401(k) Withdrawals, Mixed Inflation News, $37 T Debt, Charitable Giving Changes, Vegas Travel, Social Security Gains, Student Loans, Kodak, Tariff Impact on Producers & Resilient Spending

No surprise to me that there’s a glut of apartments on the market I saw the potential for this oversupply happening in San Diego a couple of years ago. It seemed anywhere you drove within a short distance you would see the construction of new apartment buildings. It is not just here in San Diego though as the glut of apartments is happening around the country. With the dynamics of supply and demand, if you’re looking for an apartment today, you’re in for a treat. In September rental rates had the steepest drop in more than 15 years. Landlords are now offering months of free rent, gift cards, free parking and some are even paying for your moving expenses just to get you to sign a lease. You may want to play hardball because in some areas they’ll even cut the rent on top of all those incentives. In September, 37% of rentals agreed to concessions like months of free rent. What caused the problem for landlords is during the early years of the pandemic, developers could not begin building apartments fast enough, especially in the Sunbelt area where there was a major population migration. It became the biggest apartment construction boom in 40 years, but because of the delay of construction permits and labor shortages, development took much longer than they had hoped. It seemed no one looked around to see all the apartments going up, and now they’re all competing with each other for renters. The landlords are hoping they can raise rents by the end of 2026 or at least sometime in 2027, but I don’t think they are factoring in how many apartments are online with more still to come. Based on the current apartment inventory and new apartments coming online, renters could be in for lower rent maybe perhaps until 2028. This will not be good for the housing market because rent for houses will be the next to fall and then people will have to factor in the affordability of renting vs buying a home. This would also likely hurt the demand for buying rental properties as an investment if you can't get as much rent as you thought. Are the large hyperscale companies like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet inflating earnings? Michael Burry, who was made famous by "The Big Short", made the claim that some of America's largest tech companies are using aggressive accounting to pad their profits. He believes they are understating depreciation expenses by estimating that chips will have a longer life cycle than is realistic. Investors are likely aware of the huge investment these companies are making in AI, but they likely don't understand how the accounting of the investments work. If a business makes an investment in these semiconductors/servers of let's say $100 B, that doesn't hit earnings when the money is spent as under generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, they are instead able to spread out the cost of that asset as a yearly expense that is based on the company’s estimate of how rapidly that asset depreciates in value. From what I've seen, these companies are generally depreciating their Nvidia chips for over 5 to 6 years. This seems to be a stretch considering Nvidia is on a 1-year chip production cycle, and the technology is changing quite rapidly. Burry estimated that from 2026 through 2028, the accounting maneuver would understate depreciation by about $176 billion and if Burry is correct, hyperscale's will have to write off AI capex as a bad investment, due to depreciation-useful life mismatch. This would then produce a major hit on earnings. While I remain a believer that AI is here to stay, I do believe there will be some big-time losers in this space given all the money that is being spent. Be careful chasing the hype as I do worry the fallout for some of these companies could be larger than many things possible. Burry has also warned this year that AI enthusiasm resembles the late-1990s tech bubble and recently disclosed options betting against Nvidia and Palantir. He also stated that "more detail" was coming November 25th, and that readers should "stay tuned." I know I'm definitely curious what other information he has! China is no longer just manufacturing; they are also beginning to innovate. For many years innovation was generally done here in the US, and we would have the products manufactured in China. China is no longer happy with this arrangement, and its research and development spending is up nearly 9% a year well above the 1.7% here in United States. In 2024, China filed 70,160 international patents which was about 16,000 more than the 54,087 patents the US filed. China also seems to be more advanced in robotics installing 300,000 industrial robots in 2024 compared with roughly 30,000 industrial robots in the US. It also has been noted that when it comes to worldwide sales of electric vehicles, 66% came from China. While these developments seem positive for China, the country is still experiencing problems with a slowing economy as they have seen fixed asset investment decline and a slowdown in retail sales. The population of China has also declined over the last three years, and the real estate market after four years has really taken away a lot of household