And now for some more Fatal Conceits…
Welcome to Episode #76 of the Fatal Conceits Podcast, dear listener, a show about money, markets, mobs and manias.
All eyes were on the Jay Powell’s Fed this week, specifically the chairman’s remarks following the much-expected 75-basis point rate hike.
Word was that the central bank will “continue to do what needs to be done to get the job done." Actually, they were JP’s exact words.
“The job” to which Mr. Powell refers is, of course, to get inflation back to the 2% range.
What does that mean for stocks and the dollar in the near term?
What does it spell for America’s already-toppy housing market, the pillar of middle-class wealth?
And how will gold respond? The Midas Metal popped more than $50 on Friday. (Silver was up even more, doubling gold’s advance in percentage terms.)
For answers and insights, I spoke with Bonner Private Research’s macro man, up in Laramie, Wyoming, Mr. Dan Denning. Over 45 mins or so, we covered all of the above, plus BPRs Trade of the Decade, the coming Winter Catastrophe, 2022 Redux, and why you should panic now (in an orderly fashion, of course) and beat the rush.
Please enjoy our conversation and, as always, like, comment and share our work with friends and family far and wide.
Cheers,
Joel Bowman
TRANSCRIPT:
Joel Bowman:
All right, well welcome back to another Fatal Conceits podcast, dear listener, a show about money markets, mobs and manias. If you have not already done so, please head over to our Substack page. You can find us at bonnerprivateresearch.substack.com with hundreds of daily articles now on everything from high finance to lowly politics and a ton of in-depth research reports, many of which were authored by none other than my guest today, Bonner Private Research's, macro man up in Laramie, Wyoming, Dan Denning. Dan, welcome to the show. How do you do, mate?
Dan Denning:
I'm doing all right. It's dark and cold and gloomy here in Laramie as winter approaches, but that's kind of how it feels like in markets right now, so I suppose that's appropriate.
Joel Bowman:
Yeah, exactly. We're talking off camera just now and you were firing off emails this morning at around 5:00 AM. I'm imagining it was still well below freezing at that point up there?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, it was supposed to snow this week, but it hasn't, which is good and it's been nice and sunny, but it has been something we've been paying attention to both behind the scenes and when we're writing to the readers, because as it gets colder in the US, we're dealing with this 32% drawdown in the strategic petroleum reserve and then these reports of impending or possible diesel shortages so you're kind of trying to separate what's fact from fake, I suppose, and go beyond what's in the news reports to see if it's actually impacting truckers and travel prices and things like that. So we, Bill, last year, penned a winter catastrophe and we had bad winter last year, but I think it could be worse this year and as you know, because you're organizing it, we're going to address that in early December.
Joel Bowman:
Yeah, that's December 13 for our readers, listeners and viewers, I guess now that we're doing this on YouTube, but I'll pop a link down below where you can get some more information about registering for that event. As you mentioned, Dan, we're doing a bit of behind the scenes work just to get that all organized. It's going to be the 2022 Winter Catastrophe Redux, which will be more well attended than our first one, given that it was the inaugural event and we had just a few hundred readers on that very first call with Byron King and Rick Rule, but yeah, as you mentioned, the second one looks to be shaping up to be quite the event. Of course, it's the kind of thing that you don't want to be right about, a coming winter catastrophe, but that looks like what's on the plate anyway.
So let's start at the beginning, Dan, because we're talking on Thursday the 3rd of November, and of course the big news this week was yesterday's Federal Reserve meeting where Powell & Co. hiked rates by the expected 75 basis points, but I guess it was what followed that hike that kind of got markets a little spooked. We saw a 500 or so point drop in the Dow after Mr. Powell's remarks yesterday. I'm just going to read a quick quote here from the Fed Chairman in which he says "The question of when to moderate the pace of increases is much less important than the question of how high and how long to keep monetary policy restrictive." He said, adding that "It was very premature to discuss when the Fed might pause its increases." Was this more or less in line with what you and Tom had expected and what does it mean for both stocks and the dollar in the near term in your view?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, I think the answer to the first question is definitely. The market, whether you use the future's market for interest rate expectations or you listen to the people that are quoted in mainstream media as analysts for the major banks or Wall Street firms, at the beginning of the year, they thought that the highest the Fed would go this year was 3.75% and we've been saying since the beginning of the year that it has to be much higher than that in order to bring inflation down from 8% to even 4%. A chart that we've shown repeatedly reveals that rate real interest rates, so interest rates adjusted for inflation, are still negative... and they're negative by a long way. So that would change if inflation halved from here, so the Fed wouldn't have to raise as high, but we've said that people consistently underestimate how high interest rates will have to go before inflation is under control and they probably underestimate the Fed's willingness to raise them that high.
