Stocks, Bitcoin, Gold — Everything Is Going HIGHER From Here

0:00Hello, everyone. We've got a lot to discuss today. Stocks, Bitcoin and gold, they are all going much higher. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will now allow you to use crypto to get a mortgage. and we sit down in an exclusive interview with the chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, Steve Myron, to better understand the economic policies that are coming out of the White House. That's right. We got a big boy interview with someone from the White House. We're live today from the desk of Anthony Pompliano.

0:34Now that the recession has been canceled, all eyes are on what will happen to asset prices through the end of this year. Now, if you remember, I previously predicted back in April, at the depths of all the fear-mongering, that we would see new all-time highs across assets by the end of 2025. And since then, we have seen Bitcoin, gold, and the NASDAQ 100 each reclaim a brand new high. Next up, it will be the S &P 500's turn. Four different assets, all the same outcome. And the good news, it isn't going to stop there. Carson Group's Ryan Dietrich highlights that July is the best month of the year in a post-election year.

1:06And it's also the best month in the past 20 years. It's the second best month in the past decade. So July's looking good. It's not a bad thing to look forward to, right? Ryan goes on to point out that there's a good chance that stocks could actually post a double-digit gain for 2025 as well. That would surprise many of the doomsday predictors from earlier in the year. Call it slingshot engaged. Now remember, I told you to study reflexivity. The faster something falls, the faster it can recover. We're living through volatile times. the speed of information, and therefore the speed of emotional reaction, it's never been possible before now.

1:40Up, down, up, down, just never stops. And over a long enough timeline, every asset is going to go up and to the right, as long as it's priced in dollars. Just take a look at the US dollar index for another data point. It's lost more than 10 % in the first half of this year. Bar chart points out that this is the worst start to a year in four decades. Four decades! Nowhere is it more obvious than with Bitcoin. The 80 vol asset has appreciated hundreds of percent and then violently ripped down 80 % or more multiple times. That volatility scares some people away, but it is the solution to another group of investors' problems.

2:13As many in the Bitcoin world have pointed out, volatility is vitality. Take a look at the Bitcoin price overlaid with the M2 money supply. If Bitcoin continues to follow money supply growth, we could see$150 ,000 per coin before the end of the year. That would be volatility that would make many Bitcoiners very happy. But no coiners, you got no one to blame but your government. Bitcoin will keep going up until the government stops printing money. If you want to bet on the national debt, pull in a U-turn, be my guest. I'm convinced that will never, ever, ever happen in our lifetime now. So you have to position yourself to benefit rather than be punished by the corresponding dollar debasement.

2:49Stocks, gold, and Bitcoin, they're all going higher. We're going to blow through new all-time highs. And pessimists once again, they will have sounded smart, but they're going to struggle to make money. Yesterday, the chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, he threw an absolute missile into the national conversation around Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. Here's what he had to say. Bill said that after significant studying and in keeping with President Trump's vision to make the United States the crypto capital of the world, today I ordered the great Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prepare their business to count cryptocurrency as an asset for a mortgage.

3:23Now, why the heck does Bill Pulte have to do this? Well, for those of you that don't know, banks and places like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, when you've previously applied for a mortgage, they've simply said, we're not gonna count your cryptocurrency as part of the assets when we underwrite that mortgage. It's kind of crazy. I went through this myself when I lived in Miami. I wanted to go buy a house, take out a mortgage. And when I went to the bank, they said, any crypto you own, that's a big fad zero when we evaluate what your assets actually are worth. Now, why is that? Well, they're volatile.

3:53They don't really understand it. and the bank didn't have a view on whether these assets would actually exist in the future or not. That's all behind us. BlackRock's got ETFs. Public companies are buying Bitcoin. The government actually likes Bitcoin now. And so, of course, the banks, they got to follow suit. And so this change at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, I think will be the wedge into the market for every bank to start to look at cryptocurrency assets as part of someone's application for a mortgage. Now, you don't get punished for holding cryptocurrency if you want to go and buy a home. But first, before they do that, there's some nuances in the Bitcoin and crypto world that are very important.