wealth. China’s public and private debt continue to climb rapidly, which is becoming a problem for them as well. It is estimated that China is spending around $85-$95 billion on AI capital spending yet their economy is struggling as noted by the China Merchants Bank which talked about a 11% decline in consumption among customers and retail loans are now under pressure. China’s exports to the US are down 27% because of the tariffs, but worldwide their exports are up 8%. It was recently reported that Beijing banned foreign AI chips from Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices and Intel from government funding data center buildouts. Currently, China cannot pass the US and its allies in producing the most advance semiconductors, but they’re making very good progress in developing mid-level chips and parts of the AI ecosystem. The US must continue to forge ahead because if we rest, China will be the world dominant power Financial Planning: 50-year Mortgage: Helpful or Hurtful? A 50-year mortgage is being discussed as a way to reduce monthly payments and help with affordability, offering borrowers slightly lower costs that could help them qualify for homes otherwise out of reach. Critics argue that these loans would saddle buyers with far more interest paid to banks and that many borrowers would never pay off such a long mortgage, but those arguments often miss the bigger picture. Paying a low rate of interest to a bank is not inherently bad if it allows someone to invest money elsewhere at higher returns, just as today’s homeowners with 30-year mortgages at 2% benefit greatly from not paying them off early. Also, most mortgages today are never fully paid off anyway because homes are sold, or loans are refinanced long before they reach maturity. A 50-year loan would be no different, especially since borrowers could always pay more than the minimum if they wanted to accelerate payoff. In practice, savvy investors would likely use the freed-up cash flow from 50-year mortgages to invest in higher-return opportunities, but most borrowers probably wouldn’t resulting in slower wealth accumulation for the masses without addressing the root cause of housing affordability. If used correctly, this loan could be a useful tool, but I fear the overall impact could be damaging. Does the US need Strategic Petroleum Reserve? In 2022, over 200 million barrels of oil was used to keep gasoline prices low in the US after Russia invaded Ukraine. Since then, very little oil has been replaced in the reserves. There are roughly 60 caverns at four sites between Texas and Louisiana. The caverns are roughly 1500 feet deep, which would fit the Chicago Willis Tower inside. To bring the reserve to full capacity of about 714 million barrels, the government would need to buy about 375 million barrels of crude oil. If the price was $60 a barrel, the cost would be $22.5 billion. But the big question is, do we really need to have that much oil in reserves? The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was established in 1975 shortly after the end of the Middle East oil embargo that ended in March 1974. Much has changed since then as back in the mid 70s; the United States was very dependent on foreign oil. Today, the United States is producing on average 13.5 million barrels per day. While our consumption is 20.3 million barrels per day, we are not at the mercy of anyone nation or region for oil like we once were. If we needed more oil, there would be the capacity to produce more than 13.5 million barrels of oil a day. So based on the numbers, I don’t think it would be worth $22.5 billion to fill up the reserve. Trying to fill up the reserve probably would also increase the price of oil as there would be added demand from the government. What are your thoughts? The new Paramount Skydance loses money maker Taylor Sheridan It’s only been a couple of months since David Ellison took over Paramount, which is now referred to as Paramount Skydance. Paramount was probably saved by what they call the billion-dollar man, Taylor Sheridan. He really climbed to fame after he created the hit series Yellowstone, and Mr. Sheridan seems to be a creative genius. When Paramount asked him to create new content for Paramount+, in a three-year timeframe he created seven new scripted series for Paramount, which really pushed the production teams to the limit. He created top of the line series from Tulsa King to the Lioness, and all have been big hits. Mr. Sheridan is waving goodbye to Paramount Skydance because apparently the new CEO, David Ellison, and he does not get along very well. You still have a few years left to watch the creativity of Taylor Sheridan on Paramount Skydance but beginning in 2029 after his contract expires, he’ll be working with entertainment company NBC Universal for a contract that is worth somewhere around $1 billion. It’ll be interesting to see what Mr. Sheridan does for content over the next few years at Paramount Skydance, as I wonder how engaged he’ll be. Ford’s electric truck known as the F-150 Lightning may be coming to an end Since 2023, Ford has accumulated $13 billion in losses on electric vehicles. Ford spent a lot of money on marketing and promotion of their electric truck known as the F-150 Lightning. Probably the nail in the coffin for this vehicle was the end of the Federal EV tax credit which