So what you get is this mistake that we saw in the summer, and again, this mistake we've seen in the fall, where the market thinks the Fed is done raising interest rates, or will pivot to either raising them less fast or even cutting them, as some people had hoped, and so they bid up the price of especially growth stocks, risk assets as they say, and everybody gets super excited because they think the end is near. But as Powell said yesterday, it doesn't appear the end is anywhere close to being near. He said inflation hasn't come down since last year; that there will be no pause and that the so-called terminal rate or neutral rate, is at least 5%. So all that could change if the Fed issues a press release and has another press conference, but in terms of talking to the markets about where interest rates are headed, the message couldn't have been any clearer yesterday and I just don't know why people aren't listening to the Fed, so I think that's one reason Powell spoke so forcefully.
Joel Bowman:
It's a strange situation, isn't it, when we get strong inflation prints, for example, or when things in the market seem to be breaking, and investors take that as of reason to bid up stocks because they think then, okay, the Fed is now going to have to ease off because things are starting to break. Powell said yesterday that he is going to "continue to do what needs to be done to get the job done" and by getting the job done, he explicitly mentioned bringing the rate of inflation back to around the 2% range. You've written about this before and so have both of Bill and Tom, but what does that imply for a real rate? And in other words, how far does the Fed have to keep raising before it can get, as they say, ahead of the curve, do you think?
Dan Denning:
Well, if you look back to the '70s in a similar situation, where I think Powell is studying his playbook, you saw that the Fed prematurely cut interest rates when inflation began to come down and then inflation came roaring back, so from that point of view, they probably want to see whatever inflation target they have, whether it's 2% or 4%, which I think... I think it's more likely they'll raise their inflation target because it'll be harder to get it to 2%, but they'll want to see it there for a while and it appears now that the only way to do that, at least according to the Fed, is to sort of crush the economy into a recession, to destroy demand at the retail level because people don't have money, which means higher unemployment, none of which are great, but as long as the Fed sees that there's no disorderly action in the stock market...and more importantly, I think, in the credit markets, where higher interest rates don't precipitate a bankruptcy at the corporate level, like a high profile bank or a brokerage or a really highly leveraged financial player who could then spread contagion into the rest of the market. If that doesn't happen, the Fed is happy to either to continue to raise rates or, a possibility that people haven't considered, is just leave them at a high rate for much longer than expected, until they see inflation figures come down.
And a lot of people say, well, if there's a ceasefire in Ukraine, then the oil price will come down and energy is a huge component of the CPI... or if X happens, then inflation will come down... but I think what Powell has made clear, and the market isn't listening, is that they're going to wait to see that number come down and stay down before they decide to sound the all clear signal. And stocks just weren't priced for that. They were priced as if interest rates were at or near their peak. And that's just clearly not the case yet.
Joel Bowman:
What does this spell for the greenback, which is already at multi-decade highs in some cases against foreign currencies? What can we expect going forward there?
Dan Denning:
Well, it should get stronger, shouldn't it? I mean, the wider the interest rate differential between the US bond market and the Japanese bond market or the European bond market or other markets like Australia, then you'd expect the dollar to remain strong. I guess what that means is this weird feedback loop that, and it's what we saw this summer, is that the higher interest rates create big problems for leveraged borrowers, especially those in emerging markets, that have borrowed in dollars because now it's getting more expensive for them to pay back their dollar denominated debt. So it creates a demand for dollars to pay that debt back before it gets more expensive and also it creates a demand for other so-called safe dollar denominated assets. So if you look at, for example, the one year and two year US treasuries, a year ago, the yield on the one year US Treasury was barely above 1%. Now it's just below 5%.
So for foreign investors or large institutions and central banks looking to park cash in a strong currency that actually now has a respectable interest rate, that creates a demand for dollar denominated assets, which further distresses the price action in emerging markets and currencies that are under pressure so, not great, but I think what Powell has said as an echo of what US Treasury secretary John Connally said in the '70s, that the dollar is America's currency, but everybody else's problem.
