a threat of a lawsuit, now, Sam, what
can you tell us about that?

Speaker 4 (12:11):
So we here President Trump on Tuesday threatened, yes, a
lawsuit against Jerome Powell. We don't know what the details
of that would be or even if it's going to happen,
but the threat is out there. This is over the
skyrocketing renovation costs at the Fed's headquarters in d C,
which have now ballooned over seven hundred million dollars over budget,
bringing the total to just a mere two point five billion,

(12:34):
which what's a few two point five billion dollars between friends?
Trump has said the renovation should only be a mere
fifty million dollars for a fix up. Trump posted on
True Social Jerome too late. Powell must lower the rate now.
And I am considering allowing a major lawsuit against Powell
to proceed because of the horrible and grossly incompetent job

(12:56):
he has done in managing the construction of the Fed's buildings.
What do you make of that set?

Speaker 3 (13:01):
Well, he's holding Pal's feet to the fire, Sam, and
I really like it.

Speaker 2 (13:04):
I really like it a lot. I think about this also.

Speaker 3 (13:07):
You know, Trump said those renovations to be a fifty
million dollar fix up. Pal's spending two point five billion
on this. I think Trump knows what he's talking about.
Wasn't he a real estate mogul long ago in New
York City? I think he might understand a little bit
more about the cost of buildings.

Speaker 4 (13:22):
I thought he's just a guy on TV. That's what
the left always call him. That's right, doesn't know nobody's
talking about. Actually, if you want a great video of
Trump showing his expertise in this field, go back and watch.
I think he was testifying before the Senate around two thousand,
two thousand and one something like that. They were building
the new UN headquarters or renovating it, I'm not sure
in New York, and he was explaining why it's so

(13:46):
over budget and what should be done to fix it.
And he's just brilliant. He talked like that for an hour.
It's really fascinating. It just shows he knows what he's
talking about, what he's doing.

Speaker 3 (13:54):
Absolutely, speaking of clips of Trump seeming to know what
he's doing, folks, we haven't shared this the show yet,
but I did want to share this clip with you,
so if you heard this was about several weeks ago,
when Trump went and visited the Federal Reserve, he and
Powell did kind of a little makeshift joint interview, and
so they're sitting there with their hard hats on, and
you could just get a sense of the tension between

(14:17):
Trump and Powell's relationship. We can also get a sense
of who seems to hold the upper hand in this clip.
Check this out, Sam, do we have that clip?

Speaker 4 (14:24):
We do here?

Speaker 5 (14:24):
It is it's a real estate developer.

Speaker 6 (14:26):
How would you do with a project manager who.

Speaker 1 (14:29):
Would be over budget?

Speaker 7 (14:32):
Generally speaking?

Speaker 1 (14:32):
What would I do?

Speaker 6 (14:34):
I'd fire him?

Speaker 1 (14:34):
He was the president of USI Coulson.

Speaker 7 (14:38):
Well, I'm here just really with the chairman. He's showing
us around, showing us the work, and so I don't
want to get that. I don't want to be personal.
I just would like to see it get finished. And
in many ways it's too.

Speaker 8 (14:50):
Bad it started, but it did start, and it's been
under construction for a long time. There'd be it's going
to be a real long time because like it's got
a long way to go.

Speaker 9 (15:01):
Are there things Chirman can say to you today that would.

Speaker 6 (15:06):
Make you back off some of the earlier criticisms.

Speaker 5 (15:08):
Well, I'd love him to lower interest.

Speaker 8 (15:12):
Rather than that.

Speaker 6 (15:12):
What can I tell you?

Speaker 4 (15:14):
If you're just listening, you can see Trump slaps him
on the back, and Powell looks like he wants to
crawl in a hole and just go away.

Speaker 5 (15:20):
Forever.

Speaker 3 (15:21):
Yeah, I mean it's it's pretty obvious. Uh who's the
alpha dog in that relationship there for sure? But you know, Sam,
that's that's the frustrating part about all of this. And
I don't know if you folks have thought about this yet,
but let me ask you a rhetorical question. Who can
fire the Federal Reserve chair? Apparently the president can't. I
don't know if anyone else who can. What kind of

(15:43):
job would it be? Okay, where you're in a position
and no one can fire you. Something about that doesn't
seem right to me.

