The Pomp Podcast - #1480 Darius Dale | Trump Tariffs Are Not What You Expect

Episode Date: February 3, 2025

Darius Dale is the Founder & CEO of 42Macro. In this conversation we talk about tariffs, impact on global liquidity, how asset markets and stock prices are reacting, DOGE cutting government spending, and the impact of artificial intelligence.  ======================= BitcoinIRA: Buy, sell, and swap 75+ cryptocurrencies in your retirement account. Take 3 minutes to open your account & get connected to a team of IRA specialists that will guide you through every step of the process. Go to https://bitcoinira.com/pomp/ to earn up to $500 in rewards. ======================= Xapo Bank, the world’s first fully licensed Bitcoin-enabled bank, offers military-grade security with an unmatched blend of physical and digital security, as well as pioneering regulatory oversight, so your funds are always protected. Beyond secure storage, they enable you to grow and use your Bitcoin. Earn daily interest in Bitcoin, spend with zero FX fees using a global card, and make instant payments via the Lightning Network for unrivalled access and convenience. Visit https://www.xapobank.com/pomp to join. ======================= Pomp writes a daily letter to over 265,000+ investors about business, technology, and finance. He breaks down complex topics into easy-to-understand language while sharing opinions on various aspects of each industry. You can subscribe at https://pomp.substack.com/ ======================= View 10k+ open startup jobs: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dreamstartupjob.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Enroll in my Crypto Academy: https://www.thecryptoacademy.io/

What's up everyone? This is Anthony Pompliano. Many of you know me as Pomp. You're listening to the Pomp Podcast, which is my effort to find the most interesting people in the world and sit with them for hours while I ask questions in an effort to learn. So it would mean the world to me if you would subscribe to the show on your favorite audio platform, watch episodes on YouTube, and tell your friends and family about the podcast. My goal is to help millions learn from the world's most interesting people. So let's get into today's episode. What's going on, guys? Today, we've got an amazing conversation with Darius Dale. Darius is the founder and CEO of 42 Macro. In this conversation, we talk about the tariffs

that just got implemented. We talk about the impact on global liquidity, how asset markets and stock prices are actually reacting, and what you at home should know when it comes to this environment. On top of that, we also talk about Doge cutting a trillion dollars from the government spending and the impact of artificial intelligence in the deflationary nature. This conversation touches on a lot of topics that most of you are probably wondering about right now. So I highly suggest you take a listen and let us know what you think on Twitter. Here's my latest conversation with Darius Dale. Anthony Pompliano runs Pomp Investments. All views of him and the guests on his podcast are solely their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of Pomp Investments. You

should not treat any opinion expressed by Pomp or his guests as a specific inducement to make a particular investment or follow a particular strategy, but only as an expression of his personal opinion. This podcast is for informational purposes only. Today's episode is brought to you by Bitcoin IRA. Are you a crypto investor with a retirement account, but don't have any crypto in your retirement account? Then listen up. This is for you. Bitcoin IRA is revolutionizing the way Americans save for retirement by helping smart investors diversify their savings with access to over 75 cryptocurrencies. With world-class customer service, military-grade encryption, and a vertically integrated licensed trust company,

it's no wonder more than 200,000 Americans trust Bitcoin IRA to secure their financial future. Getting started is quick and easy. It takes just three minutes to open an account. Once you're set up, their team of IRA specialists will reach out to guide you through every step of the process. Whether you're transferring an IRA from a legacy bank, rolling over an old 401k, or starting fresh with new contribution, the Bitcoin IRA team is here to help you get access to real crypto in your retirement account. And here's the best part. As a listener to this podcast, you can earn up to $500 in rewards when you add funds to your account. That's right. Search for Bitcoin IRA in the app store or visit bitcoinira.com slash pomp to join 200,000

Americans on their journey to upgrade their retirement. Bitcoinira.com slash pomp to upgrade today and you can earn up to $500 in rewards when you add funds to your account. Today's episode is brought to you by Zappo. Picture this. Every time you trade Bitcoin, the spread determines how much value stays with you. That's why securing top tier Bitcoin trading fees is key to growing your Bitcoin wealth. But what if I told you that there's a platform that lets you save up to 90% on your Bitcoin trading fees? Now, here's the kicker. Not only do they save that money, they also are dubbed the Fort Knox of Bitcoin. Zappo Bank. They're the world's first fully licensed and regulated Bitcoin and banking group, and they have been delivering a unique blend of

physical and digital security for over a decade. From military-grade Swiss bunkers to cutting-edge digital protocols, they've got you covered. And now they're bringing you the kind of competitive Bitcoin trading fees typically reserved for institutional giants, right in the palm of your hand.