This is a really important point Tom has made, which I think not a lot of people, I haven't really seen it made elsewhere, and it's underappreciated, is that in the context of everything that's happening in the world right now, geopolitically, if you view Russia and Saudi Arabia and OPEC using oil and energy as a weapon against the United States, and perhaps China too, using COVID lockdowns as a way to keep prices high for Chinese exports, the US counterpart to that is the dollar, the stronger the dollar is the more it mutes the effects of inflation on energy and imported products in the United States.
So Tom believes that the Fed is using the dollar as a financial weapon to counteract energy as a commodity weapon and in that sense, if Powell is acting both to bring inflation down, but to use the dollar as an economic weapon, then it could stay higher for longer than people expect. For US investors, the other implication, which we can talk about if you want, is what that means for gold because there's been some interesting things that happened this week in the gold market that we need to pay attention to.
Joel Bowman:
Well, let's talk about that then, because a lot of people, particularly our readers, most of whom I would say are in the US, they've been adhering to what was Richard Russell's old mantra was, and one that both you and Tom have echoed of late, which is "cash now gold later" and they've been looking at the price action in gold, which has been more or less range bound in dollar terms but as we've been talking about, the dollar is of course at historic highs right now, but viewed in terms of other currencies, Aussie dollar, pound, euro, et cetera, we see slightly different story. Where do you see us as on the "now-to-later" curve with regards to cash now gold later?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, that's a great question and we take it up. In fact, we decided to change the format a little bit for the subscribers, the paid subscribers. We had intended, at the beginning of the year, to review them quarterly because that's about the appropriate amount of time to review the performance and then decide if a change needs to be made, but because we've got so many new readers who are not familiar with that strategy, or only read about it in February, we've decided to revisit that every month in the monthly strategy report. So for paying subscribers, they can take some comfort that this discussion is now a more regular discussion because it needs to be a more regular discussion.
But with respect to what we said at the beginning of the year, we said, no bonds, lots of cash, lots of gold, less real estate and that turned out to be pretty spot on, which is great, but the question is, what now? So I think what you're seeing with the higher government bond interest rates one year, two year, 10 year, really most of the US yield curve is now above 4%. That makes annuities and fixed income products slightly more interesting to investors than they were a year ago, and certainly more interesting relative to stocks because if stocks look like they could go down another 20% or 30%, then putting short term cash in a money market fund or a CD or a Treasury I bond that has a respectable yield is now a lot more attractive to people. We think gold is doing exactly what it's supposed to do, which is preserve your purchasing power, so if you look on a year-to-date basis, gold's down 11%, which is about the same as the Dow, but that's after the Dow rallied almost 15% from its lows in October.
So now that this Fed pivot is not going to materialize, I would expect probably the Dow, the S&P 500 and certainly the Nasdaq to close or to go lower, whereas gold is pretty much staying where it's at. So on a relative basis, we think gold is doing what it should do for you in your asset allocation strategy, which is do better than everything else. And of course, the Nasdaq's down actually 32% and the S&P's down about 20% so I wouldn't be surprised to see gold outperform at least this month and probably through the end of the year. And you see that two interesting things have happened in the price action with gold. One, retail investors have kind of gotten frustrated because gold hasn't gone up and inflation's 8% and they're like, what good is gold if inflation's 8% and I'm not making more money?
And our answer is you're not trying to make money in dollar terms with gold, you're trying not to lose money, and we'd like to be doing better, but it's better alternative than sticking money in the bond market or increasing our allocation to stocks. The interesting thing that happened in the third quarter is that according to the World Gold Council, which keeps track of these things, central banks added more gold than they ever have before in any quarter in the history of data from that organization. They had a 399 tons of gold and don't know exactly who the buyers were, but we think it's probably the usual suspects so China, which doesn't always report, Russia, which has an obvious interest in diversifying its currency service, and then some of the oil and gas exporters who've been making money hand over fist have been converting it to gold.
So on the one hand, retail investors kind of sitting on their hands lamenting the price action, and on the other hand, this huge quarterly surge in central bank gold buying and in fact, the year-to-date buying by central banks through the first three quarters is already greater than any year in the last 20 years so you can see that this financial war about hard assets versus the dollar, you can see what's going on in the background. So I like that price, I like that piece of data because it confirms to me that at the bottom of this leveraged pyramid of financial assets sits gold, and in any private portfolio, you ought to have some portion of your wealth safely stored in that and for the long term, just ignore the week-to-week, day-to-day price fluctuations because they really shouldn't matter that much.
