The MeidasTouch Podcast - Justin Wolfers Discusses Trump’s Long-term Economic Damage

Episode Date: January 25, 2026

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump getting thrown under the bus by JD Vance who admits that Donald Trump has not been able to quickly turn around the economy and Meiselas speaks with University of Michigan Professor Justin Wolfers about the long term damage Donald Trump is doing to the economy. Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump was thrown under the bus by his own vice president, J.D. Vance, who shined a massive spotlight on just how disastrous Donald Trump's presidency is. So J.D. Vance took a tour across the country this past week purportedly to defend Donald Trump's economic policies that are an utter disaster to defend Donald Trump sending ICE and Border Patrol Gestapo to terrorize people in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and across this country. And then J.D. Vance took part in a March for Life event where he talked about completely banning women's access to reproductive rights. And it just made the country even more livid and pissed at Donald Trump and J.D. Vance than they already were. Heck, even Laura Lumer, one of Donald Trump's biggest cheerleaders,

said, why is the GOP and J.D. Vance pushing more abortion messaging in a midterm election here? Didn't they learn their lesson from 2018? Trump doesn't like when the GOP focuses on abortion. How many times does he have to say this? Trump gets it. The GOP will blow the midterms to which J.D. Vance responds. The president literally sent a video to the March for Life today

and encouraged me to accept their invitation, which I was happy to do. And then Laura Lumer kept on attacking J.D. Vance and all of these other MAGA people kept attacking J.D. Vance. But earlier in the week, J.D. Vance visited Toledo, Ohio, and then Minneapolis. When he was in Toledo, his message on the economy is, the economy is just like the Titanic. J.D. Vance. And, hmm, I wonder what happened with the Titanic, J.D. says you can't just turn around the Titanic overnight. So I got it, J.D. The American economy is like the Titanic. That's your messaging going into the midterm. watch J.D. throw Donald Trump under the bus right here.

Let's play this clip. This is something I want you to hear. The Democrats talk a lot about the affordability crisis in the United States of America. And yes, there is an affordability crisis, one created by Joe Biden's policies. You don't turn the Titanic around overnight. It takes time to fix what was broken. I said earlier that the... And then when J.D. was speaking at the March 4 Life event as it's called,

J.D. Vance kind of repeated that message and said the elephant in the room is that many of you think we're not doing things quick enough. Watch J.D. say that here as well. Play this clip. Now, I must address an elephant in the room, and I've heard the guy over here talking about it. A fear, a fear that some of you have that not enough progress has been made, that not enough has happened in the political arena, that we're not going fast enough. that our politics have failed to answer the clarion call to life that this march represents and that all of us, I believe, hold in our hearts. And I want you to know that I hear you and that I understand. There will inevitably be debates within this movement.

We love each other, but we're going to have open conversations about how best to use our political system to advance life, how prudential we must be and the cause of advancing human life. I think these are good, honest, and natural debates. And frankly, they're not just good for all of you. They help keep people like me honest. And that's an important thing.

And then when J.D. Vance was in Minnesota, he said, if we're trying to find sex offenders here with ICE and Border Patrol, why don't you just help us? J.D. Vance says, can you just tell us where the guy lives, where the petto is, where the sex offender is, where the person covering up child sex trafficking is? to which everybody responded to JD and said, you may want to check in, you know, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

You may want to check out that area. You may just want to try JD, just an opinion, and see what's up. Watch JD say that. And again, this was just so utterly disastrous for Donald here, play this clip. The specific types of cooperation that we need. Look, I don't need Tim Walz or Jacob Frey or anybody else to come out and say that they agree with J.D. Vance or Donald Trump on immigration.

I just don't need that. What I do need them to do is empower, their local officials to help our local or help our federal officials out in a way where this can be a little bit less chaotic and it can be a little bit more targeted. Like if we're trying to find a sex offender, tell us where the guy lives. Now, as J.D. Vance was saying all of that, many people were reminded that J.D. Vance during one of his previous iterations of his personality, hated Donald Trump. And when J.D. Vance tried to pretend that he's the man of Appalachia who hates Donald Trump and he compared Donald Trump to Hitler back in the day.