caused sales in October to drop 24% in the US compared with a year ago. This was the first month without tax credit. It is not just Ford ‘s truck that has struggled, but sales of Tesla's Cybertruck have dropped dramatically this year and Rivian, who also makes electric trucks, has been cutting back on expenses including job cuts to maintain their cash. I remember concerns about electric trucks when they first came out as buyers worried that the electric pick-ups would run out of juice in the middle of a job or a long haul. The range for these EV trucks on a single charge is reduced dramatically when towing or carrying big loads or operating in cold weather. Ford's electric F series trucks have sold the most so far this year at 24,577 vehicles sold. That is about 7000 more than the Tesla Cybertruck. It appears this could be the end of EV trucks and big electric SUVs. For smaller electric cars, the demand is there from consumers, but it appears within the next 6 to 12 months you’ll probably witness more auto makers dropping their big electric vehicles. The president of Microsoft sells over 38,000 shares of his stock On Monday, November 3rd, Microsoft's Vice Chair and President, Brad Smith, sold a total of 38,500 shares of his Microsoft stock. It was done in two separate transactions. The first transaction was a sale of 30,411 shares with an average price of $518.49 and the second transaction that day was for 8,089 shares with a price of $519.21 for a total sale value of just under $20 million. He still owns 461,000 shares a value around $237 million, but could he have some concerns that are causing him to lighten up his position a little bit? After the most recent quarterly report, the stock sold off because of the high amount of money they’re spending on AI. In the most recent quarter, capital expenditure was $34.9 billion, which was above expectations. The stock closed last Friday at $496.82, which marked the first time since September 8th that it was below $500 a share. Like many tech companies, their stock trades at high valuations with a price/earnings ratio of around 35 times. We have been concerned with the high valuations of tech companies. Could this be a sign that even the top executives have some concerns about valuations? Protect yourself from AI scams with a code word Generative AI has become so good that it can mimic people’s voices like your son or daughter, and you can’t even tell the difference. To prevent you from being scammed by someone imitating your son or daughter that claims to be in need of money, you want to establish a family code word. The code word should be simple, but something not well known that you may put on social media like the name of a pet or the street you live on. You may want to come up with a code word that is something unique to your family and is easy to remember. You should keep the circle that has the codeword small and pretty much only in the immediate family. It may sound silly, but it would be a good idea to bring up the codeword with the family in private, so no one forgets it when it is needed. This isn't high tech where you have to change passwords frequently, it is lower tech and the only time you would have to change the password is if by chance someone in the family got divorced or someone accidentally told someone else that is not in the family about the code word. It kind of makes you feel like the old days of the spy world where before you can talk or send money you ask what the code word is. The job market still looks strong You may be wondering, how would one know since the major government data has not been released due to the shutdown? It is important to realize there are other sources that can be used to get some idea of where the job market stands. For instance, the Chicago Fed, which is separate from the federal government and still producing data, estimated that last month's unemployment rate was at 4.36%. This is remarkably close to the estimate in September of 4.35% and the BLS jobless rate in August of 4.3%. It does appear the job market is continuing to hold steady even with all the noise. Another source is ADP, and they said in the month of October private payrolls increased by 42,000. While September did drop by 29,000 jobs, that is still a net gain of 13,000 jobs over a two-month period. The Bank of America Institute also said there was no further slowdown in employment in October, based on the tracking of internal deposit flows. They found that payrolls were up 0.5% from a year earlier. Will the shutdown finally come to a close this past week? We should start seeing economic data from the federal government soon. Goldman Sachs estimates the Bureau of Labor Statistics will put out an updated schedule of releases in the early part of next week. We are now missing the September and October job reports and while we should see the September data soon, October's survey that is used to produce the jobless rate wasn't completed. This means we will not get a complete October jobs report, and other survey-based data like the October CPI will not be produced. Hopefully, the Fed can get more data before the December meeting on the 9th and 10th, as it is a coin flip as to whether they will cut rates or not. It has been quite a change since just a month ago when the market assigned a 95% probability that there would be a rate cut.