Speaker 4 (15:50):
Well, there's a reason why it's considered the fourth branch
of government. It's not in the constitution. And yet we
really don't know who it's accountable to.

Speaker 3 (15:57):
Absolutely nobody knows that they're If you're in any kind
of working environment, if I don't have some kind of
accountability above me where I know, hey, listen, if I
don't do my job, my job is at risk.

Speaker 5 (16:09):
But don't do it, well, I might get fired if
I don't have that.

Speaker 2 (16:12):
Do you think I'm gonna be productive or effective?

Speaker 5 (16:14):
Probably not? Probably not as much as I could be.

Speaker 3 (16:16):
For sure, there's a good level of accountability where I've
got bosses above me who say, listen, they they love me,
they respect me, but they expect me to do my
job well.

Speaker 5 (16:25):
Expect me to do it well.

Speaker 3 (16:26):
And if you don't have that, you're gonna have stuff
you don't have, nonsense two point five billion dollar projects
that should only cost fifty million. You're gonna have a
rogue Federal Reserve chair where now people are wondering if
he's just doing what he's doing to get under Trump's
skin because of some kind of personal vendetta.

Speaker 4 (16:40):
My day, add Seth. That doesn't look exactly like renovations.
If you watched that video, that looked like a full
on construction project. When I'm thinking renovations is like, you know,
this is a shag carpet from the seventies. It's kind
of clashes and it's dated. Maybe we need a new
elevator that doesn't look like That's what's happening with the FED.

Speaker 5 (16:57):
That's a total overhaul.

Speaker 3 (16:59):
And Sam, you had mentioned when we talked about this
a couple weeks ago, this this overhaul of the Federal
Reserve was comparable to what would be an overhaul to
the Palace of Versailles.

Speaker 4 (17:07):
I think it was the building of the Palace of
Versaides building that's crazy, which would cost three billion dollars.
This is coming in at a two point five billion.
Trump claims it might be closer to three billion, but
I've not seen those numbers.

Speaker 3 (17:20):
So Trump seems like he's doing everything in his power
constitutionally to try to hold Jerome Pale in the Fed accountable.
But again, there's no precedent who is allowed to fire him,
who's allow to hold him accountable?

Speaker 5 (17:29):
We don't have that.

Speaker 2 (17:29):
We got to figure that out, folks.

Speaker 4 (17:31):
It's so late in the game. Is it even worth
it to spend all the political capital to actually fire him.
He's going to be gone in less than eight exactly.
And that was kind of why, you know, we brought
up at the beginning of the show. Maybe it's actually
from a political standpoint, it might work out best for
Trump to be able to keep Powell around because he
kind of had, you know, he has that that enemy
that you know, the enemy that you know, is better

(17:52):
than the enemy that you don't know. And like, like
you said, Sam, there's there's kind of that punching bag
element too, where the Powell has has our already not
exactly given himself in the good graces of many, many
people on both sides of the aisle. Truthfully, so might
be convenient for Trump to not oust him if he
can help it. Who knows, interesting stuff there, folks. Nonetheless,

(18:13):
but that's what's going on with the possible lawsuit. I
don't know if the lawsuit will actually happen there, but
that's what we're looking like elsewhere. Sam, we did hear
the president touting the inflation numbers. What can you tell
us about this here? Yeah, of course Trump is excited
about the inflation numbers because to him, it proves that
the tariffs are working, or at the very least not
having the disastrous end of the world effects that everyone

(18:35):
expected they were going to have. Trump said, quote, it
has been proven that even at this late stage, tariffs
have not caused inflation or any other problems for America
other than massive amounts of cash pouring into the Treasury's coffers.
Trump goes on to claim that trillions of dollars are
being taken in on tariffs, which if you look at
the hard numbers right now, that's not exactly true. What

(18:55):
he's probably saying is that theoretically, in the long term,
If these tariffs stay on, they could raise trillions of dollars.
Of course, questions still remain if that would happen, because
it's possible that tariff levels, the amount of money coming
in from tariffs would decrease over time because as you
on shore new jobs, which is one of Trump's ideas
that we're not going to be importing as much from

(19:17):
other countries, the ideas we're going to be building stuff
at the United States, You're not going to be paying
tariffs on those types of things, So the income would
lesson as also import levels would drop.