With Zappobank's ultra-competitive spreads, more of your Bitcoin stays where it belongs, in your pocket. Whether you're trading big or small, every move you make is designed to boost your gains and fuel your financial future. Head to zappobank.com forward slash pomp to join. That's X-A-P-O-B-A-N-K dot com slash pump.

Yeah, no, great questions, man. Thanks again for having me. Always a pleasure to be here with your audience, my friend. So I'll start by saying the sort of mainstream economic discourse around tariffs, in my opinion, misses the boat. It's sort of overtly focused on what the economic impacts from tariffs are in terms of shaving a few tens of a basis points of GDP from here or adding a few tens of inflation there. The reality is that that's the sideshow. That's a parlor game at this point. What really matters as it relates to asset markets, particularly from this asymmetrically bullish crowded position that we've observed via our position model heading into the year, is the fact that we might see trending US dollar strength start to really weigh on global liquidity in a way that really starts to cause all that bullish positioning to unwind. And so we may be at the precipice of that. We'll see. But I do think it's important to start to refocus investors' thought processes around

tariffs from what's it going to do to the economy to what's going to happen in asset markets as a function of dollar strength. So we can walk through those linkages. What do you think is going to happen? Yeah, well, so I mean, I think ultimately what matters on how fast and how strong the dollar gets, right? So if you pull up slide one from our presentation that we sent you this morning, we just want to remind investors that global liquidity is a key driver of asset markets. So the chart on the left shows the 42 macro global liquidity proxy, which is the aggregated sum, dollar sum of the major economies, central banks, top 10 economies in the world. There are broad money supply from those particular economies.

And then there are fiat FX reserves, so FX reserves minus gold. And then we add a bond market volatility overlay to simulate the impact of expansions and contractions in the repo market upon global liquidity. And so that's what the black line shows. That shows that metric on a year-over-year rate of change basis. The blue line in the chart on the left shows the global stock market capitalization and the orange line, Bitcoin orange line in the chart on the right shows the global Bitcoin's price. And so, as you can see, based on the blue line and the orange line to be highly correlated with the black line, which is our global liquidity proxy. So we need that. That's kind of a good starting point for this discussion is, OK, we know liquidity is a big feature of asset markets.

It's, you know, less understood by kind of the mainstream market economic sources. but the sources like yours and like mine really have honed in on this in recent years. Slide two, or sorry, rather slide three, where we show the bar charts, it's not simply enough to know whether global liquidity is trending higher or lower. We need to have accurate forecasts of it to have an informed outlook for asset markets. And so what we've done with our analysis is identify a collection of economic and financial market indicators that have, you know, great, that produce have historically been key leading indicators of global liquidity when you regress them on a, say, three-month lead or six-month lead basis. So it's things like global stock

market capitalization, it's global crypto market capitalization. Those are cyclical leading indicators of global liquidity. Counter-cyclical leading indicators of global liquidity include the US dollar, currency volatility, global interest rates, bond market volatility. Global growth is a cyclical leading indicator of global liquidity. Global inflation is a counter-cyclical leading indicator of global liquidity and then global unemployment is a cyclical leading indicator of global liquidity and then the final chart i'll share is on slide four where we kind of blow up the time series specifically as it relates to the dollar and currency volatility and you can see very clearly just by eyeball on the chart that their dollar and currency volatility are very

much inversely correlated to the rate of change of liquidity as determined by our the 42 macro global liquidity proxy that we talked about so you want to follow the balancing ball as it relates to this tariff discussion, you have to understand what tariffs are likely to do in terms of inflating dollar strength and catalyzing more currency volatility. And those two things will obviously weigh on global liquidity as they already are, have been in recent months. When we think about the tariffs and their relationship with global liquidity, which really plays into kind of this idea of asset markets, I went back and I looked at the 2018 tariffs. And a lot of things I found there surprised me. I did not think I was going to find