4:27Take Casa's Nick Newman. He called out the fact that it looks like Bitcoin held in self-custody will not count as an asset for consideration on home loans. He believes that's a mistake. And he said to Bill Pulte that self-custody is fundamentally aligned with American values. It's trivial to prove ownership of Bitcoin in self-custody. I agree with Nick. And I actually believe that Bill Pulte also agrees as well. We want people to be able to hold whatever financial asset that they actually want to hold. Let them do with their money what they want. But then they should also be able to use those financial assets when they apply for a mortgage.

5:00It looks like Bill Pulte, somebody who's been very sympathetic to the Bitcoin story. He understands the technology. He holds Bitcoin, I believe. And now he's helping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enter into and be one of the first to look at Bitcoin and crypto when you apply for a mortgage. My prediction. So we're going to see a lot more of this in the coming years. Ladies and gentlemen, today I have a very special treat for you. I had the opportunity to sit down for an exclusive interview with Steve Myron, who's the chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Steve is one of the most sought after sounding boards for President Trump on economic policy.

5:34And in this conversation, Steve really helps us understand what is the White House thinking in terms of that economic policy? What is their intended outcome? And where do we have to go from here? How will it affect your personal portfolio? Here's my conversation with Steve Myron. Steve, I thought a great place to start this conversation is there's so many people who are focused on the one big, beautiful bill. And I think rightfully so, because that's the piece of legislation that everyone wants to see impact from. But before we get to actually what's happening here today, I thought it'd be better to expand maybe on your kind of worldview.

6:04And there's a lot of talk online of kind of this reordering of the monetary order, the Mar-a-Lago Accord. And so could you just describe how you see where the United States is today and what you think are the big opportunities for us to kind of re-engineer how global trade and the economy works? Sure. So first of all, thanks for having me. It's really great to be here chatting with you. I guess sort of we're talking about my overall view of how the world works. You know, it's basically that, you know, if we really had a world of free and reciprocal trade, you know, I think we'd be in a much better position where we'd have more balanced trade and more balanced trade is, of course, more sustainable.

6:39It's more resilient. It helps us defend ourselves better because it would be good for a manufacturing sector. But the truth is that there's lots of countries around the world who have all sorts of non-tariff barriers up and tariffs and other other interferences in trade. Things like IP theft, you know, things in other financial markets that prevent trade from balancing and it makes it highly uneven. And so I do think it's important that we start thinking about restructuring the global trading system to make it fairer, to make it more open to American goods. And that's exactly what the president is doing.

7:10I mean, his actions on tariffs have been truly historic and and they serve as strong incentives to other countries to open their markets to American products. But also they bring in tons of revenue, which brings the deficit down, too. Talk about the trade deficit. I think that there are plenty of video clips that have surfaced online of Democrats over the years talking about the trade deficits with China or other countries. There's been Republicans that have been talking about this for a long time. But I don't think the American people quite understand what exactly a trade deficit is and why it's such a problem in your view.

7:40Yeah. So the trade deficit basically is what happens when we import more than we export. Right. And so when we buy more from the rest of the world than we sell to the rest of the world, we end up owing the rest of the world money. We end up owing them debt because that's the only way that you can buy more from them than you sell to them. And that ends up being a problem. Right. It ends up being a problem because if you accumulate all that, all that international debt, eventually it leads to financial instability problems down the road. And you want to address that before you ever get there. It also leads to a problem because it creates real problems in what economists would call the tradable sector.

8:14And if we end up importing over a trillion dollars more from the rest of the world than we export to the rest of the world every single year, driven in large part by systematic cheating by countries like China, you know, it ends up really hollowing out our tradable sector, which means manufacturing. And that's why you get large scale, you know, problems in in geography, in geographical parts of the country that are reliant on the factory town. And then the factory goes out of business and the jobs move to China or something. And then you have that that region of the country have severe economic problems that follow down from that.