Speaker 3 (19:27):
Good stuff, Sam, I appreciate you bringing that up here.
You know, Trump still has to contend with talking heads
on the mainstream liberal media and many who are itching
to paint his administration in any kind of negative light.
They can so interesting stuff there, folks. Going on a
couple quick hitters here I wanted to bring to your attention.
Looks like House lawmakers have requested over one billion dollars
in federal funding for local projects in twenty twenty six.

(19:50):
Moving over to the nation's capital, we mentioned yesterday what's
going on over there. DC Police Union is backing Trump's
capital takeover. Also, we saw an amazing story about that. Yesterday,
I don't remember what news outlet it was on. They
were asking what is the local response to Trump's DC
police takeover? And the only person they reference was the

(20:11):
mayor who hates Trump, and they said, oh, they think
it's terrible, completely ignoring that the police union loves it.
They said, yes, it lets us do our job. So
it's just incredible and how dishonest reporting can be about
this stuff when it comes to Trump, and it really is,
absolutely Sam, I found this one really interesting here. This
is something we're gonna have to keep an eye on, folks.
But it looks like the Supreme Court is coming closer

(20:32):
to facing the decision on a case urging the overturn
of same sex marriage. I believe Sam, if I'm correct,
this is the same case that Matt Staver brought up
to us. This is the exact same case. Yes, folks, listen,
we need to pray that this continues to gain steam
because this could lead to the overturn of Obergafell, which
would be just an amazing thing for this Coindy.

Speaker 4 (20:54):
Yeah, I saw a great tweet about that. They said, well,
you probably shouldn't have brought the whole eye of Saurron
down on one a woman just because she didn't want
to go along with.

Speaker 3 (21:02):
This, exactly right. This may end up backfiring on those
who want to uphold gay marriage, which is, by the way,
in itself, actually an oxymoron. It's a phrase. It doesn't
make any sense the idea of marriage. That is, it
is only a God ordained institution between one man and
one woman for one lifetime, so two men cannot be

(21:23):
married too.

Speaker 4 (21:23):
It's also constitutional nonsense as well, because this has always
been a state issue. Marriage is always something conducted by
the states, not the federal government. So this has always
been silly. So we've seen the overturn of Roe v.

Speaker 9 (21:36):
Wade.

Speaker 3 (21:37):
Boy, if we see the overturn of Obergafelt too, that
could be absolutely incredible for our country and further proof that,
by God's grace, he has not done with us yet.

Speaker 5 (21:45):
Absolutely let it be.

Speaker 4 (21:46):
So let's see here anything I want to say. You
read that US layoffs if high since COVID nineteen. I
want to clarify about that because I kind of I
saw that, and actually what that mostly is is government layoffs.

Speaker 5 (21:57):
If you look at those numbers.

Speaker 4 (21:59):
It's almost all DOGE cuts there's some tech cuts as well,
because ironically, the people who are losing their jobs to
AI are the tech bros. So all those guys telling
you stop complaining about that you don't make money as
a plumber learned to code, Well, now they're having to
learn how to plumb because their machine has eaten their jobs.

Speaker 8 (22:17):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (22:17):
Yeah, that's exactly right, and interesting to see that so
many of those are government jobs as well. So uh, look, folks,
we've talked about this on the show before. Never want
to just fire from the hip condemned government jobs. There
are a lot of government jobs that are good and necessary.
I think there are also quite a few government jobs
that are unnecessary, and it seems like Doge has done

(22:40):
some pretty good work and getting rid of those.

Speaker 4 (22:42):
Especially when Doge has been finding people who were basically
just collecting paychecks. They actually had a whole other full
time job on the side, but no one in their
government job cared to check in on them to see
if they were actually working, so they were not even
working for the government. They were just mooching off of us.

Speaker 5 (22:58):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (22:58):
Yeah, absolutely interesting stuff all around there, folks, that's for sure. Hey,
I see several questions that we got in for Craig.
I love that, love to see that, so we'll try
to get those questions in for Craig. He's going to
be coming on for a live AG report in just
a couple of moments here now, so we'll get to
those if we have time for him. And of course,
by the way, folks, Stefan Padfield is going to join

(23:19):
me in the following segment as we'll talk about some
of the nefarious things that certain big corporations are doing
to continue to try to push these DEI programs. You're
not gonna want to miss that coming up on the
other side if you have to leave us, folks, So
if you have a great rest of the day today
for the rest of you stick around.

