2041: How the Recession Doomers Got the US Economy So Wrong, Harry Dent Predicts Weakening Economy & Potential Recession

This show is produced by the Hartman Media Company. For more information and links to all our great podcasts, visit hartmanmedia.com.

My name.

Is Andrew and I live in the Pacific Northwest. So far I've got six properties in about three and a half years and I'm pretty happy about it. And it's all because his team of experts and just his, his knowledge and his time that he spent doing it, he can really guide you through it. And his podcast is excellent and I highly recommend it for anybody, whether you're a beginner or an expert. There's a ton to learn there and it'll help you get to the next level.

Welcome to the Creating wealth show with Jason Hartman. You're about to learn a new slant on investing, some exciting techniques and fresh new approaches to the world's most historically proven asset class that will enable you to create more wealth and freedom than you ever thought possible. Jason is a genuine, self made multimillionaire who's actually been there and he's a successful investor, lender, developer and entrepreneur who's owned properties in 11 states, had hundreds of tenants and been involved in thousands of real estate transactions. This program will help you follow in Jason's footsteps on the road to your Financial Independence Day. You really can do it. And now here's your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Welcome to episode 2041. We have a returning guest back on the show today. He's the best selling author of many, many books and that is none other than Harry Dent is back for maybe.

Maybe he's been on the show a dozen times over the years starting back.

In 2005 or 2006 probably. Anyway, Harry is still very bearish. He has been very bearish on the economy for a long, long time. The question is, is he finally going to be right? So we will explore that. And remember, the economy is obviously a very complex animal. Harry himself tells that joke. Why was the study or the profession of economics invented? It was to make astrologists look credible.

I love that joke. That's a good one.

But for whatever it's worth, he'll be.

Here to share some insights for you.

I really do like the way though he studies demographics as they relate to.

The economy and very predictable spending patterns throughout people's lives.

I think that is a very reliable way to look at things. However, it isn't everything and Harry has taken a lot of turns into some different avenues over the years and some.

Different ways of looking at things.

So we will get to that. But before we do I want to let you know that we have an upcoming event, a live event and it is actually a cruise. Not sure I've mentioned this before, but we are doing our second cruise and that is coming up for next April, April 2024. It's going to be fantastic. So look for that. Keep it in mind, save the dates.

Don'T plan any big vacations because we've got a wonderful five day cruise coming up and we'd like you to join.

Us for some fun and certainly some education. So we will announce that in the near future here. We've got some time but just want.

To mention it so you'll save the.

Date okay, this is an article I want to share with you. It's a summary of an article from the Atlantic and it's entitled how the Recession Doomers Got the US Economy so Wrong The Crash Bros. The Recession Doomers look, negative news sells.

Much better than positive news.

We all know that. It's human nature. That's what we respond to. We respond to the clickbait titles. We respond to the doom and gloom. The bad news. We love it. We eat that up. It's just human nature. It's the way we're wired. I've explained why that is or some.

Theories on that many times over the years.

But without further ado, let's get to this little summary piece. And I'm just going to play the audio because the narrator has a much.

Better voice than mine, a very cool accent.

So here we go with that and.

I'll make a couple comments along the way.

Then we will get to our guest, Harry Dent.

This is a recast of the 1800 word piece how the Recession Doomers Got the US Economy so Wrong from the Atlantic. This article discusses how experts predictions of a recession in the US economy for 2023 were proven wrong, highlighting the positive state of the economy and exploring potential reasons for the inaccurate forecasts. Let's listen in.

So the article we're discussing today is titled how the Recession Doomers Got the US Economy so Wrong. It talks about how experts were predicting a recession for the US economy in 2023, but so far things have been going quite well.

That's right. The past year, many economists were pessimistic about the economy. A Bloomberg economic model even said that the odds of a recession in 2023 were 100%. But as it turns out, they were way off the mark.

Exactly. The article mentions that employment is high, inflation is falling, real incomes are rising, and inequality is narrowing. The US has the fastest growth rate and the lowest annual inflation of any G7 country.

See, that's the important thing a lot of the doom and gloomers forget to mention.

They forget to think about the Jason Hartman question, which is life's most important question. And that is none other than, you.

Know what I'm gonna say. Compared to what?