Apple CEO Tim Cook pulled three rabbits out of a hat Pulling a rabbit out of a hat is a pretty good trick, but pulling three out of a hat is nothing short of a miracle. In the spring of this year, Apple stock fell below $170 a share as it was faced with enormous tariffs on iPhones, the potential loss of a $20 billion per year payment from Google, and sales for iPhones seemed to be stuck in the mud. To handle the tariff situation, Tim Cook promised US investments of $600 billion over four years. This was not bringing iPhone production back to the US, but it was an investment of making AI servers in Texas and offering manufacturing training for US businesses in Detroit. Apple also announced a $2.5 billion commitment to make iPhone cover glass in Kentucky with Corning and a $500 million partnership to produce rare earth magnets in the United States. After this investment pledge, the President said Apple would be exempt from tariffs on imported electronics. To save the $20 billion yearly payment from Google, Mr. Cook sent Apple’s senior vice president in charge of services Eddie Cue to testify. He convinced the judge that technology shifts are so powerful that they can take down even the most massive companies. In other words, the judge didn’t need to impose harsh penalties, and the market would essentially take care of itself. And somehow consumers have been convinced that the new thinner smart phone called the iPhone Air is a must for any consumer. The marketing on this must be phenomenal because the iPhone Air has a weaker camera, a single speaker, a smaller battery with a shorter life and a higher price tag. Apple also convinced consumers that the rest of the iPhone 17 lineup was worth an upgrade. Apple is predicting up to12% revenue growth in the holiday quarter, twice what Wall Street estimated. So, in roughly 6 months the stock, after dropping to a low around $169 a share, it is up roughly $100 and somehow supports a price earnings ratio of 36. Congratulations to Tim Cook and shareholders of Apple stock. If anyone said they knew Apple would be fine either they have a crystal that really works, or they didn’t understand the problems Apple was facing. Going forward the road is still bumpy with operating expenses coming in slightly over $18 billion for the December quarter, a 19% increase year over a year and well above the 10 to 12% revenue increase that Apple's projecting. We don’t see any big drops in the stock coming up, but I still can’t justify the share price or see any reason why the stock will continue to climb going forward. In 2026 you could be buying stocks on the Texas Stock Exchange Businesses and CEOs are getting tired of the high taxes in New York City and the regulations that are costing them billions of dollars. Texas, which is known as a pro business state will be opening in Dallas the Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE). This has already been approved by the Security Exchange Commission (SEC). It is expected to see operations open for trading in the first quarter of 2026. The Texas stock exchange has the backing of JPMorgan Chase, who just invested $90 million into the new exchange. Large companies like BlackRock and Charles Schwab are also on board. It is backed by many businesspeople including billionaire Kelcy Warren, cofounder of Energy Transfer Partners, and billionaire Paul Foster, who founded the investment firm Franklin Mountain Investments. This could be a heavy blow to New York and New York City, who have been unfriendly to business because they felt like they have the only place in the country to trade. Now that New York City has elected Zohran Mamdani for mayor, it will be interesting to see how businesses respond since he says he will go after business and the wealthy to pay more taxes. The state of Texas has no income tax, but if you live in New York City you could pay a state tax of 10.9% plus a city tax of 3.9% and it doesn’t take long to get to those levels based on your income. Public companies that bought Bitcoin are getting worried The craziness of public companies riding the Bitcoin wave as it increased in value caused many of their stocks to jump even more than the increase in Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. But now that Bitcoin has pulled back from its all-time high slightly over $126,000 and has dropped about 20%, those public companies that bought Bitcoin are seeing their stocks drop far greater than the decline in Bitcoin. Roughly 25% of the public companies that bought Bitcoin as a treasury strategy now have a market cap valuation below the total value of their Bitcoin value. What companies were doing was they would invest in Bitcoin then sell their shares at a premium as their stock increased in value and then used those proceeds to turn around and buy more Bitcoin. Now that Bitcoin has declined, there’s no reason for crypto buyers or traders to buy those stocks and instead it looks like they have been selling them. As an example, CleanCore Solutions is now down over 80% since investing in Dogecoin and even a larger player like Japan’s Metaplanet, which is a top five publicly listed Bitcoin holder, has seen its stock decline around 60% over the last 3 months. If Bitcoin were to continue its decline, the company could be forced to sell assets, which could cause Bitcoin to fall even further. So far, this has not affected the company who started this craziness of buying Bitcoin in their treasury. I'm referring to MicroStrategy, which