And when J.D. Vance was an anti-Trump guy, J.D. Vance said that Donald Trump is a bad candidate and, frankly, a really bad person. Play this clip. And so one of the takeaways is not just that the Republican Party base is somehow fundamentally flawed in a way that's unique in American political history. It's that Trump is a really bad candidate. frankly, I think a really bad person. But about the Titanic reference, J.D. When you said that it's like a ship the economy

and it's very hard to turn things around, lots of people including our editorial team here at the Midas Touch Network were surfacing clips of Donald Trump where in the past 12 months, Donald Trump promise that energy bills, that our home energy prices would go down by 50% within a year.

Here play this clip. Trump economic plan, we will cut your energy prices in half within market down. And you can get very angry at me if we don't do it. Within 12 months, your energy prices will be cut in half. My plan will cut energy prices in half or more than that within 12 months of taking office. Number one, your energy bill within 12 months will be cut in half. And that's my pledge all over the country beyond farmers. That's my pledge all over the country. If you vote for me, I will cut your energy and electricity prices at half within 12 months. We're going to cut them down on it. And then Maga sycophant, this weirdo maga politician, Troy Nels, who wears like Trump shirts and like weird Trump American flag

bow ties when he's on Capitol Hill. Just take a look at this guy, by the way. Our reporter on the Hill, Pablo Monriquez, caught up with Troy Nels. And we just wanted to get the perspective, you know, know of all this and which is, you know, Donald Trump promised, we heard those clips right there that he would reduce energy prices by 50%. Troy Nels, you're a maga sycophant. What do you make of it? Troy, watch Troy's response. It's so utterly embarrassing play this clip. Donald Trump said that he would lower the cost of energy by 50% in his first 12 months. What was your message for Americans are seeing their energy prices go up? Well, energy. I mean, there are several things of energy. You got energy, got gas and everything.

gas prices are down. Other things are down, but we have a very unstable. The entire globe, there's a lot of instability, obviously with Venezuela, with oil, this and that. There's a lot of fluctuations with all that. So I think Donald Trump just give him time, give that man time to continue to lead. And if Congress will follow that lead, you will see energy prices reduced by 50%. There's no question about it, because Donald Trump is right all the time. But on the topic of the disastrous Trump economy and not just the short-term damage, but the long-term damage it is causing. I want to bring in someone that I admire and someone who I'm sure you admire as well. Justin Wolfers, Professor over at University of Michigan, Professor of Economics.

Let's bring in Professor Wolfers. I want to have a conversation with him about Donald Trump's disastrous economy and how we should be thinking about. this right now as well let's bring in professor wolfers professor wilfers great to see you mate i'll go by justin fit good to see you then justin good to see you then just unless you want to go by professor miss how do i pronounce it my my cell is just depends how i'm feeling i prefer to go by ben though but justin let's get let's get into it so this past week we saw yet another kind of fake deal announced by donald trump he goes to davos he confuses greenland with iceland he says we need to acquire it later on in the day, he announces, we've done this great deal.

And we did it with NATO, apparently Denmark, Greenland or Mark Rudd of NATO, don't know anything about it. Trump says it's infinite. It's amazing. It's so great. You learn that nobody knows any details of this thing. There's no deal at all. He made it all up.

The market tanks, the market rises. We've seen this pattern before you've documented. Let's just start this week. And then we'll pan out a little bit. What an amazing 11 years the last week has been. So I think we might have begun the week with some of the fallout from Trump threatening to jail the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. We went to the Supreme Court and we saw Trump's attempt to fire Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve Board. We are still waiting for the Supreme Court to come down on deciding whether the tariffs are constitutional or not.