Compared to what? Remember, as different economies encounter different struggles, capital and entrepreneurs, whether it be intellectual capital, ambition capital or monetary capital, always looks for best place to go. And by comparison, the US is doing fantastically well. So that's where the capital is going to go. That's where the people are going to go. That's where the thought is going to go. That's where the marketing is going to go. That's where all of the initiative will go. It will go to the best place. That's just natural. We live in this global community. And it's not just from the perspective of that old saying, money always goes where it's treated best. That implies government regulation, regulation, so forth, the regulatory environment. But this is going where it's treated.

Best just because that's where the best.

Opportunity is compared to what is always the most important question in life, in any endeavor, not just this one.

Let's continue.

So overall things seem to be going pretty well.

But why were economists so wrong in their predictions? Well, one explanation is that economic prediction has always been more sorcery than science. The majority of economists have failed to anticipate every single recession. Economic models of the future are more like astrology than actual science.

That's a good point.

And isn't it funny that they mention astrology After I just told that joke? I actually forgot that was in this article.

But you know, astrology isn't that inaccurate, is it?

I mean, look, I'm a Libra and that's pretty accurate.

When you read a description of a Libra, it's pretty close to me. When you read a description of a.

Virgo or a Taurus. That's not me, that's someone else. Right.

It is the oldest personality assessment in the world. Right.

But the scammy part of it is.

Probably those daily horoscopes. Those are hokey. Right.

But just overall traits.

I don't know, it seems kind of.

Uncannily accurate, I think.

But it's not like I study this or anything. I did a long time ago because I just got curious about it.

Yeah, I know some people will say it's the devil's work or something like that. I just think it's a personality assessment.

Calm down.

Reracks it's just interesting.

If nothing else. It's kind of funny to talk about, but is it more accurate than the study of economics? You be the judge.

Another explanation mentioned in the article is that the US economy withstood a number of shocks and then those shocks went away. There were various factors like post pandemic spending, broken supply chains, energy price spikes and more. But eventually the pain subsided and the economy kept going.

It's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve doesn't seem to have played a significant role in this monetary policy might not be as powerful as experts thought when it comes to stimulating or depressing growth.

That's true. The article also suggests that the Fed's role might be more about shaping expectations and moods through their statements and actions. So it's not just about interest rates, but also about how people perceive the economy.

Absolutely. And this perception is quite interesting. Even though the economy is doing well, many Americans still believe it's terrible. There's a disconnect between people's feelings and the reality of the economy.

I think part of that disconnect is the wealth gap. Right now the article says the wealth gap is shrinking and maybe that's true. I'm not going to go into it here. You know, there is a metric for that that's used around the world. It's called the Gini coefficient. And that measures wealth gap. Right.

But it's certainly, it may be shrinking.

And that's, that's great news if it is. But it is certainly wider than it was a long time ago. So the question is compared to what? Right. In the 80s, for example, the wealth gap was not as large as it is today. So that's a matter of judgment. And remember, the wider the wealth gap, the more we turn into a banana republic type nation. And if you look at it from a state level, I mean California, as I've, I've said for a long time before I even left California, about what, 11, 12 years ago now I've always said that California, the socialist Republic of California, is becoming a banana republic where you've got these super rich people and poor people and hollowing out the middle class.

So it depends who you are, right?

When they, when they say so many people think that the economy is broken.

And that it's so bad.

I mean it is that way for a lot of people, of course, the people that are taking advantage of the.

Cantillon effect, like us really, because we can get close to that money printer.

That money supply through my inflation induced debt destruction strategy, so we can take advantage of that. And I've. I've taught you how over the years. Anyway, let's go on.

The article calls it a VI discussion where people are anxious about the future while contributing to a growing economy.

It's definitely a complex situation and the article proposes an interesting theory that maybe the recession doers got it wrong because they were so convincing. Their pessimistic predictions might have actually reduced spending, hiring and wage growth, which in turn reduced inflation without causing a recession.

It's an intriguing theory for sure. But as the article concludes, maybe all of these theories are true at once. Economic forecasts are not an exact science and there are various factors at play. Only time will tell what the future holds for the U.S. economy.

All right, so hopefully that was informative. I thought the article was interesting.

Okay, let's go to our guest today.

And that is none other than Harry Dent.

It is my pleasure to welcome a returning guest back to the show. He's been on the show many times, but it's been a while.

So I'm really glad to have him back to hear what he has to say about this economy that is going through radical transformations. And that is none other than New.