Speaker 5 (23:34):
More financial issues coming right out, folks.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
Appreciate you being here with us today.

Speaker 5 (24:08):
It's been an enjoyable.

Speaker 3 (24:09):
Time in the show so far. The chat is lively.
I hope you join us on the chat. The market's
just opened up as well. Wall Street is awake and
alive once again, and all three major indices are opening
the day strong positive territory for the Dow Jones and
the Nasdaq, both right around a half percent positive. The
SB five hundred is also nearing that right around two
fifths of a percent positive. As we've opened this morning,

(24:31):
oil around sixty three dollars a barrel, almost on the dot,
and the US ten year treasury yield percentage is four
and a quarter. So that's what we are looking like there,
four and a quarter percent for the ten year treasury.
All right, folks, special guest here, as always, Craig Halgard,
our faithful financial issues AG reporter, is on with me
once again.

Speaker 2 (24:49):
Craig, Welcome back, buddy. Thanks for joining me.

Speaker 9 (24:52):
Man, it is a pleasure to be here.

Speaker 6 (24:54):
Seth.

Speaker 9 (24:54):
I hope everything is well in your world, my friend, It's.

Speaker 3 (24:57):
Just got a lot better, Craig. Let's put it that
way now that I have you on the program. Great,
great to have you, buddy. As always, let's jump right
into it.

Speaker 5 (25:04):
Brother.

Speaker 3 (25:04):
You know, the story of the beginning of Trump's second
term from an agricultural perspective was the astronomical cost of eggs.

Speaker 9 (25:11):
Now.

Speaker 3 (25:11):
Of course, the revisionist historians will probably argue it was
Trump's fault. True historians will realize that there were some
things that the Biden administration did that didn't exactly help,
like butchering several hundred million chickens, But we won't get
into that. The question I have for you is have
these egg prices leveled out? And what I'm really asking
is can I once again enjoy a good farmer's omelet

(25:32):
in the morning without having to take out a second
mortgage on my home?

Speaker 9 (25:37):
But you seem to be well fortified today, so I'm
guessing that you were able to pull off the price
of eggs for bread. I hope so, and I'm happy
to hear that. I think probably the best way to
respond to that is I can tell you what's going
on on the farm level. Yeah, and that is in fact,
in the last week we've seen the price received by

(25:57):
farmers for a dozen eggs dropped by fifteen cents. We
do continue to see that that price decline at the
farm gate, and I'm assuming that it's going to get
passed through, uh to the consumer at some point as well.
So yeah, very very much a different story from where
we were at under under Joe Biden. A lot of

(26:17):
that was was driven by bird flowing at that thing,
but he also had some policies in place that were
were harmful to the consumers in general. So I think
the eggs that now seth you sound to me like
a man that may enjoy a few slabs of bacon
along with those.

Speaker 3 (26:35):
That I take that as an enormous compliment, by the way,
so thank you.

Speaker 9 (26:39):
Well, you know you're a scholar and gentleman, and that
always comes with bacon and eggs. So I took a
look at what was going on there. Now. In the
old days, we used to trade frozen pork belties, which
was basically just frozen support that you turned into bacon,
because it used to be that the bacon was more

(26:59):
of as no food and it was mainly consumed in
the summer and then, so you'd have to freeze a
lot of pork bellies to get you to the summer
af you're starting. In nineteen eighties, we kind of saw
some consumer behavior change and porks started to get eaten
more year round, so they no longer have pork belly futures. Unfortunately,
they stopped trading those in twenty eleven. So we do

(27:21):
have to look at what hog prices have done. And again,
as was the case with eggs, so is the case
with hogs. The price that the farmers receiving it at
the farm gate for a finished fat pig right now,
I is down. It's not about three dollars I guess
from a week ago numbers. So both your bacon and

(27:43):
your eggs should be, in theory, coming to you at
a reduced price from what you have been paying in
the past, yourself to the consumer.

Speaker 3 (27:53):
And then, yeah, have ever told you my theory that
I actually believe the marriage supper of the lamb could
be bacon and eggs.

Speaker 2 (28:00):
They're that good, They're there, They're that happening.

Speaker 9 (28:04):
It is amazing how you can take a pig and
grow basically candy on them. I mean aboute It is
incredible that that.