not and so in the final couple of minutes while they're waiting to find out if their constitutional Trump threatens eight European nations with tariffs of 10% rising to 25% if they don't hand over an independent territory. Trump flies to Davos and gives a what I can as far as I can tell is a plane breaks down first it gives a campaign rally speech which is rather odd because I don't think he's meant to run for election again. He's certainly not running for anything in Switzerland. There was a long, rambling, incoherent speech, which, if anything, just shows disrespect to our allies, to the businesses there, to the leaders that are there. He arrives and says, I'm not going

to bomb Greenland. Not bombing Greenland is enough to cause markets to rise and sentiment to rise. I think it was on the Friday. It was all the way back to last race. It's been seven days. Friday or maybe Saturday. It was Saturday when he said that he was going to impose the brand new tariffs on Greenland. And so it took all of four days for him then to decide, well, actually, I'm not going to do anything with the tariffs. So what he managed to do was cause a stock market selloff as the world reacted to the possibility that the next round of the trade war was starting. And then he managed to cause markets to rise. by just not doing that. And if I sound a little exhausted now, I am. And if your audience is feeling sick and tired of this carnival show, you ought to be. Sometimes though I think we're going to learn the most if we press pause, stand back and try and put everything that we just talked about in a deeper perspective.

Let's do you guide me on that, Ben. Let's do that because the cycle that we've seen now, over a year. I think the first threat was against Colombia and then he backed down. People forget it. I think it was actually Colombia over a year ago. Then it was Canada and Mexico. Then he did it with China. And then you had what he called Liberation Day, which was liquidation day, the markets tank there. Then he would just kind of oscillate with that over and over again. You see that same pattern and he'd pick on kind of random countries. The biggest drop was that after liberation liquidation day. And we could talk about the difference. Sometimes people call it like a K-shaped

economy because the rich get richer, everybody else gets screwed. And while the markets have gone frantic, but have trended at least to help wealthier people, the impacts have been felt. The tariffs have been felt by consumers. There's some people are saying it's either a jobless recession, but unemployment is up and people are struggling to find jobs. Things are far more expensive. People struggle to pay their rent, you know, and you have this, you know, Trump points to the markets, the markets, the markets, and the people are saying, what about me?

I'm left behind in all of this. And there is that, that case shaped element. Can you talk us through that? So much there. Let me trying to figure which part of that to start by biting off. Let me tell you the distinguishing feature of this business cycle. Normally, the economy churns along and some good things are happening and some bad things are happening. Some sectors are expanding, some are contracting, and that's what a normal economy looks like. And sometimes we have recessions, and that's usually because something bad and unexpected happens.

There's a financial crisis, there's a global pandemic, there's a war, there's big movements in global oil markets. What's so annoying, frustrating, disappointing and different about this is this might be the first ever economic downturn caused by incompetence. It's actually rare for a US, you know, often the role of economists when we talk about ongoing political dramas is to remind people that the White House doesn't control everything in their lives. The president's not accountable for everything. Sometimes economies have lives of their own. That's not a story that any economist is telling right now. So there's the immense uncertainty that

people feel. Now, we all feel in very different ways. If you're running a business right now, you don't know what the rules are going to be tomorrow. You don't know whether you'll be able to import the goods that you need as inputs. You don't know whether you'll be able to find foreign markets for the goods that you're producing. You don't know whether the workers you've been relying on are going to be there tomorrow. You don't know, for instance, I teach you to university,

whether we'll be able to get our students in across the border. And if they can't get across the border, we can't take their tuition. You don't know whether your company is going to get called out in the late night Truth Social Post for, for being too woke, not woke enough. You don't know whether you're going to end up the way the CEO of Intel did, of walking into the White House for a meeting and walking out,

having accidentally left 10% of his company down the back of the White House couch. You don't know what the rules and regulations are going to be tomorrow. You don't know who's even going to be staffing the government departments that you have to work with. And so there's this just immense uncertainty out there. But uncertainty is one thing we can even live with that. but the problem is often the choices, often when we see, well, here's something that's happening, I can think to myself, well, a rational government would do this, and this will give me a way of thinking about the future. But that's not what's happening. There is no way it serves America's

interests for the president to rip up a trade agreement on a Friday, which is what he did last Friday. He told the Europeans, we have a trade agreement, but I'm just going to add 10 to 25% tariffs on top because I'm upset about Greenland, there's no way it's in America's best interest to rip it up on a Friday and then restore it on a Thursday. That cannot possibly serve America's interests. It makes it harder for us to do business with anyone else. It makes it harder for future promises to be believed. It actually reduces the leverage of the United States. Because if you can't credibly commit to something, then no one will want to commit to anything with you. Look, if I would, to be glib about this, I'd say that if you had had many, many, many failed