what I found. And it actually made me change my mind. I was pretty, maybe skeptical to anti-tariff. I came out of that being like, this is a great idea. We should go and double and triple down on this. What I did not have the time to look at was what the impact of those tariffs were on asset markets. And again, these were much more surgical, right? There was kind of three to five different product lines, depending on how you look at it. It was like tens of billions versus now we're talking about hundreds of billions. We're talking about Blanket and two large trading partners. How do you think about maybe past examples of tariffs and what we can learn from them and what they did to asset markets versus maybe the breadth and depth of

what Trump is doing right now? Yeah, excellent analogy and really excellent question. I'm glad you're going to do the primary research, my friend. We got to hire on our analyst team. No, so we obviously looked at that case study as well. And so kind of the key takeaways that I would say from that particular case study. So you go back to March of 2018. We knew that that's when the first rave of Trump tariffs against China. They're very targeted back then, as you indicated. That's when they first started. We saw customs receipts double from March of 2018 all the way through the end of 2018. So essentially, the amount of tariffs we were collecting essentially doubled in that subsequent sort of eight or nine month period. We had the

dollar rally about 8% from March 2018 through the year end 2018. And then we had stocks, I want to say they were down about 7% or 8% from March 2018 through December 18. But they also included a full scale crash. Recall that stocks crashed from their peak in September of 2018 through the lows of Christmas Eve of 2018. So it's our view that the dollar got too strong partially as a function of tariffs, but also don't forget the Fed and Reserve was hiking interest rates pretty aggressively back then, or at least aggressively prior to what we now consider to be aggressive in recent years. And then they made the comment, Powell made the comment back in October of 2018, that they were, quote unquote, a long ways away from neutral,

which ultimately catalyzed a significant expansion of volatility in the bond market and repriced, very hawkish repricing of the dollar, of global currency markets, global fixed income markets that ultimately caused a significant reduction in risk asset valuations. That is the kind of risk we see as part of 2025 here, in particular in the context of the global refinancing cycle that you and I talked about a couple of months ago. If we do have a dollar that is continuing to trend higher into that, it's just a direct headwind to the growth rate of global investor balance sheet capacity that we're going to need to roll over all of that existing debt from a lower interest rate regime to a higher interest rate regime. You need more

balance sheet capacity to do that. And ultimately, that process could be pretty painful in the context of asset markets. Now, I think you kind of alluded to another question that I think is a more philosophical question or more of a longer term economic study, whether this is a good idea or a bad idea. And, you know, President Trump has obviously sort of sided with the kind of less popular view, at least popular among mainstream economists, the less popular view that this is actually ultimately going to wind up creating jobs in America, creating and boosting investment, and ultimately reducing our reliance on, you know, sort of foreign adversaries, you know, like China, for specific, for key raw materials and for key materials that we use into a lot of

our kind of economically and national security sensitive industries. I don't know what the right answer is. But what I do know is that we're going to pursue these policies. And this is something we've had a lot of conviction on just based on our analysis of the federal budget dynamics, which ultimately suggests that and more importantly, the process that they're going to use to extend expanded Trump tax cuts, they're going to need revenue offsets and expenditure reduction offsets in order to push this stuff through. So I think the net result of all this sort of quote unquote negotiating is we're going to wind up with more tariffs on our trading partners that we had on January 19th, period. Whether that be the blanket across the board, 25% tariffs on

Canada, Mexico, 10% or wherever they're going to wind up on China. I think that is to be deliberated. And I'm not sure President Trump even knows the answer. But I think we need to prepare for a world that has higher tariffs, a stronger dollar. And ultimately, if the dollar gets too strong, and I'm not smart enough to ascertain what that level is, but if the dollar gets too strong and currency vol gets too high, we're going to be talking about a reduction in global liquidity as opposed to an expansion. We need an expansion in order to prevent asset markets from having a severe correction or crash here in 2025 because of the refinancing cycle. So when I was doing my research, I go all the way back, George Washington,

first president of the United States, second bill he signs is tariffs. He implements 5% tariff on all imports and they create what's now known as the Coast Guard to go and enforce this collection of the tariff. Makes sense. Right now, implementing 25% blanket tariffs on Canada and Mexico, rightfully so, both countries are like, yo, what the hell? This is crazy. Would we be better off rather than doing big on a small number of trading partners, going small on a lot of trading partners, say bringing back, hey, we're gonna do a 5% tariff on all imports to the United States versus going after a select number of countries with these big 25% numbers? So better off depends on who you're asking. Are you asking Wall Street or are you asking