Speaker 3 (28:11):
Is awesome, No, Craig, that that's great stuff to get
to hear there, brother, Let let's let's move a slightly
different topic here. Yesterday we saw a major USDA report released. Uh,
I'd love for you to tell our listeners what exactly
this report is and why it matters for us.

Speaker 9 (28:28):
Well, I think the trulyest sounding thing was in corn.
And we'll talk about beans a little bit as well. Yeah,
but in corn they came out and everybody's we know
that we've had a good drawing season. We've been very
focused on on there's going to be a large crop,
but the magnitude of what they're projecting now was was

(28:49):
really quite astounding. I think they're projecting we're going to
have a national average yield of one hundred and eighty
eight point eight bushels per acre. I think the all
time record prior to this was one hundred and seventy
nine point three. And to kind of put that in perspective,
I graduated from high school I'll shoot fifty years ago
in nineteen seventy five, and in nineteen seventy five, the

(29:12):
national average yield for corn that year was eighty six
point four bushel's breaker. So we're going to be over
roughly one hundred over one hundred and two bushels breaker
more now than year I graduated, and that was a
very common yield back then. What has happened in agriculture
was unlocking the potential that God put in those scenes

(29:34):
is truly amazing. I mean, if we were back in
the yields we had in nineteen seventy five, we'd have
massive famine and starvation, not just across the world, but
probably here in the United States as well. It truly
is a miracle. I believe so they came out with
one hundred and eighty eight point eight national average yield.

(29:54):
They also raised the number of acres that they feel
are going to be harvests by one point nine million,
and that gives us a carry out of two point
one billion bushels of corn. Now, what a carry out
means is after we use up all the corn for
everything we can use it for, we feed livestock, we
export it, we make ethanol out of it, we do

(30:15):
every possible use you can think of to do with it.
Twelve months later, you still have two point one billion
bushels of it left over. A year ago, at this time,
we were at one point three billion bushell carry out.
So clearly, when you have a huge supply of corn
like that, it's probably negative to prices, but it also

(30:36):
offers some opportunity to farmers. If we've got listeners in
the audience, then maybe have done some pre selling when
we're at higher levels and have some futures prices locked in.
What the market now has to do is reward people
for storing it until they need it at a later date,
So we call that carry in the market. What we're

(30:57):
starting to see is if you have storage you have
evitor price and just keep rolling that price forward. The
market's going to pay you extra for hanging on to
it until they need it at a later date. Right now,
it's going to give you an extra fifty cents a
bushel to hold it from this December to next December.
And I think that number is going to get larger.

(31:17):
So for people that have on farm storage or for
commercial elevators like myself didn't know how to take advantage
of and capture that, there's a real opportunity there in
capturing carrying the market. The soybeans is the other piece
of the action, and we are projecting a new all
time record deal in soybeans as well, a fifty three
point six bushel's breaker. But what they did in soybeans

(31:40):
was actually reduced the number of acres that they say
we got planted this spring and that we will harvest
this fall. And that makes some sense. We had a
pretty wet spring across a lot of a lot of
the nation. Corn was a little later than normal getting in,
and soybeans usually get most areas plant that after corn,
and so I just I think we ran out of

(32:02):
time to get that crop in. So by reducing the
number of acres that are actually planted and we'll get harvested.
I actually saw the projected carry out drop a little
bit from three dared and thirty million bushels a year
ago down to twitter and ninety million bushels and in
yeser's report, and that was certainly seen as friendly to
the bean market. We were up pretty good yesterday. We'll

(32:24):
trade them out a dime higher on beans again today.
But as I looked at that and saw those projected
national average yields, it truly is a miracle what is
happening out here in these fields and in the mount
of grain that we're now producing.

Speaker 5 (32:40):
Greg, it's great stuff.

Speaker 3 (32:41):
Great stuff to get to hear that here, I think
we might have time to get to one listener question, Craig.

Speaker 2 (32:45):
So I'm gonna throw kind of a curveball at you here.

Speaker 3 (32:47):
Brian from Missouri is asking Craig, can you give your
opinion on cloud seating and the positive and negatives of it.
Brian's read some of those big storms in Texas how
they had some cloud seating prior to that. I've heard
some similar things, Craig, what are your thoughts on this?