York Times best selling author of many, many books, Harry Dent. I discovered his work back in the mid-90s and was very intrigued by the way he looked at demographics and spending.

Cycles and just life cycles and how people spend money throughout their lives and peak spending years and so forth. And I think it has a lot to say about where we've been and where we're going. So it's a great pleasure to have.

Him back, coming from Puerto Rico.

Harry, welcome back.

How are you?

Nice to be back, Jason.

It's good to have you.

It's good to have you.

So you have been bearish for a long time.

In fact, I don't know, does anyone call you Harry Bearish or there's a nickname.

Some people started calling me a perm bear. Look, I've been forecasting since the early 80s and I've been the most bullish guy. People used to call me the crazy crazy bullish. Right. I was the guy that said this boom's gonna last way longer, go way high. I had a doubt. 10,000 by 2000. I remember back in the 80s, people thought I was crazy and I still underpay was 12,500 by 2000. Yeah, it even went higher than I thought when people said, well, Harry, we know that's not possible. Back then everybody thought America was done. I'm like, hey, long term, we are, we are Peaking out and aging like most developed countries. But we got the biggest damn baby boom. That's the secret.

So, Harry, if I'm remembering your work correctly, it seemed like you were in.

The past, in decades past, you were.

Pretty much bullish until about 2013. That you said much earlier would be.

Kind of a turning point because that.

Would be when baby boomers started to retire.

And generally the pattern is people spend less money, they maybe downsize their house and so forth.

Am I remembering that correctly?

Well, you know, it was actually way better. It was 2007. Okay, 2007 was when the baby boomers in the, in the highest and final numbers would reach their peak spending. And that spending comes as they're raising their kids and getting them through high school, school, college, or graduate school, however long the kids can trick their parents into paying for them. I went all the way to graduate school, so I got the best deal in my family. But, but so, and that, that was back for, for the baby boomers age 46, with that peak of spending and the peak of the baby boom birth curve. The, you know, before it dropped off was 1961. So that was just 1961 plus 46 by late. I, I was predicting all the way back in the early 80s, talking to small business people back then at Tech and ypo, I said this is going to be the greatest boom in history because this generation is so large. And even though the US Is an aging nation and all that sort of stuff, in Asia's rising, we got one of the best baby booms in the world, and we're going to have a hell of a boom. And, and we did. Now what, what happened though and what has been very hard to read since, we did have that downturn right when my indicator said 2008 was the worst downturn we had seen since the early 80s. At the bottom of the whole last generation cycle, the Bob Hope generation was bottoming in 80 to 82. And that was the worst unemployment, 10, 11% back then, as bad as we've seen since. So now the question is, okay, the baby boomers have peaked right now, where we're at on this cycle, Jason, we're at the bottom of the baby bus down cycle in 2022, 23. That was my forecast way back too. So what's happened if different this time and never even close before, not even in the Great Depression when 2008, nine hit harder than anybody expected. They just started printing money and, and they thought, okay, they started with a trillion dollars. And I, you know, I would have Even done that if I was the government back then. Trillion dollars. They thought, okay, the economy's in a funk. Trillion dollars in a, you know, 16 trillion dollar economy, whatever it was back then, that'll get things back going and boom. Well, it didn't. And they just had to keep printing money.

Okay, why?

Because the, the fundamental demographic said, no, we're in a long term downturn. And, and this is history. Every 40 years, every generation. Real quick.

Yeah.

30 to 42. Long term downturn after the great roaring 20s, Pete. 68 to 82. After the Bob Hope generation boom. 40s, 50s, 60s. And now after 83 to 2007, baby boomers, the demographics our week, right into 20, 22, 23, and it's next year that we should actually naturally turn up with the millennial generation, which will not be as long a boom as strong, but we should have good fundamentals again. But we've been having all this stimulus, Jason, and why, why it's taken them so much. Nobody thought it would take 14 years of stimulus and we'd only be tightening for the first time last year after all of this. It's because the demographics really did were adverse and slowed the economy.

Right.

Okay, so I want to like zoom.

Way out and just talk about some of your general thesis for a moment, if we can. So I know that demographers disagree a little bit on these size ranges, but.

As I interpret it, baby boomers are.

About 76 million Americans. The last one was born in 1964. Okay. Or the youngest baby boomer, sorry, 1964.

And the millennial generation, about 80 million.

Slightly bigger than the baby boomers, just by a small margin. And Gen X, my generation, small, only 46 million. Okay, so those are the numbers I'm working with.