marriages because each of them involved cheating on your marriage vows, it's going to be hard for you to find the next wife because she's not going to believe you. And in some sense, that's where we are with trading partners right now. And how do we even get accurate data that's out there? Because you have Trump posting all of these different things that are inaccurate. We know he fired the Bureau of Labor Statistics, former chief for accurately reporting on data. I believe that it's like 40% of the consumer price index is now based on estimates. It's not staffed enough to actually ingest the right amount of data of even making these determinations. And I say this because I don't like veering down conspiratorial lanes, even when we hear 2.7% inflation, which is way above the Fed's target.

had Donald Trump did nothing, we would be far less than that 2.7% inflation. But when I go to a store, everybody's own view of it is like, that towel used to cost $6 and now it's $15. And now it doesn't feel like it's only 2% year over year. But again, I don't like veering down into those areas. But how do we know we're getting accurate info right now? Ben, I appreciate the question. I think it's actually a particularly important question for us to look the viewers in the eye and tell our audience exactly what's going on out there.

And it's really hard because it used to be a very simple question to ask, which it used to be that anything that comes out of the federal government has been fact checked and is true. Even if it was spin, say for instance in a former president's state of the union address, it would be spin, but it would still be true. And so we would always say the facts are true, the context you might need to think about.

We're now in a much trickier world. And so I think it's really important to distinguish between who different facts are coming from and the quality of different claims. So the first thing that's completely obvious is almost everything that comes out of the White House is a lie. If it's true, it's a mere accident. So that means if something comes out of the president's mouth, it's almost certainly untrue. If it comes out of the Treasury Secretary's mouth, it may well be untrue.

If it comes out of the Commerce Secretary's mouth, just go and run away and stop listening to him. If it comes out of the press secretary's mouth, she's a relentless liar. So anyone inside the White House, just forget it. Separately, there's our economic statistics. Our economic statistics are compiled by independent or independent-ish agencies, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau. These are totally serious statisticians who are doing the best they can with the resources they can.

Nothing that comes out of those organizations is a lie still. And I think it's really important, as much as we might worry about the statistics, none of it's a political lie. Having said that, that doesn't mean there are always the truth, which is to say any statistic is an estimate. It's a best guess using a specific methodology. And at different times and places, those methodologies can be stronger or weaker. We never know the truth because in order to know, for instance, the truth of total income earned in America, We'd have to talk to every American and find out how much income they've earned. We don't do that, right?

We have to ask people. Did we ask the right subset? Did they tell the truth? Were they thinking about pre-tax or post-tax? All sorts of things go on. Statistical sausage is really quite complex. So even though these numbers are the truth, they are open to critique. Now, here's where I really want to be careful.

They're almost always, because we're blessed by extraordinarily good statisticians in the United States, they're almost always the best possible guess. So you might have other ways of guessing, estimating what's going on, but these guys are very, very sophisticated. So they're almost always the best, but the best doesn't mean perfect. To give you an example, we estimate non-farm payrolls. It makes big headlines once a month. It's one of the most important economic indicators.

The way they do that is they call a bunch of companies and they say how many people are hiring right now. Now you might think, well, that's pretty easy. How could that go wrong? Well, the question is when they call, say, a thousand, companies, did they just call one one thousandth of all companies in the United States or one two thousand. In order to know that, you'd have to know how many companies there were. And the problem with that is every day there are new companies being born and there's old companies

dying and they never reports the government exactly what it is they're doing. And so the statistics it turns out have been overstating the extent of job growth because of the difficulties in trying to figure out how many companies have been born and dying. So the numbers are honest but contestable. Let me come back to the one that you just raise there, Ben, which is the CPI, which is how we measure the cost of living, what's going on with prices. I'm not very worried about the fact it is true. They've cut funding for that, which will make it less accurate, right? But it won't tell you that it will always understate or always overstayed. It just might be a little bit noisy around the truth.