Speaker 9 (33:02):
You know, I think that It's something that I've played with,
I believe since the nineteen forty said, Yeah, and if
I remember correctly, you're you're salting. Is the silver eye
eye crystals into those clouds? Yeah, and the silver eye
eye causes the water molecules to cling to it. I
guess my wife actually is a is a chemist and

(33:24):
he can explain this well way better than I. But
you get enough water molecules clinging to that silver eye
eye that it becomes heavy, it falls out of the
sky right and in the form of rain. And so
I think there is something to the seedium clouds that
generate generate rain. One of the big problems with it,

(33:47):
of course, is that we don't control where the cloud goes, right,
So you could see that, but you have no control
over where that rain is ultimately going to fall. And
also in those huge storm events like we had in Techxus,
I really don't personally believe that it can be generated
by by clothes seeing. I think that studies seem to

(34:11):
show that there might be a small advantage, but I
don't think it creates the kind of of all bursts
that we saw that led to such tragic consequences.

Speaker 5 (34:21):
Yeah, in Texas, absolutely.

Speaker 9 (34:23):
I think it's a very inexact science and still in development,
but I really don't believe it was responsible for the
deaths in Texas and the magnitude of that storm.

Speaker 3 (34:34):
You know, Craig, I really appreciate your insight on that one, brother,
because that was truthfully something and I might sound like
a conspiracy theorist with this, and people accuse me of
sounds like a conspiracy theorist a lot, but that was
something that I generally did wonder is something the fary
is going on with our government with that? But it
really does seem like it's just your classic example of
maybe our you know, government dabbling in things that they

(34:56):
can't really control and then there's consequences to it.

Speaker 2 (34:59):
But a lot of it is still things that we
can't control.

Speaker 3 (35:01):
Boy, Craig, we ran out of time, as always tends
to happen, so I'll have to pick up with some
of these topics on our next time, brother, But man,
I just appreciate you so much joining us man. Folks,
if you want to catch the AG Report every day
on financial issues, you got to tune in usually second
half of the show.

Speaker 5 (35:14):
You get to hear Craig's great wisdom.

Speaker 3 (35:16):
We'll be back with more financial issues coming up on
the other side of this break.

Speaker 10 (35:28):
The opinions and recommendations expressed on this program do not
necessarily represent the opinions of the station or any of
the program sponsors. Additionally, all products or services offered by
the program sponsors may not be known by the program.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
Great to be here with you, folks. We've got a
busy show today.

Speaker 3 (35:47):
It's been an enjoyable one, and we've got one more
guest upcoming here. Right now, I've got my friend Stefan Padfield.
Stefan' the executive director of the Free Enterprise Project at
the National Center for Public Policy Research. He and his
team they worked tirelessly to keep American corporate life free
from woke nonsense. That's right alongside the work that we're
trying to do here as well. So Stefan man, we

(36:09):
appreciate the work you guys do so much, and welcome
back to the show.

Speaker 6 (36:12):
Well, thanks so much for having me back, and thank
you for that wonderful introduction, and really appreciate the work
you are doing as well.

Speaker 5 (36:20):
Absolutely well, thank you. Brother.

Speaker 3 (36:22):
Hey, let's begin here with the letter that you sent
last week to Morgan Stanley, so you demanded some answers.
Apparently they're continuing the DEI nonsense, not really getting with
the program, it seems here, Stefan, what was the circumstance
surrounding this letter?

Speaker 6 (36:36):
Right? So the background was that I did an interview
and one of the issues was the companies that are
looking like they're walking back their commitments to illegal DEI
but in fact are just rebranding or otherwise hiding what
they're actually doing. And after that interview, I got an
email from a whistleblower who basically said, look, you should

(36:59):
look into more and Stanley. I work there. They're still
pushing this stuff. They still have, you know, a compensation
bonuses tied to you know, diversity factors. And so then
I took a moment to look into Morgan Stanley and
found a number of other concerning issues. I mean, just
one off the top of my head, and I can

(37:20):
pull a letter up and we can get into more detail.
But one I think that you and your viewers will
likely be interested in is, you know, Morgan Stanley is
a platinum partner of the Human Rights Campaign and they
you know, scored one hundred on that Corporate Equality Index,
which brings with it all sorts of concerns, everything from
you know, have you actually done your fiduciary duty and