has changed its name just to Strategy and still trades under the symbol MSTR. Really all this company does is buy Bitcoin. Strategy owns roughly 640,000 Bitcoin and at today’s price it is worth roughly $70 billion. It is estimated that Strategy's average purchase price for Bitcoin is $74,000, so they seem to be safe for a while. However, stock investors in Strategy are probably crying the blues since in July the stock was around $450 and as of today it trades around $240, close to a 50% decline. As we have said for years, no one really knows what direction Bitcoin is going, it could be up or it could be down. But one thing is for certain, if those companies that bought Bitcoin and pushed the price higher, now need to sell it that will probably cause Bitcoin to fall further. Financial Planning: The Conflict of Interest around Universal Life Insurance Universal life insurance is often presented as a hybrid policy that combines features of term life and whole life, marketed for its perceived benefits of tax-deferred cash value growth and the potential for tax-free income through policy loans in addition to a permanent death benefit. However, realizing these benefits typically requires significant overfunding, meaning the policyholder must pay premiums well above the minimum needed to keep the policy in force. Universal life offers flexible premiums, but there are ongoing fees and costs of insurance, which increase with age, required to maintain coverage. Only premiums paid beyond those costs build cash value that can be invested. The problem is that agent commissions are usually based on the “target premium”—the minimum amount needed to keep the policy active, not the funding level required for it to perform as illustrated. This creates a conflict of interest, where many agents are incentivized to sell the policy but not to ensure it’s structured or funded properly. As a result, many universal life policies become underfunded, fail to accumulate meaningful cash value, and ultimately function as expensive term insurance. While some advisors structure these policies correctly, they are the exception rather than the rule. Because the life insurance industry is easy to enter and highly lucrative, it attracts many underqualified or self-interested salespeople. For most people, term life insurance combined with disciplined investing remains a more transparent and cost-effective approach that will outperform even the most efficiently structured life insurance, especially since the need for a death benefit typically declines by retirement. It’s important to regularly review existing life insurance policies to ensure they’re performing as intended and not quietly eroding in value over time. Sales of electric vehicles killed Porsche‘s profits Like other car makers, Porsche thought it was a good idea to come out with electric vehicles for their consumers to buy. Unfortunately, the Porsche buyer rejected electric vehicles, and this has destroyed the profits at Porsche, which had been known for financial stability and for over 10 years generally had double digit operating margins. The most recent quarter they reported a loss, which was the first quarterly loss in years. The numbers got worse from there. For the first nine months of the year, the profit was only €40 million. The company also reported €2.7 billion in one-time costs and write downs. Unfortunately, they believe by the end of the year that write-off could rise to €3.1 billion. The company is also dealing with a difficult Chinese market and tariffs from the United States. In my opinion, some cars should not be electric, which includes Porsche and the recent announcement by Ferrari to do an electric vehicle. I think that could have the same results as what Porsche experienced. New estimate show in 2033 retirees will lose $18,000 a year in benefits There are many misconceptions about what happens when Social Security becomes insolvent. Benefits will still be paid, but since there’s no money left in the plan, it will only be able to pay out what it brings in. In a recent survey by Allianz, 55% of Americans admit they don’t know much about Social Security or how it will fit into their retirement plans and 66% worry that Social Security will not be there when they retire. The $18,000 loss per year would be for the average couple, not per individual. Another issue that is not discussed as much is it is predicted that the Medicare hospital insurance fund will also be empty in 2033 and when that happens Medicare payments will fall by 11%. So, people getting less benefits are going to find it hard to find a doctor or medical facility to accept less. Social Security is a big part of household income for adults over 62 years of age accounting for roughly half of all their income. To fix the problem, either benefits have to be reduced, or taxes need to go up, or perhaps both. It’s important to realize that Social Security came out in 1935 when the average life expectancy in the United States was 61.7 years old. With the retirement age at 65, not many people were collecting Social Security. Today people in the US are living 16.7 years longer with a life expectancy of 78.4 years. This has not been taken into account over the last 90 years with Social Security and that’s why we’re in the mess that we are in today. As life expectancy improved over the years, the retirement age should’ve also increased at a proportionate amount. The best way to fix the problem is to extend the retirement age