8:51And we want to address that because we don't want those parts of the country to lag behind. And it's also so critical from a national security perspective, because manufacturing is essential to defense. You want to be able to defend America, defend ourselves, keep our shipping lanes open. And that requires that we can produce the material we need for defense here at home without relying on key inputs from an adversary like China. We don't want to be in a position in which we say, okay, we need to make guns. We need to make bullets or satellites or jets. And there's a number of key parts that you can't make it without those parts.

9:27And China says, hey, we're not giving you those parts, right? That is just, you know, forget about the economics for a moment. It is unacceptable that we'd be unable to defend ourselves because we don't have a sufficient manufacturing sector, because we allowed decades of failed America-less trade policy to continue. Now, I've probably spent more time reading some of your work and some of your thoughts than I'd like to admit. But one of the nuances that I see between what I believe you think and what is kind of the mainstream conversation is this idea that reshoring of manufacturing, people will immediately point to, we don't want to screw in the iPhones.

10:00We don't want to make t-shirts or socks or underwear here. When I hear you talk, you're talking about things in high technology or defense, semiconductors, things that are much, much more, I think, higher on the priority list. Is the reshoring manufacturing everything or is it more surgical in terms of these kind of critical industries? So I do think that we are going to reshoring manufacturing. We are going to get much more manufacturing in this country because of our policies, because of what the president is doing. But I don't think we're going to get all the manufacturing in the world, right?

10:30We will never make everything in the universe here. There will always be trade. It's a question of wanting to make more here. And then, of course, as you say, we want to make more of the high-tech stuff. We want to make more of the high-value-add stuff. We want to make more of the stuff where we can really specialize as technological and innovative leaders and in high-productivity fields, right? Now, I think one major difference between how our administration is pursuing things versus how, say, the Biden administration pursued things or how China pursues things, is we have less focused, targeted subsidies at specific industries.

11:03And the reason why, and so, you know, if you look at what the Biden administration did, just, you know, throwing, you know, a trillion dollar plus of subsidies at Green New Deal stuff, like different new forms of energy or electric vehicles, or you look at what China does throwing endless amounts of industrial subsidies at various industries, including real estate, to the extent where they build so much real estate that they have empty cities. The thing is that it's really difficult for a government bureaucrat to sort of say, hey, I know exactly what consumers are going to want and when and where and how much, right?

11:34That type of knowledge is really difficult for the government to have. And that's why the government is really bad at picking winners and losers. And that's why you get in China a situation where they invest billions or trillions of dollars and it winds up producing empty cities because nobody really wants or uses those apartments. Or the Biden administration plows a trillion dollar plus into Green New Deal stuff that ends up building, you know, green tech industries that are reliant on continual government subsidies that disappear if those subsidies disappear too because the end consumer demand isn't there.

12:06The government is not really going to be good at predicting whether consumers want electric cars or gas cars, or whether they want hoops or sedans or SUVs, right? Only consumers at the end of the day are going to know what kind of car they want. And there's no reason for thinking the government's really going to be good at that. So our approach instead is to just create the best environment for doing business that we can, right? And so if you look at the One Big Beautiful Bill, it contains such huge incentives for investing in America. There's things like full expensing on equipment, tax deductions for buying equipment, full expensing on new factories, right?

12:40If you build a new factory, you get a huge tax incentive, full expensing on R &D, right? Same thing. And then on top of that, you look at what we're doing on the deregulatory agenda. We are cutting regulations left and right, right, as fast as we possibly can. And that's so important because we want companies to be able to build and invest and hire what, where, and when they want, rather than spending years begging Washington, right? And all of these regulations are very, very anti-business. They say, don't invest here, don't build here. And what we want to do is create the best environment for business on the planet so that anyone who's thinking about building a factory or hiring a worker says America is the obvious place to do it.

13:17Now, if you contrast these two approaches, what the Biden administration and what China do, right, and they're very similar because, you know, they both have sort of strong elements of central planning to them. It's to say we know exactly what industries and products we want to plow money into. And then they do that. And then ultimately, consumer demand may or may not be there for those products. And they could end up wasting lots of money. Whereas what we want to do is we want to create an environment in which businesses know what they want to invest in, but they have incentives to do that investment regardless of what it is.