Joel Bowman:
Yeah, interesting. It's almost like what our good friend Chris Mayer talks about, having skin in the game and inside knowledge into the operations of a particular company. One wonders, do central banks know something that the rest of the world or the rest of the investors don't know when they're, as you say, hoarding record amounts of gold at this moment? But with respect to stocks, which you mentioned just then, and of course they are still down considerably for the year, but not as much as they were just a month ago, October was, if I'm not mistaken, I think the best month ever for stocks, or certainly for a very, very long time, you'll have the exact stat there.
When you and Tom and Bill talk about a significant drawdown in stock markets, you toss around some pretty big numbers. We saw, obviously last week, a lot of earnings reports between Amazon, Meta and Microsoft, something like 350 billion worth of market cap was wiped out after some pretty shoddy reports and grim forecast for the rest of the year. I think only Apple is the last man standing there in the Dow. For how long can we expect this to hold up and what's our outlook for Q4 for stocks?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, that's a great question. I mean, Bill Bonner, our founder and patron saint, during his sabbatical he made a great point which he's been making for a long time, that the last 20 years and really since 1982, if you want to go all the way back that far, since 1982, the stock market's been underpinned by three pro-growth, structural features, cheap energy, low interest rates, and the lower and cheaper cost of global labor, which is really China since it came into the world economy in 2000 when it entered formally into the World Trade Organization. All have been really favorable for high GDP growth but what hasn't happened is you haven't seen high productivity growth. What you have seen happen is high growth in the multiples, people are willing to pay for growth stocks and at the forefront of growth stocks were the technology stocks from 2000 to now.
And the earnings numbers weren't terrible in terms of the amount of revenue generated by these companies, it's an impressive amount, but what's notable in all other cases is the rate of growth has slowed markedly, particularly in advertising for Facebook or Meta and for Google, but also in the cloud. Cloud computing, which for Amazon is particularly important because the cloud is the only business segment that runs at an operating profit. It pays for the rest of the retail business and if the cloud business is growing less quickly, then it supports the thesis that the leading sector of the market for the last 10 years, the tech sector, will not be the leading sector of the market for the next 10 years because the growth phase underpinned by those three things is over. That's not a cyclical change in the market. That's what we call a secular change, a long term change.
And that's why our forecasts for the indexes are not a 20 to 25% bear market and then back to business as usual, it's a 40 to 50% decline in the indexes with a 60 to 80% decline in the most leveraged and aggressive growth investments, which we've already kind of seen with Arrk Innovation Fund and Spotify and Netflix and Snap and some of these other tech companies. So our whole premise since we started last year, as you know, is to prevent a big draw down and loss in your retirement savings during this transition from the high growth phase to whatever comes next.
So everyone's like, great, great, yep, it's over now though, right? So 25% down we can get back to business. And what we've said is this is not business as usual, this is a new era, as they used to say in the early 2000s, but it's an era where all the fundamental pillars that uphold the stock markets prices are changing. So it's not all bad news because for example, we think energy is going to be the big winner in the next 10 years, which is why we made it the trade of the decade and if you look at some of the best performing stocks this year in the Dow, one of them is Chevron. Exxon would be, but it's not in the Dow anymore because-
Joel Bowman:
It got booted.
Dan Denning:
... right, for Salesforce. So there are these little pillars of light, a thousand points of light or a dozen points of light as George Bush might say. So we're still looking, but I think Tom's strategy is the correct one that you have to be really opportunistic and tactical and to echo Chris Mayer's point, you take your chances when you see a good business opportunity or a good trading opportunity, but from a strategic point of view, when it's a bear market, you don't want to own too many stocks and so we continue to be underweight stocks compared to what you would get in a more mainstream, institutional portfolio and that won't change anytime soon.
Joel Bowman:
So let's then I guess move on from the last 10 years of growth, growth, growth and which, as you said, seems to be coming to a fairly cataclysmic end and something that you mentioned just there, our trade of the decade, which is essentially long conventional oil and gas, we have a specific proxy trade for that, but the convergence of those three enormous macro trends that Bill has underlined for us, the end of cheap and abundant energy, the end of cheap and abundant credit, and the end of cheap and abundant labor, all for various reasons, including the weaponization of all three by various geopolitical players around the world right now, really sets a kind of perfect storm to use an overused metaphor for energy going forward.