(37:41):
determined whether you actually believe a person can be born
in the wrong body, or that you know a man
can become a woman simply by saying so all the
way to bias in terms of not filling out alliance
defending Freedom's viewpoint bias survey. Right. So there were seven
total questions, and again I can go through them in detail,

(38:02):
but that was the sort of gist of what we
were getting at. And I have received a reply. Just
yesterday I received a reply from Morgan Stanley, and it
was basically a very blanket response essentially boiling down to
we don't have quotas, which wasn't even a specific question
that we asked. And so I have followed up because

(38:24):
I think at this point these corporations know well enough
not to have express quotas, right. The problem is, are
they still in fact discriminating illegally through less obvious means
and raising other issues that would go into sort of
woke governance. And so I've replied and said, you know,
I appreciate the response. Sometimes you just get stiff armed
by these companies and ghosted, so the fact that they're

(38:46):
actually engaging at all is certainly to be Yeah, it's
a good sign. But I said, you know, it doesn't
look like you've actually answered any of our specific questions,
and you know said, look, you know, let us know
in a couple of days if you're interested in engaging further.
But if not, then we're going to have to look
into some other avenues because we do believe that these issues,
these questions are material to shareholders from a bottom line

(39:09):
perspective and broader perspectives.

Speaker 3 (39:11):
Yeah, you know, I think it would be great, Stefan
if you could actually give our listeners kind of a
taste of some of these specific issues you mentioned those
seven questions. What are some of the ways that you
really kind of specifically threw down the gauntlet.

Speaker 6 (39:24):
Sure, I'll walk through quickly and then we can pick
up on what specifically you want to get into. So
one is Morgan Stanley still has its commitment to diversity
and inclusion. And one of the issues that we've really
been pushing at the Free Enterprise Project is are you
actually checking the return on investment the ROI of those expenditures.
There's a lot of evidence to suggest that this whole

(39:46):
trope of diversity is good for business is not in
fact empirically supported, and in fact, if you push it
through a sort of forced demographic diversity, it actually can
undermine performance. So you would think one of the most
obvious things a business would do is to set up
a way to measure the ROI of its investments in
such a thing like diversity and inclusion. So we ask

(40:06):
what are you doing on that front? Are you getting
that data? Do you have it? Then the question about
does Morgan Stanley still count diversity as a factor in
awarding bonuses, which is not the same thing as do
you have quotas? Right, you cannot have quotas and still
counted as a factor, And that goes back to a
Wall Street Journal story that back in March that said
that that was still going on. There was a Republican

(40:29):
Attorney's General letter asking about these issues, and have really
found nothing in terms of a response, So we ask
what is Morgan Stanley's response to this letter. We reference
a couple of organizations that you and your viewers are
likely familiar with. So seventeen ninety two Exchange has rated
Morgan Stanley a high risk. We ask whether Morgan Stanley
has done anything to evaluate and address the concerns, because

(40:52):
those seventeen ninety two Exchange does a great job of
breaking out specifically why they rate the company a high risk.
Science Defending Freedom gives Morgan Stanley an eight percent on
its Viewpoint Diversity Score Business Index. So again we ask
has Morgan Stanley evaluate it and addressed the specific concerns
we have? The question about the Human Rights Campaign basically

(41:15):
a two part question. I'll just read it quickly. The
bottom line question one is has Morgan Stanley in fact
concluded that it agrees with the propositions that a child
can be born in the wrong body or that a
man can become a woman simply by saying so? And
I continue to advocate for the position that it is
a breach of duty because this is a business decision.
Right are you going to be a partner of HRC?

(41:37):
Are you going to respond to their survey? Those are
business decisions unless you're going to characterize them as charitable contributions,
which they haven't. So you should be making a fully
informed business decision, which would seem to include whether or
not you actually agree with the positions that HRC takes.
And then the second part is, will Morgan Stanley either
sever ties with HRC or at least demonstrate some ideological

(42:01):
balance by cooperating with ADF survey, right, That would be
a way to again show some viewpoint neutrality if you
want to engage in these surveys. And then finally, we
say that getting one hundred percent on the HRC's CEI
at least tease up the possibility of discrimination on the
basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. And we set

(42:21):
forth some legal cases, Supreme court cases that suggest that,
and so we ask simply, does Morgan Stanley agree with
our assessment and if not, why not? So that's essentially
a rundown of the seven questions, which again a blanket
response of we don't have quotas really doesn't get at any.