13:48Now, what's interesting to me is when we talk about tariffs, which obviously is kind of a core component, I think, of the economic policy coming out of Washington right now, most people are evaluating these tariffs kind of in a silo. Are tariffs good? Are tariffs bad? What is the impact of tariffs? What you're describing here is almost a kind of more robust approach where you're saying, OK, we're going to levy tariffs, which will cause friction in certain parts of the economy for certain products, certain countries. But then also there is a tax incentive to come and move your factory here, build your factory, hire people, et cetera.

14:16Can you talk about maybe the robust approach to the economic policy rather than these kind of one-off things that people try to separate and analyze in a silo? Yeah, totally. So, yeah, so again, if you're targeting a specific industry like the Chinese did with real estate, you end up with lots of unnecessary capacity, right? Lots of unused product, empty cities, right? Whereas the approach that we're taking is to do exactly what you're saying, to just make it the best environment for companies to invest in, right? And so that means tax incentives for investing. That means the full expensing on equipment and R &D and on new factories.

14:51That means getting rid of the regulations, too. And I think that regulations are so profoundly important for thinking about how the economy develops. So imagine there's a regulation that says you can't build a factory there because we found a snail. It doesn't matter whether the tax rate is 10 percent or 20 percent or 80 percent. If there's a regulation that says that you can't build the factory there because there's a snail, you're not building the factory no matter what. Because otherwise the government will come in and fine you billions and billions of dollars, throw you in jail, whatever. Right.

15:20And that's a big problem. So it is so important that we start peeling back these regulations so that businesses can invest very often. So much of the of the cost advantage that other countries benefit from relative to the United States in terms of moving production abroad is a regulatory event. Right. Because those countries allow allow businesses to invest and build and we don't. And so it's so important that we start allowing the permitting process to move forward, that we start allowing businesses to build and hire. And that's how you create an environment in which businesses are able to and want to do business.

15:56When we think about your policies and kind of your worldview, another key component is that the U.S. dollar is overvalued historically because of its global reserve status. Can you describe kind of how that happens and what the negative impacts are? Yeah, so I'm not going to comment on the specific level of the dollar right now. You've got to talk to the Treasury Department and Secretary Besson for that. But, you know, like there are many things that go into global capital flows and currency valuations are certainly one of them. Trade conditions and trade barriers are another part of it. And so what the administration is doing is taking a holistic approach to trade where we are using tariffs to to reindustrialize.

16:34We are using tariffs to open foreign markets. Tariffs, as you said a moment ago, create a cost advantage for the United States for producing here relative to importing. Tariffs give the president the leverage he needs to open foreign markets to our goods so that we can reach positive negotiated deals. And then we have more ability to export into those markets. And we're taking a holistic approach to it combined with making the United States a much better environment for doing business as we were just discussing. You've been very against large stimulus packages, as I think more and more Americans are realizing that those things actually are detrimental over the long run.

17:09There is kind of one approach, which is to yell and scream and try to prevent the stimulus packages from being approved and implemented. There's another approach, which is kind of a free market solution with something like Bitcoin, which essentially is allowing people to protect themselves and almost benefit from the insanity of some of this monetary fiscal policy. What are your views on Bitcoin? How do you look at that asset specifically playing into the global trade? Yeah. So first, I'm not opposed to stimulus in principle, but I do think that everything has its moment. Right. And so if you look at COVID, if you look at like the depths of COVID, right, the CARES Act of March of 2020, which really got the economy back on its feet after COVID and ushered in the strongest recovery in history, you know, that was a$2.2 trillion package.