When I spoke to our mutual friend, Doug Casey on this podcast just a few weeks ago, maybe a month or so ago, he brought up the oft overlooked statistic that if you go back to the seventies, which a lot of people are talking about now for very obvious reasons, high inflation, et cetera, et cetera, the oil and gas producers and explorers made up something like 30% of the market cap of the S&P 500, that's down to about 3% last year, it may have inched up with some strong performance in that sector and of obvious selloffs in others this year so maybe up around 5%, but it's a long way from its historic high and it's a long way from the kind of CapEx and R&D investments that you would expect to power a 21st century economy, which is largely or if not entirely built on the fossil fuel revolution.
So do you maybe just want to catch us up on where we are on the trade of the decade thus far, and any catalysts that you see in the near to medium term that might be getting us to where we think we're going to be headed?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, great question. We're still really early in a decade which is an arbitrary time so it's not like we think that it'll be exactly 10 years, but Bill has made a couple of these trades since the millennium, since 2000. And some of it's based on just sector performance. So it's a little bit like The Dogs of the Dow strategy that you buy the worst performing Dow stocks at the end of the year, they're going to be the best performing stocks and not everybody, the data backs that up mostly, although some people say that in a bull market you just keep buying the best performing stocks, that you buy momentum, you don't try to buy value or a beaten down value because then you get caught into value trap. But what we'd looked at when we went into the trade was that energy was historically small as a percentage of the S&P market cap.
It had its worst 10 years of any of the 11 sectors in the S&P and that because of regulation and the energy transition and the anti-fossil fuel narrative from both Wall Street and Washington, that the companies had decided, okay, fine, we won't invest in oil and gas if you're coming after our business, it doesn't make sense to. So all of those had set up for a big, big turnaround in the performance of the oil and gas sector. That's only just started to happen. I mean, on a financial basis it's definitely started to happen because of high oil and gas prices but in terms of investment flows, institutional money going into oil and gas, that's still complicated by the ESG policies of a lot of the pension funds and other funds like BlackRock and Vanguard about whether they're going to commit to investing in companies that might bring oil and gas online.
So we don't really care about any of that because we think at the end of the day, 82% of the world's energy still comes from fossil fuels. It's unchanged in the last 30 years despite the growth of renewables. It's exactly the same really so we think that it'll be that way for a while and that even if there is an energy transition toward more electric vehicles or toward maybe more natural gas fired plants rather than coal, that it's going to take a lot of fossil fuels to fuel that transition, to manufacture everything you need to have an energy economy that's based on electricity. And we see stories about, well, there's going to be an OPEC of lithium and electric car battery technologies getting better and better. Great, no problem. Maybe that's true. But in the meantime, just look at the free cash flows being generated by major oil and gas producers.
They're great. And the big risk to us right now is that the rate hikes by the Fed trigger not just the mild recession, but a massive recession which destroys demand for energy and brings prices down, which would lead to a correction in the stock prices of those producers, but over 10 years, not something we're too worried about given the other trends so if you're entering the trade and we write about this on a weekly basis, you just look for weakness in the particular investment that we recommended. And by weakness, I mean it trades below a moving average or it's relative strength indicator, which is a technical indicator under 30.
That's not happening right now, but it is something we update readers on who are new to the research, who like the idea, who believe in the thesis and who want to enter the trade so we may have another opportunity to enter the trade before the end of the year, but again, over the 10 years, we think the big factors that are pushing oil and gas prices higher should be very favorable to the free cash flows of those producers and it should trounce any of that other crap in the EV space. That's what we think.
Joel Bowman:
I'll have to get that last sentence as a pullout quote for the transcript here, Dan. This I guess brings us full circle to the winter catastrophe that we opened the conversation with at the top, and something that you and I have been looking at in particular lately. You mentioned the diesel or distillate shortage in the United States. I had a look at a couple of figures the other day writing under a guest column by our good friend Byron King and I think the situation is, I mean, as you said, it's difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff with regards to what's a little overblown and what is cause for concern but a report out by the Energy Information Agency has the US reserves at something like a 50 year low. Actually, it was even further than that, it went back to I think 1951 when the population of the United States was a mere 150 million beating hearts.