Main Street? Because at the end of the day, one of the things that I think that is going to be a very, I don't know what the right word is for this, but we're going to have an amount of cognitive dissonance as investors. Because on one hand, President Trump has been elected to office on a populist mandate to fix a lot of the problems that you know were caused by let's say institutions like globalization uh that's obviously caused a lot of um you know economic hardship across america in the form of lost jobs you know under severe reduction wages etc uh president trump is you know when he thinks about tariffs he's trying to address those ends you know he's trying to fix that that set of problems uh when you're talking about do we want smaller tariffs across a larger

number of trading partners, that's more of a Wall Street problem, right? Can we make this solution that President Trump has identified to kind of, you know, fix this problem on Main Street? Can somehow the solution be mitigated in a way that makes Wall Street happy? And I'm not sure, I don't think we know right yet what the, how President Trump is going to, where is he going to fall in that discussion, right? You know, I think that he surrounded himself with some very smart people from Wall Street, Howard Lutnick, Scott Besson, you know, you and I both know those folks, or I don't know Howard, but we all know both of those folks combined. He surrounded himself with really smart people from Wall Street that are going to, in our view, try to mitigate some

of the more disruptive aspects of his America First economic agenda. But the reality is he got voted. Wall Street didn't vote President Trump in office. It's the people who are facing economic hardship in places like Iowa and Ohio and Nebraska and all across the country that have been left behind by globalization in decades of, you know, policies that really kind of put corporate profits, you know, above, you know, the well-being of human beings in society. So I think the key, I don't know, but that's a long-winded way of getting to the answer, which I think is, I think if you want to solve the problem on Main Street, you kind of have to do what President Trump is doing. And I think that's why he started with this, as opposed to

If you want to just make sure everything is ho-hum on Wall Street, who's been winning for decades as a function of all this globalist policy, then yeah, maybe you can go that. But I don't think that's what he wants. I think he wants to get some wins from Wall Street. Let's talk about two deflationary things that are happening simultaneously. You've got Elon Musk and Doge. They have rude access now to the payment system. They are trying to shut down USAID and a bunch of these organizations.

Whatever they're going to do, it sounds like they're going to be able to cut a trillion dollars of government spending. which like three weeks ago, no one thought was possible. Now he's like, we may get it done this weekend, which I think kind of blows people's mind. But let's say, okay, you know, they do do that. Obviously reduction in government spending at that size would probably be a pretty good backdrop for keeping inflation under control, things like that. The other thing is AI and kind of the explosion of economic activity that's happening there. It kind of feels like, you know, the Holy Grail would have been cut government spending, have innovation and GDP growth,

et cetera. Are we getting both of them? And like, how do you think about, you know, them playing into this whole tariff conversation? Yeah, no, I think it's a very, thank you for asking that question, man, because I think people forgetting that these policies, when you put them all together, we sort of have a hodgepodge of like Ronald Reagan supply side economics with some of the more, I don't know, kind of, you know, more classical economic views are going back to the, know the the the 19th late 1800s early 1900s you know it's a real you know kind of and these are hot populist economic policies right so it's a weird you know these are strange bedfellows you know reagan-esque supply-side economics with populist uh tariff policy and trade policy but

it is what it is we're just going to have to as investors net out the effects and i'm glad you brought up the doge point because this is they're actually landing on the numbers that we threw out a couple of months ago which as i said if they they wind up doing anything it's going to wind up being 500 billion to about a trillion dollars which is at the time i got blasted on twitter for saying that they weren't going to hit 2 trillion uh elon musk has since come and not come out and confirmed that they weren't going to hit 2 trillion so i think we're very right on that and if they wind up with the 500 billion trillion dollars of federal expenditure reduction that we identified based on our deep dive analysis of all the u.s budget dynamics then that would be great