Okay, Jay, I'm going to stop here. It's much simpler than that for me and much, much more effective. Okay. I look at the births, which I adjust in all immigrants, you know, past and even forecast to where they were born, which I can do. And I'm looking at an immigration adjusted birth index and how much that when that goes up and down on a 46 year lag. Now it's 47 for the millennials, but it was 46 for the boomers. It was 44 for the Bob Hope generation before them. So it's that simple. It's just a lag on the birth index. But because of high immigration, particularly in the United States and other countries I deal in with, like Australia, New Zealand, where I speak a lot, immigration is a big deal. Right? So, so that's all it is. When there's a rising tide of people going into higher and peak spending, the economy is going to generally grow. And when there's a falling tide, you know, from, from late 68 to 82, which adjusted for inflation was the worst stock, was a 14 year bear market.

Let's not, let's just get some of.

The thesis out though first before we talk about those specifics if we can.

So peak spending year is 46 years old.

Right. What's 44 for the Bob Hope before them? Looks like 47 for the millennials to follow.

Right. And millennials have generally been about six years.

It's when your kids finally leave the nest and you don't have to spend money raising them and getting them through school. So the more kids, the reason that's been raising for generation is more is.

Because people are waiting longer to have kids.

High percentage going to college. And that's pretty much peaked out now. I don't expect the net the next generation down the road to peak at 50 or something. It probably will be more like the millennials.

Okay, what's the peak earning year though? Is that about the same as the speak spending year or not?

No spending more important for the economy? No, it is similar. It's a little bit later. Vinnie Bank. Here's the other thing. If you're dealing with more affluent people, like the top 10 or 20%, they don't peak until they're early to mid-50s. So the more affluent people are, the longer they go to school and then the longer their kids that they raise tend to go school because they can afford more school. So, so it's different by, by income. But for the overall average and for the baby boom generation, my indicator was the simplest in history. Move forward. The immigration adjusted birth index, which is a very accurate number. 46 stupid years. It told me the economy was going to boom from 83 to 2007 and then slow substantially.

Right.

And one of the things that you.

You said a long time ago is you used to talk about how the, you know, the baby boome not spend as much. They would sell their McMansions, they would sell their homes and there'd be a glut of properties like that on the market in the post 2007, 2013, whatever world. Somehow I remember that as 2013.

Not for that's somebody else, not for.

Me in the big picture. It's close enough, but yeah, I get it.

So you know, with the Great Recession.

They obviously stimulated like crazy. We've had this Much longer run of boom times than anybody expected. Certainly more than you've expected.

And not only that much more. So for the financial markets, you know where that money goes. They didn't send us checks in the mail, which they could have done.

Right.

Was injected into the financial markets by first buying bonds, but then that filters into stocks and everything everybody's expecting with all this money printing. Oh, my God. They're going to create consumer inflation. No, financial asset inflation. Stocks in one of the worst real estate periods in history have had a better boom than they had even when baby boomers were spending increasing.

Okay, so your major work through kind.

Of your biggest years in your authorship business and so forth. Right.

Was about the baby boomers and their.

Cycle of spending and then reducing spending.

But now you've got the millennials.

The oldest millennial is about 42 years old now. These are definitely not kids anymore. They're forming households. Yeah, they're about six years behind schedule. I get it.

But they're a slightly bigger generation than the baby boomers. So why.

Again. Again, Jason, that means nothing to me. It's the relative size over time. And the millennials are the first generation in America and more so in Europe that do not take the overall spending level to a new high. Okay. The baby boom generation took us much higher than the Bob Hope generation.

Why?

Because it's a smaller relative number. In fact, millennial births adjusted for immigration never went higher than the baby boom births. The first generation not to be high. I don't care how many people in the generation. I compare what the peak birth levels were adjusted for immigration. And this was the first generation not to take us to new heights. And their boom is just starting in this time period and will not peak, will not start to peak until 2037.

Okay, so you're saying then, as the.

Millennials move through the economy, a slightly larger cohort by a small margin, but relative to the overall population of the country, they're actually smaller if you adjust them that way. Okay, so I get that, and that's an important point.

This boom, with the millennials at their best, will never be as strong as the boom was in the 90s, in the mid part of it for the baby.

So tell us, tell us about size.