Speaker 3 (42:39):
Of those absolutely, and that's really what where I want
to go next here, Stefan, you have done your due diligence,
You followed up with them. Is there any hope that
they might follow up again or do you get the
sense that they're just trying to they see this as
kind of a nuisance, They're just trying to get out
of it.

Speaker 5 (42:54):
A little bit.

Speaker 2 (42:55):
What do you expect from them? Do you expect another
response back?

Speaker 6 (42:58):
I'm always hopeful, but my experience also suggests that one
needs to be prepared for everything from uh, you know,
ghosting to you know, basically non responses that that appear
to be responses. So I do continue to be hopeful.
I do think there is a vibe shift, if you will,
uh that even corporations that have not engaged in good

(43:21):
faith in the past or thought they could just stiff
arm conservatives are changing their tune. So time will tell.
I think if I had to bet on what the
response will be, I doubt they're going to give us
anything more than what they've responded with. And so, you know,
we take these issues seriously enough, you know, from a
shareholder bottom line perspective and and a free market liberty

(43:43):
perspective that you know, will continue to push. So whether
that be h you know, applying more sunlight through h
you know, publicity, might even be a books and records
request because we are a shareholder, so we can use
the court system to pursue more answers. But we'll keep pushing.
And again, I do sincerely hope we get to sit

(44:03):
down at the table, because we're coming at this from
a good faith basis, and all we're really looking for
at the end of the day is to move the needle.
Just move the needle back to neutrality. You don't need
to do everything you know that we might recommend in
a perfect world, but show us something that you're serious
about backing away from this. You know, woke insanity.

Speaker 3 (44:25):
You know right now, Stefan, we actually here at FISM
currently in the midst of a campaign where we're trying
to hold one of our former bylist companies accountable for
their misuse of investor funds. We have a petition on
going right now. I know you value this same work.
Let me ask you this as we close our time here.
Why is this work of keeping companies accountable so necessary?

Speaker 6 (44:47):
Well, it's particularly important right now because I think there's
been a sense in some quarters of the conservative movement
that somehow we've won. Right. We've gotten some great support
from the Trump administration. There's been some power full executive orders.
We've seen companies backtrack, right, there's been successes for the
past six months. The problem is that really on some

(45:08):
level we've just scratched the surface, and the leftists, these
woke activists who I think can fairly be described, at
least in part as neo racist, neo Marxists. They have
been embedded for a long time, and it is going
to take time, and it's going to take work, and
it's going to take continued vigilance to really root those

(45:28):
individuals out, expose them, and get these companies back to
the business of doing business. The thing that I find
so frustrating is that the goals that they say they want, right, equality, opportunity, unity, inclusion,
those are things that can be achieved, and I think
most of us, if not all of us, agree, are
worthwhile goals, but they're going about it in a way

(45:50):
that is completely neurotic. It's the exact opposite of getting there.
So the hope continues to be that we have real
fundamental change, but it's going to take continued vigilance, continued
at activity.

Speaker 5 (46:00):
Well, said Stefan.

Speaker 3 (46:02):
Where can our listeners find a copy of your letter
and follow your work?

Speaker 6 (46:06):
Sure, easiest thing to do is just go to Nationalcenter
dot org. I'm a part of the Free Enterprise Project.
We have all our press releases, all the links there
are easily available, and folks can also follow me on
x at Stefan Padfield.

Speaker 5 (46:20):
That's awesome, Stefan.

Speaker 3 (46:21):
We appreciate you so much brother, the work that you
do and also taking time out of your very busy
day to come join us and tell me and our
listeners what's going on.

Speaker 5 (46:28):
Thank you, Stefan.

Speaker 3 (46:29):
God bless you, Thank you, God bless you. Yeah, appreciate it, brother, folks.
That's Stefan Padfield. Boy, what a great time it was
on the show today. Grateful for each and every one
of you, and God willing we'll do it again tomorrow.
Until then, remember everything you have belongs to the Lord.
Let's be found good and faithful stewards with everything that
God has given to us. I'm Sethidinsky on behalf of
the studio, a team here at FISM. We appreciate each

(46:51):
of you, and God willing we'll see tomorrow and more.

Speaker 2 (46:53):
Financialations have a great dam.

Speaker 1 (47:08):
If we ever forget that we're one nation under God,
then we will