17:53But that's not a crazy number because there was a$2 trillion hole in the economy. Right. And so the size of the CARES Act package was roughly similar to the size of the hole in the economy. And that's appropriate. You do a stimulus package when you have no other options. When monetary policy is tapped out, it can't ease any more. It can't provide any additional stimulus to the economy. And there's a huge hole in the economy and it's really necessary. You don't do it at any other time. Right. So it was appropriate to do some fiscal in 2020. It was appropriate to do some fiscal stimulus in 2008, 2009.

18:23Other than that, there have been, you know, almost no times in the last, you know, sort of recent decades that have been appropriate. Now, the problem with the previous administration was they just kept on doing fiscal stimulus even as the economy recovered. And, you know, you don't need to do it when the economy is recovering on its own. All you do is sort of end up with significant inflation. And that's what Americans lived through for the last, you know, for the last four years until President Trump. And they made it very clear at the ballot box what they thought about that. Now, Bitcoin and crypto, you know, they have important roles to serve when you think about what goes on with inflation and hedging and inflation.

18:57And I think that, you know, that's part of why they've become so popular with people. I do think crypto has a big role to play in shoring up the financial system as well. When you look at some of the crypto legislation that's going through Congress right now, things like the like the Genius Act, you know, the Stable Genius Act. I think that those can do a world of good by allowing folks who don't have access to traditional savings vehicles to get their savings via crypto, via stablecoins, into what are ultimately treasury-backed securities. And that can have a real profound stabilizing and shoring up role on the U.S.

19:36financial system and the global financial system. It's fascinating to me that in a weird way, when I first started looking at Bitcoin, you start to think that Bitcoin and the dollar are competitive with each other. What it seems to now get to is that Bitcoin and the dollar are both succeeding together. Stablecoins are a big part of kind of this global adoption of the U.S. dollar. We are now a very large buyer of U.S. treasuries. And as this kind of plays out, it almost feels like the stablecoins are becoming systemically important. How do you evaluate them as buyers of treasuries, especially at a time where maybe China and Japan, who were big buyers in the past, on a percentage basis have started to buy less and less of our debt?

20:14Yeah, so as long as the stablecoins are backing their deposits with treasury securities one for one, then they don't pose real systemic risk because it's all backed by the underlying securities, right? And I think that's what the Genius Act tries to do, right, is to make sure that they do so that you do have that sound and robust financial system. Now, what stable coins do is they give access to savings that ultimately are backed by treasury securities to anyone in the world who wants it, right? And so if you live in a place where it's difficult to get an account at a financial institution that would allow you to own treasury securities, that would allow you to own dollars, now you can, right?

20:53And so what that does is that that allows many, many more people, many more billions of dollars access into our financial market that wouldn't otherwise have that access. And so in doing so, it underlines dollar dominance. It underlines the role of the dollar. It preserves our financial hegemony. And those are all, you know, really positive things. And my last question about Bitcoin and crypto is Bitcoin seems to have been this bottoms up adoption story, you know, kind of people started to adopt it. Then we got companies and financial institutions and now governments. Obviously, we've got the strategic Bitcoin reserve here in the United States.

21:25Other countries have decided to mine or buy or hold Bitcoin. We know that gold has served an incredibly important role in this global financial system. And there are certain countries that are really buying a lot of gold, and they're putting that in their central bank reserves. How do you see Bitcoin playing into kind of the resilience or the plan from a strategic standpoint for governments moving forward through the lens of economics more so than anything else? Yeah, so, you know, I don't really have a great answer to that. But, you know, I do think that, as I said before, you know, These types of assets have roles to play when you think about the role of inflation and what it does to other assets and what it does to hedges – sorry, and as a hedge.

22:05And therefore, I think that they do have roles to play for a lot of folks. And I want to be very clear. I'm not giving – it's not my job as the chief economist in the White House to give financial advice to people. But I do think that there's a reason why these products are so popular, and you're describing some of those reasons. That's absolutely the case. Let's talk about the big, beautiful bill. I think there's a lot of folks who they've seen headlines that this is going to blow out the deficit, that this is going to spend an incredible amount of money. When I read the analysis, the reports that are coming out of the White House or maybe some of the economists in Washington, D.C., I hear a very different story.