Of the generations bigger. If you just look at the birth curve, the, the side, the baby boom looks like a 10 foot wave if I'm a surfer. And the Bob Hope of four, it looks like a four foot wave. And the millennials after him looks like a five foot wave if you're A surfer. Do you know the difference between the power of a ten foot wave?

I have been surfing. I grew up in California. I got it. Okay.

All right. So in other words, your point being.

That relative to the size of the country, overall population, the millennials are actually smaller than the baby boomers. And I understand that. That's a very important point. Very important.

Larger in total numbers, relative size, they were not as big a wave and booms and busts like anything else in life are just waves.

Yeah, okay, but also, you could argue that they're not doing as well. They don't have as much to spend, they don't have as much discretionary income. Maybe that's what they think.

They just spoiled everybody. Every generation's done better than the one before them. Now, there is a point when any country like Rome, when the whole thing falls, where that will change. But every generation thinks they're smarter than they are, but also thinks they're not getting as fair a shake or they're not doing as well. Yeah, I know for them it's not true.

The whole, hey, boomer meme is really unfair to the boomers.

You know, I mean, part of the problem with millennials and baby boomers rose how drove house prices so high they're having to pay a lot more of their income for their house.

Sure, sure. Okay, got it. Okay, so I want to show some charts. These are your charts and have you just talk to us about these charts a little bit, if you would. So let's take a look at them.

So this first one, and remember, some.

People aren't on video. They will only hear the audio of this, of course, on the video platforms. You can see these charts if you want to refer to them.

This is Fed printed 44% more money in two years after Covid than between.

2008 and 2014, that six year period. Okay, and what are you showing us on this chart?

Okay, and then first of all, it was not in vogue in most of history for central governments to just print money. When the economy slowed down, you know, they didn't believe they were supposed to do that. But this too, again, 2008 was the most serious downturn since the early 80s in a long time. Nobody expected that. And so they started printing money, as I said earlier, thinking, well, it won't, you know, a trillion or so will get us out of it. No, they had to keep it. Well, the first six years they had to print 3.6 trillion. And believe me, that was nowhere near their intention. They thought a trillion back then in 2009 and they'd be done. Now what happened then? Then it tailed out and then Covid hits and there they ended up to deal with that. And this is where I think they made a huge mistake and overreacted. They printed 5.2 in two years. So the first wave was 3.6 trillion over six years. Then it kind of flattened out and then they printed the big whammy, 5.2 trillion. Well, that's what's thrown the economy off because that's what caused inflation, which has been falling ever since the late 70s, early 80s. Inflation was never caused by government deficits, which is what I was taught back then. And government deficits were nowhere near as big back then. Even in more difficult economic times, inflation is caused by young people having to grow up and be funded by parents, governments and everybody. And corporations, when they first hire them, funding them to enter the workforce, they're a liability at first. They need training, they're smart, but they don't know what they're doing yet. So workforce growth on a two and a half year life. This is an indicator that I invented myself decades ago that no economist would ever think of. Okay, workforce growth, because young expensive people are coming in at first before they become productive and show off their talents and really learn their stuff into their 40s and peak in their spending and productivity. That's what caused the inflation from the late 60s into 1980 and that's what's brought it down ever since. Until we printed this $5.2 trillion here after Covid and inflation suddenly went from 1% to 9%. And now that's what we're dealing with. Now they have to tighten to deal with that. And I'm saying the economy underneath, we're still in this lull of the echo of the baby bust before the millennials start to hit, really starting next year and cause another rising tide. So we're still in this weak point and I think this tightening is going to do more damage than they think. And so far it looks like, oh, the tightening is not having that big effect. It hits on a 12 to 18 month lag that everybody knows. Well, economists know that. They don't ever talk about it and people don't think that way. This tightening is going to be at its worst mid to late next year. Then we'll know how much damage it's going to do.

And I'm saying sort of, I point.

To wearing off number one. And then this tightening now and rates going from zero to five and a half predicted they're five And a quarter already is going to hit in the next year and we're going to have a down whammy underneath and then this tightening and the economy going to be hitting way worse than people think.

Okay, so hang on, hang on. So just to be fair though, the, the tightening has been, it's an iterative thing, right? It started a year ago.

Yeah, started in March of last year. They're raising rates a little over a year ago, raising the cost of borrowing and that always slows the economy, but it does it on a lag. Businesses don't immediately change all their decisions.

Right. But if, if the thesis is that.