now you're talking about significant reduction in federal expenditures now the issue here as it relates to the medium to long-term outlook for uh growth inflation the us economy is you know you still have to net this out with what is very likely to be an expansion extension and expansion of of the tax cuts and jobs acts right you know so on one hand you're cutting spending on another hand you're cutting revenues relative to baseline relative to the baseline of law which has uh the individual income tax components of the tcja expiring on december 31st you're also talking about raising revenues via tariffs we don't really know where that's going to settle out at but we know that those revenues are going to be sticky largely as a function of the budget but

reconciliation process and so i don't know if we know the answer yet as investors about are we going to have more inflation or less inflation as a function of this more growth or less growth as a function is what we have already observed however we noticed this in the q4 gdp report is that u.s economic policy uncertainty as as uh as indicated by the bigger bloomin davis index which is only the index i've ever seen that can track policy uncertainty uh debate whether or not it's a good index or not but this time series which is an apples to apples comparison of what that index thought a u.s economic policy uncertainty was going back daily since 1985 and it does this by uh analysis of of newspaper headlines and whatnot that index is essentially

saying we have about as high as the policy uncertainties we ever had outside of coban in the GFC. And so, as a function of that, we've already seen fixed investment, non-residential, or sorry, gross fixed investment in the Q4 GDP report slowed to minus 0.6% on a quarter-for-quarter basis in Q4. So, investment in the U.S. economy, both business investment and investment in the housing market, ground to a halt in Q4. And so, this amount of policy uncertainty as it relates You're trying to piece together the impact of expenditure reductions, tariff hikes, tax cuts and extension expansion of the tax cuts. It's just a lot to push together into an economic model. And so I think what's really happening is business investment is slowing.

You're starting to see confusion, breed contempt in asset markets. And, you know, this is kind of the key takeaway from our SSS theme all along, which is the size, sequence, and scope of all these changes might cause problems in and of itself, irrespective of the outcomes. because there's a lot of change and we don't know what to do as investors in terms of trying to high handicap that so uh i still think you know this is probably more of a i don't say a political view but i i think we just have to accept the fact that this stuff is coming you know again president trump has got a very popular mandate to come in and change a bunch of stuff specifically as it relates to uh how u.s uh citizens have been sort of um you know kind of been left by the wayside if you will, to further globalists, you know, the kind of the global order, if you will,

or globalization, if you will. And it's been very great for U.S. corporate profits and global corporate profits, but it's been very bad for the average person here in America from a median income perspective. And I think what President Trump is going to do is he's trying to just turn the dial back on that, whether it causes problems for Wall Street or not. And I think we just have to accept that as investors and move on. When you think of AI, what are some of the things that you guys are trying to figure out? How are you guys using it internally? Yeah, no. So, I mean, we obviously use AI as part of our research process when we're researching

primary topics and whatnot. It speeds up that very quickly. Obviously, we have a lot of AI productivity tools like Calendly and all that kind of stuff. But to me, what we see currently on the enterprise use case for AI, I think it's barely scratching the surface. I think we're probably less than 5% to 10% in terms of what AI is actually going to ultimately do. I have friends that run AI companies that are trying to build solutions for investors

across global wall street and the solutions they've they've already they're already starting to work on to me it's like we're not going to need to hire analysts at some point you know and then as those ai systems improve the next season we're not going to need to hire associates at some point and after a while you're going to say we're not going to need to hire managing directors and the capability what i'm trying to say is that over time just based on what they're currently working on and the stuff that i've seen that's blown me away is i'm like okay if they can get this done and do that and start to build on that that's the same thing that we've all done as analysts and and and the former analysts and former associates and mds and now ceos in this business

and so my kind of take on this is somewhat draconian which is every company in the world is incentivized to expand its profit margins right like that's that's kind of the nature of being a manager of a company is you want to grow profits and you want to make your productivity and profitability of your company is as high as both of those things can be. And the reality is that we're going to get to a point where you're just not going to have any incentive to invest in more human capital. You know, the AI bots will be able to just do what a lot of what you used to hire people to do better. And so if you sort of multiply that in mass across the economy, you could easily get to a place where employment stops growing and eventually actually starts to go down across all

these white collar industries where the accumulation and exploitation of knowledge is really what we do. And so my key takeaway, and I pushed the question back to you is, how do we not end up in a world that has significantly higher unemployment and significantly wider corporate profits and a significantly higher share of income being generated by a significantly smaller share of human beings? Well, I think there's a couple of different components. One is for some parts of the economy, that's 100% going to happen, unfortunately. But that is a story that if you go back 200 years, or you actually can go back to maybe 1850, 1875, most people were living off the food that they farmed in their yard. Houses weren't connected. There was no electricity.