It's obviously more than double that now. Officially, it's something like 332 million and obviously probably a lot higher than that. Added to that, not just a more than doubling of the population, but we obviously have a more modernized economy. We have ACs in every other room, we have, you know, if you plug in your Tesla in, that doesn't go to a windmill or a solar farm, that's going to an electrical grid that demands real fuel and I think one other point, just to add very quickly, is the other parts of the supply chains that tend to break down when you have an industrial fuel like diesel that is in short supply.
So the number of commercial vehicles, this is trucks that freight your goods, your medical supplies, that stock your shelves at your local grocery store. 76% of these commercial vehicles operate on diesel fuel and they deliver 70% of the freight tonnage around the country from sea to shining sea. So is this something that people should be particularly concerned about? I mean is it going to be an acute problem in the near future, or is there's something that's just going to see a bit of a price spike and hopefully we'll have some mild weather and we'll see you on the other side?
Dan Denning:
Yeah, it's an important question because it's not simply a financial question, it's what level of preparation is it reasonable for you to take given the risk that there's an interruption to our supply of diesel fuel, which translates into things not being on the shelves in the store, whether that's medicine or food, or whether it's fuel at the pump for your own vehicles. So we don't want to be blase about what the risk is, or we don't want to exaggerate it either. The truth is, the refining capacity of US refineries has been pretty much maxed out all year so even if we were releasing more oil or could release more oil from the strategic petroleum reserve, we couldn't turn it all into distillate fuels and we couldn't get it all into the pumps and that's assuming we're not exporting some of it, which we are, whether it's crude oil or whether it's distillate fuels.
So the refining bottleneck is a major issue and part of the problem when you run your refineries at 90% of capacity or 95% of capacity for months on end, as things start to break down and when they do, then you have even less product coming online so that's a real thing to keep your eye on and it's already started to happen. But as to the level of preparation you need to take, I'd be prudent. I think if you, like I grew up in a big family and we always had extra food even though people were eating it all the time, it was hard to keep extra food ready to go but we don't associate life in... Most Americans, or most people watching this probably don't associate life in the 21st century with the idea of having to prepare for much higher food prices or an actual shortage of food.
I mean, you can call DoorDash or Uber right now, and they will deliver cheap calories to your door running on fuel so we don't have bread rights yet but I think one thing we've learned in the last two years from COVID, and really from the response to COVID by shutting down the global supply chain, is how short and fragile the just in time supply chain is, and how long it takes to recover once government has mangled it up. So you'd be foolish to look at what's happened in the last two years and not take some sensible level of preparation for both your food and fuel supplies. And I think that's as an important investment decision as you can make this winter as whether you buy the Dow or whether Apple is going to hold up. By the way, you asked about that, and I didn't mention it, but I will finish with that.
Apple has held up really well. It hasn't made its lows from June, I think, which was around 139 and I think it's a great litmus test for how long this market can hold up because anybody who manages money has to own Apple for whatever reason, because it's a great company, because it's performed so well and to me, it's like a fortress stock that everyone flees behind the gates and they lower the drawbridge or they raise the drawbridge and everyone hides in Apple because of its liquidity, because it's widely owned, because it's a quality stock. So when Apple gives up the ghost and makes a new low, then we'll start talking about whether the market has made a low. But until that happens, I think you shouldn't try to time the bottom of the market. You should probably try to fill up the bottom of your freezer with some frozen beef and chicken and things that you can cook later and then step away.
The trends we're talking about, we think will take years. And so from week-to-week and month-to-month, they don't require a lot of buying and selling. You just have to get the strategy right and I think right now we feel pretty comfortable with where it's at, but things can change quickly. As we saw with the Fed's announcement. If the Fed came out and pivoted because of data, then you could see another, you know, you could see a lot of volatility in stock prices but we don't think that changes the overall primary trend in markets.
Joel Bowman:
All right, thanks, Dan. You guys are doing a great job there. Just once again, please head over to bonnerprivateresearch.substack.com. Readers, listeners, and viewers will be able to get all of Dan, Tom and Bill's writings on all of the above subjects and plenty more and I guess the takeaway here is panic, but in an orderly fashion and see if you can't beat the rush.
Dan, thanks for joining us from your fortress of solitude up there in Laramie. We'll catch you again soon.
Dan Denning:
Okay. Thanks, Joel.
Dan Denning on The Fed's Dilemma