The lag is 12 months, then we've already seen some of that hit the economy and more.

When before has 5.2 trillion, that's 25% of GDP been added to the economy? This was not about lowering rates. This was money injected into the financial market making rich people richer. Okay. And then they spend more of their money, can do more. So it's this 5 trillion is what caused the short term inflation. This tightening is meant to fight it. The problem is these lags mix it up for people.

Understood.

We're still feeling the 5.2 that's going to wear off in the next year for sure. And this tightening for sure is going to hit much harder. So the next year is going to be surprisingly less strong than people think. Right now everybody's concern is including the Fed, the US economy and most economy world are too strong.

Okay, so I got a question for you.

So the first time I met you.

We had a really fun night in Scottsdale, Arizona. You were doing a conference there and we went, we had some food, we had some drinks and that was a great time because I'd followed your work for so long and that was really fun.

And I remember you saying back then in 2004 that you were expecting deflation.

And I know you've been a fan of the Elliot Wave theory and we had Bob Proctor on the show and his associate talking about Elliott Wave before as well.

Are you still in that camp or.

Has that changed at all?

And you reminded me of it because.

Of this 5.2 trillion injected into the economy.

And the 3.6 trillion that 5.2 trillion had had two purposes. To get the economy out of a funk and to prevent deflation.

Sure.

If you look at history, the worst times are not times of rising inflation. Those are bad. The worst times are deflationary periods like the 1930s and many periods before that. The 1870s and 80s were deflationary. The 1830s and early 40s were deflationary. Those are not periods that they call recessions, Jason, those are called depressions. Why? Because financial asset bubbles that blow up more than anything else, way more than economy does with stimulus, those financial assets go down and wealth just disappears. And that makes the spending, particularly at the top 20% who actually control 50% of the spending in economy, that makes their spending go down and that and that's what hurts the economy.

Okay, so is the future still, according to Harry Dent deflationary or.

It is when it hits and in to do this the economy has to slow and which means this 5.2 trillion has to wear off. We're not slowing because this 5.2 trillion is still working its way in the economy. But it's not going to take that long. I'm saying in the next year this 5.2 is going to drop off. That's disinflationary, deflationary, weakening for the economy. And on top of that, which is something new that they just did in the last year. Like you said, they started in March of last year. This taking rates from zero to five and a quarter and probably at least a five and a half before they're over just ahead that rate hike is going to slow capital investments by in home buying and all this sort of stuff. It's not doing it yet because people are already rolling it that it has a lag too. What I'm saying here, we will not know where we're at until about a year from now. So anybody judging today just saying. Well, they raised interest rates as much as and it's not slowing things that much has no idea what.

Yeah, Harry, look, we know part of it because it started over a year ago. So we don't know all of it yet. But we do know because it's iterative. They have a meeting every month and they've raised it what 11 times.

You're not listening to me. Okay, I'm sorry. You're not listening to me.

Yeah, go ahead.

We don't have one thing going on here, okay. We've got this giant 5.2 trillion ceiling now. We got this tightening, okay. These things are on different clocks happen at different times, right. And so. And they have lags. You have to think in lags to make any sense of it.

Yes, yes, I, I know.

That's what I'm trying to do.

I agree.

One to one and a half year lag to this 5.2. You understand why the tightening isn't having much of an effect yet. I'm saying, and I'll stake my career on this. The next year we'll see more weakening than people are expecting because of these lags. Both lags, okay? The 5.2 trillion stimulus will wear off as any stimulus does because it's temporary and not real. Okay? And they've been mopping it up like a generation. Spend more. And this tightening will keep digging in and hitting harder over the next year. So we won't know where we're at until the summer or fall of 2024. And I'm saying we're going to be in maybe a depression, but at least a deep recession.

Okay? So deep recess, if not depression.

And we'll be back with a lot.

More on this topic with this guest.

On our next episode.

Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you don't miss any episodes. Be sure to check out the show's specific website and our general website, hartman media.com for appropriate disclaimers and terms of service. Remember that guest opinions are their own and if you were require specific legal or tax advice or advice in any other specialized area, please consult an appropriate professional. And we also very much appreciate you reviewing the show. Please go to itunes or Stitcher Radio or whatever platform you're using and write.

A review for the show.

We would very much appreciate that. And be sure to make it official and subscribe so you do not miss any episodes. We look forward to seeing you on the next episode.