by five years or so, but only for the rich. The reason for this is American men born in 1960 that are in the top quartile by income are expected to live 12.7 years longer than those in the bottom of quintile. This is because they have more money and are generally in better health with better access to a healthier lifestyle. Also, since rich Americans live longer than poor Americans, they collect more from Social Security so they should have to work a little bit longer, which would reduce the length of time that they would collect from Social Security and also add an additional five years putting into the fund. Being in the top quintile myself, I would not have a problem with this and believe it is the fairest way to solve the problem. I’m sure some will disagree with me and unfortunately, I don’t think the problem will be resolved until whoever gets in office in 2032 is forced to come up with a solution. No President or Congress would want to make such an unpopular decision until they absolutely need to. Job losses are increasing in white-collar jobs What do Amazon, UPS, Target, Rivian, Molson Coors, Booze Allen and General Motors have in common? They all have recently been laying off white-collar jobs to improve efficiency. AI is partly to blame for these job losses, but also executives are putting more pressure on mid-level managers and employees to produce more per employee. On the opposite side, there are many opportunities in front-line, blue-collar jobs for those who have specialized work abilities. That would include jobs in various trades, healthcare, hospitality and construction. It has been difficult for the graduating class of 2025, who according to the National Association of Colleges and Employers have submitted more job applications than the class of 2024, but are receiving less job. The sad part is I don’t see this changing going forward even though the economy is doing OK. Businesses will continue to look for ways to increase profits by using artificial intelligence and forcing employees to work harder and perhaps more hours. The jobs that pay more and require a bachelor's degree could be the ones that are more likely to be replaced by AI than other positions. If you’re in a white-collar job, you may want to do everything you can to increase your production to prevent being a white-collar employee who is easily replaceable by AI. If I wasn’t a value investor, I would consider putting Tesla stock in our portfolio As a value investor, when we invest in a company, it must have earnings, and we refuse to pay more than 10 to 12 times the future earnings for any business. This automatically kicks out a company like Tesla because it trades for over 250 times this year's estimated earnings. I always say if you don’t stick to your discipline and find an excuse to break it, then you have no discipline. However, on November 6th Tesla shareholders voted on stock bonuses for Elon Musk, which would nearly double his share in the company from 13% to 25% if he hits very high goals. The market cap of Tesla, which is currently around $1.5 trillion, would have to hit $8.5 trillion in the next 10 years, more than likely an impossibility of very high goals. I do believe Tesla could see a stock decline in the near future because of the big buying spree in September before the expiration of tax credits for electrical vehicles. I've seen predictions by experts that Tesla will see a 40% or more decline in electric vehicle sales going forward. This could cause a nice drop in the stock, giving investors a buying opportunity. The reason why I would be looking at investing in Tesla is three-fold. First, Elon Musk always seems to pull a rabbit out of the hat. I also believe they will have robotaxis and autonomous driving vehicles in the future. Another futuristic thing that is probably closer than we think is humanoid helpers in homes and businesses that will be a growing industry. Both of these innovations will be under the Tesla name, unlike some other innovations that Elon Musk has come up with that are under different companies. Investors investing money in Tesla have to be prepared for a wild ride over the next 5 to 10 years, sometimes experiencing a drop of perhaps 50% or more. But there is no doubt in my mind that Tesla will make some good profits off Robotaxis and these human-like robots. The big question is at the current levels has the valuation priced in these lofty expectations? Have some retirees become too comfortable with gains in the stock market? Over the last 10 years, the S&P 500 is up around 237%. Unfortunately, there are some retirees who don’t understand the risk they’re taking and believe this will go on forever. If you follow us at Wilsey Asset Management on a regular basis, you may know we have done well investing but also at the same time are very cautious based on many factors which I will not get into today. We do tell people that you can still be investing in stocks when in retirement, but you have to look behind the scenes and see what you’re investing in and understand that all stocks are not equal. Some retirees are probably spending more money than they should based on their past performance and are taking extra trips, flying first class and getting locked into lavish retirement homes that require a large down payment of hundreds of thousand dollars plus high monthly fees. What people don’t understand is that yes, the S&P 500 is up about 237%, but there could be a 20% pullback at some time that actually