Now, the fact that they've cut back on the number of prices that they collect actually isn't that worrying. Let me explain why. It turns out, you must have been through one of those intersections where there's a gas station on every corner. Turns out when there's two gas stations next to each other, they usually have pretty much the same price. So therefore, if we only surveyed one of those gas stations, we'd have a pretty good guess about what's going on with gas prices. That analogy holds more broadly. Often a chocolate bar that's sold in one store is sold at the same price as another store. Could be in the old days we were surveying both stores. Today we just survey one store, but realize as long as they're that correlation and remains high, that we still have pretty accurate measurement.

So I am going to continue to say we should trust the statistics, but if you want to go deeper, we can talk about exactly what it is they mean, and I think that's the harder question. Yeah, because, well, and let's use that talking about University of Michigan for a second, because they put out a consumer sentiment report. And when you see month over month, they're like the worst ever. I mean, you know, and I see you posting about it and other economists post about those reports and a lot of the stats that we get around how consumers are feeling. It's like this is the worst since and it's either like the Great Recession or COVID or numbers like that.

Actually, it's currently the worst on record. Right. And yet the government though reports GDP growth is up or this. So how do we make sense of that? Really good question. So the first thing is realize these, what the government's measuring, things like GDP or employment is one thing. how people feel about the economy is a different thing.

So of course, when you measure two different things, they don't have to be the same. So one possible reconciliation is that people feel really bummed out, even as they continue to spend and produce and so on. Another possibility is when you look inside, how do we actually measure GDP? It's very complicated. And there's lots of ways in which it could be wrong.

And it later gets revised as we get better data. And it could be consumer confidence is right. And actually, the economy is not humble. along. Let me give you another story. And I think this really gets to how I'm going to bore all of your audience. And I'm not going to apologize for it, but I think it's a deep, it's a great example that you raised here, Ben. The University of Michigan is doing the most, and I don't work on this survey, but they're doing the most honest job they can calling. I think it's 500 Americans every month, might be 1,000. I think it's 500. And they asked them about how they feel about the future and so on. And as I mentioned, that's currently just about at its lowest level ever.

And there's a question, does it really make sense to think that people are more depressed today than they were during the COVID lockdowns or just after Lehman Brothers collapsed on the cusp of the Great Recession? And maybe it doesn't make much sense. So one possibility is actually what we've seen is the way that people answer surveys has changed. So it turned out for many, many years, if you called someone and asked them, how the economy is doing. They tell you how the economy is doing. They thought of economics just as

economics. And what's happened is we've become increasingly partisan over time. And you can basically date this to the day that Trump walked down the golden escalator. We start to see everything through a partisan lens now. And so what happens now as you call someone and you ask them, how do you feel about the state of the economy? And often what they do instead is they answer the question, how do you feel about the president? And so Democrats say, I feel like it's in a terrible recession. say I think it's booming extraordinarily. And so the correlation between people's feelings about the economy and their partisan views has become incredibly strong, perhaps so strong that we're not learning anything about their views about the economy. Here's the other thing.

During good economic times, you might expect 80% of people to be confident about the economy. But if we've got a sample, it's half Democrat and half Republican and half the Republicans think it's terrible and half the Democrats think it's wonderful, then we're going to end up with 50% thinking it's a good economy. saying that they think it's a good economy. And so this could actually be what's pushing consumer confidence down. The measurements are all honest, but they no longer mean the same thing that we thought that they once mean.

Now, Ben, I hope I've impressed you with my capacity to bore you. Well, let me ask you about your, you've always impressed me with that. But let me ask you more broadly, though, about your view on the economy right now, because certain factors, whether it's, manufacturing. It seemed that we were the envy of the world, as it was described, heading into the Trump administration. And now it seems, at least in manufacturing, I've heard manufacturing recession, or at least manufacturing down. When it comes to unemployment, people saying we've got a big issue with jobs right now. And I've heard the term jobs recession being thrown around. I don't want to

throw out the R word recession, you know, haphazardly. on the show, but I hear economists using that term, but recession I know is also a specific term of art as it relates to kind of overall economic GDP style growth. So what do you feel about the economy, right? Where are we right now? Certainly I've seen your posts relative to the rest of the world, actually America's doing much worse.