There was roads barely connected to these homes. And so running water, I mean, just crazy to today. and you look at that and you say okay hold on a second in less than you know 200 years look at how far we came well guess what happened there's a lot of uh capitalistic incentives that changed who held capital uh there was much more of a stratification of results uh corporations you know had this explosion like all the things you're talking about most people still got jobs though and it's just there's new types of jobs and so i do think there's some of that that goes on But I think maybe the bigger thing is historically, when you go from 98% of a population being farmers to 2%, there were very obvious other jobs for them to go fill. Where we're headed now is it kind of feels like you run in a room and the lights are off and you can't see anything.

So what do you do? You run up to the first door. You try to open it. You're like, it's not open. Go to the next door. You try to open it. Can't open it. Go to the third door.

Can't open it. And you're like, wait, what the hell? and then the lights turn on and you realize that you're in a room full of doors where they're all locked and you start to panic a little bit. Well, AI is coming for all these different jobs. So you're like, hey, I thought I was going to be, I don't know, a financial analyst. Well, AI is coming for that. Okay, well, I'll go over here and I'll do copywriting. Oh, AI is coming for that. Oh, okay, well, fine. I'll go do, and you just keep coming up with all these things. And it's like, AI is coming for a lot of these things. Now, one of the questions that I think is probably

most interesting is very similar to how investors are winners and savers or losers in the economy. The people who learn to harness this technology are going to benefit the people who don't are probably going to get hurt. And so you can't change systematically, you know, what is happening, but what you can do is you can be responsible for yourself. And so go and learn the technology, right? Go and figure out, Hey, how does cursor work? How do I use this stuff? What are the things that I can create now that maybe I otherwise couldn't, Right. Those types of things are gonna be pretty important. And then lastly, uh, capital being the capital owner is still going to be pretty valuable. Um, if you're able to get people to, um, you have

this explosion of economic activity, if you own capital, if you own equity, uh, you'll still be okay. And so, you know, kind of the continuation of being the investor is the winner. Uh, it's gonna be an important theme. Yeah, no, I hear you. Everything you said, man, I think the key takeaway from AI is that you are going to wind up with a more inherently unequal society by people who enter this regime without capital or without the skills required to implement and understand and implement the AI. That's clearly going to lead to disinflation or outright deflation because you're talking about mass unemployment and a significant increase in the supply of available human labor. The problem is, is there won't be as much demand for human labor. And so that kind of

takes me to my next following point is i don't understand how this doesn't wind up with like some form of mild form of hyperinflation because ultimately what you're talking about is eroding the tax base of the u.s government significantly right now 85 of u.s federal taxes come from human beings in the form of individual income taxes and um and social security taxes well they also come from llc's and pastor enterprises as well but these are human beings um you know contributing those those taxes and their tax returns i don't know what happens to the federal we're already talking about the federal budget now as it's been an unsustainable path what happens if you eviscerate like half of 85 percent of the total tax base where federal budgets deficits and debt's

going to be then obviously into the federal reserve in terms of monetizing anything that looks like you know basic income or whatever all the stuff that that's about i mean this is a you know this stuff sounds nuts to talk about right now but i'm really glad that you created a platform for us to start having these damn discussions because this is serious we're in a fourth turning it's coming we will have significant technological geopolitical and economic change in this period ai may be one of those catalysts you know further along that those significant changes and if you're not having these types of conversations or if you're dumb enough to think these types of conversations are for sci-fi movies then god bless you you're not one of those people

who survive this, and I very much tend to help me and my clients and as much as you intend to help yourself and your clients and your audience, you know,

survive this next, you know, as much as we possibly can is what it is. I completely agree. Where can we send people to find out more about 42 Macro?

I appreciate you, man. I'm always blessed to be here, man. 42macro.com, come check us out. You can find me on Twitter as well, DariusDel42. Doing a great job. I learn from you

every single time we talk, so we're going to keep doing it, my friend. Talk soon. Appreciate you, brother. Thank you. We'll be right back.