We're not leading the world anymore, even if there is some growth and errors. But what do you think, Professor, about where we are now? I think right now I'm holding my breath and hoping. Let me answer a couple of the specific questions that you asked and then broaden it out to really answer your question. So on manufacturing, we're in a manufacturing recession, but equally we've been in one for roughly 40 years in a row now. And the US is losing its manufacturing jobs. This is a standard part of economic development. It used to be that this

was predominantly an agricultural economy. And we lost our agricultural jobs as we moved into the factories. Now we're moving from the factories into services, services which often have high-earned, value added, productivity, higher wages, better working conditions. And so we're continuing to lose our manufacturing. I know there are a lot of people who have a certain regard for manufacturing. You know, it was once the pathway to the middle class for working class folks, but we're losing those jobs. And if you look at the jobs that is replacing them, I don't necessarily mourn it.

So that's what's going on with manufacturing. see the economy is barely creating jobs at the moment. And that's the sense in which I'd say we're on the cusp of a jobs recession. Which side of that we're on? Honestly, we're just coming out of a bit of a data blackout. If you remember, the government was just shut down for a month and a half. So it's still quite hard to tell where we're at, but it could turn out actually that we're losing jobs. That we've actually lost jobs since Liberation Day, which is a very, very unusual thing for an economy to

do. But let me go one step deeper, Ben, I want to challenge you and literally everyone in the media to think a little harder about what economic things we should be looking at. Here's what I mean. Don't think about next quarter. Don't think about next year and even look through a recession. Ask the much deeper question, what are the foundations of prosperity, economic prosperity, shared prosperity, equitable growth. Look across countries and ask yourself, why is the United States rich and the country of my birth, Papua New Guinea, poor? And we have economists who ask this question, and they load all sorts of numbers into their computers, and they run very complicated analyses, or they do studies, or case studies and historical analyses. And the answer turns out to be

what we call institutions, the rules of the game, the rules of economic and political life, the fact that we respect the rule of law, that we have contestable elections, that we have contracts that we respect, that the government plays a limited and predictable role in economic life, and on and on the list goes. And the thing is, those are the things the president is undermining. He's attempting to take away the independence of the Federal Reserve. He's tried to undermine that how much federal economic statistics reflect reality. He's tried to overturn an election. He's snatching people up off the streets. He is calling CEOs and telling them what to do.

This is the most interventionist government of my lifetime. It's the least conservative government of my lifetime. When you are the richest country in the world, maybe you're not the ones who should be thinking about ripping down your existing institutions. It's those who are somewhat behind. But that's what the president's doing. That's not going to show up in next quarter's GDP. What that's going to show up as is in a decade's time,

there'll be some companies that were never founded. There were some entrepreneurs who couldn't afford to go to business school. There were immigrants with great ideas who ended up staying in their home countries instead. And so whatever the next generation's Google or Open AI is, it may not end up being invented or it may not happen on our soil. And we will never see that absence. But our kids will feel it. Our kids will feel it instead of lost opportunities,

there will be businesses. they never started, there'll be job opportunities, there'll be new technologies, there'll be ways of creating a greener, safer, more prosperous future that simply aren't possible, but we're not going to see it straight away. And that, I think, is our current media is not well set up to talk about those issues because there's no number comes out, there's no news cycle, there's no Wall Street Journal headline, but it turns out economic research tells us that's the stuff that matters. Well, we want to focus on that more. I hope you come back where we'll just zoom in right on that topic in specific and that's where we'll start.

But I think this was a good foundation for what I hope will be a number of other conversations we can have because with our 6 million subscribers here and more people watching this YouTube channel more than the networks, yours is a voice I want to share and I want to talk about those topics. I'm impressed by as you said, you know, the ability to bore because that's what people like about me. And it's the ability to get into the detail people like when we go into the footnotes i will share with our audience ben and i had never met before 15 minutes ago but ben i have a feeling we're going to be mates let's do it all right professor wilfers that justin justin everybody thanks justin take care everybody hit

subscribe let's get to six million subscribers want to stay plugged in become a subscribers for our substack at midasplus.com you'll get daily recaps from ron philipkowski add free episodes of our podcast and more exclusive content only available at mightas plus bus.com.