lasts more than a few months. That does not mean that the 237% gain will fall to just a 217% gain, no it will drop your gain over 10 years to only 169%. Also, the emotional distress that will happen when the markets fall will probably cause some people to sell their investments because they don’t understand what they have and then invest the money in something very conservative. Never getting back what they lost for perhaps as long as 20 years or more. It is great that retirees are enjoying their retirement, but they have to understand the risk they are taking, and this is why a good financial advisor with many years of experience that understands how to value investments is the best path for success in retirement. There are some signs that the job market is breaking down, but it’s not all bad We have been watching the job market for quite a while, and it still looks stable. There has been bad news from some companies like Amazon, General Motors, Paramount Skydance, and UPS that collectively laid off 65,000 people. But it’s not all bad news as there is some good news to balance out the bad. Small businesses revealed in the latest National Federation of Independent Business survey that they are planning to hire new employees. Also, people are still traveling and staying in hotels along with eating out and this has helped the hospitality sector, which posted the strongest rebound in hiring for October when monthly payroll growth was up 13.8%. Normally, October shows a decline in the month. With the government shutdown occupying so much of the negative news, there are other companies doing well like Homebase that provides employee management software to 150,000 small businesses which employ roughly 2,000,000 people collectively. It’s important to remember that small businesses in the United States accounts for nearly 50% of all the US private sector jobs. While small businesses do remain cautious, many are still optimistic going forward. Also on the positive front, ADP reported last Tuesday that the four-week moving average of 14,250 jobs for the week ending October 11 is higher than the previous four weeks with only 10,750 jobs. The government shutdown does make accessing data about the economy a little more difficult, but with everyone in the business world trying to find information to run their business there’s some interesting companies providing worthwhile data.

The big brokerage firms are fighting for your investment accounts Our investment advisory firm over the years has never been a favorite of the big brokerage firms because we generally only do three, maybe four trades on average per year. But the big brokerage firms are now acting like the casinos in Las Vegas and are doing everything they can to get you on their platform. They will give you all kinds of tools and seminars, so you’ll take higher risk and do more trading. In the meantime, they're downplaying the risk of trading. You see also like the casinos in Las Vegas, there are now stories of them giving away free rooms for the big players and they are giving you free software and free education on how to trade. Robinhood even invited 1000 people to Las Vegas and took them go kart racing and provided classes with their new trade platform. Schwab and Fidelity are doing similar types of events to get you to use more of their services. Once they get you in the door, they can show you how to use margin debt, which by the way hit a new record of $1.13 trillion in September, along with option trading and other exciting ways to make you think you can make a lot of money. Doesn't that sound like the casinos in Las Vegas that try and get you to hit the gambling tables? Unfortunately, it seems to be working somewhat because the percentage of investors who now have self-directed accounts is 33%, which is a big increase from 24% just five years ago. My problem with this, as you can tell, is I don’t believe they’re teaching people how to invest but more on how to gamble and how exciting it can be. Going back 100 years it's still the same with Wall Street, they will make some big profits, and the small investors will lose most if not all of their nest egg. Can Travis Kelce turn around Six Flags? If you’re not sure who Travis Kelce is, he is a tight end for the Kansas City Chiefs and engaged to the well-known singer Taylor Swift. Six Flags, which is a public company that trades under the symbol FUN, has received an investment of $200 million from the activist investment company JANA Partners. It was not disclosed how much investment Travis has of the $200 million, but he does like to invest in companies both public and private. He has investments in over 30 companies that include manufacturing, distribution, consumer goods, entertainment, and a beer company. He is pretty excited about his investment because as a kid he used to love the roller coasters, Dippin' Dots and him and his brother have great memories at Six Flags. He has suggested that they do a roller coaster with a 300 foot drop where riders feet dangle from beneath. Investing in Six Flags seems to be an uphill battle. Year to date the stock is down roughly 45%, the company is losing money and has a market capitalization of $2.6 billion. Travis does have a long-term perspective on all his investments likes we do. He is OK investing in a company losing money in hopes it could be turned around. Our philosophy at our firm is we will not invest in companies that do not have earnings. One benefit he does have is obviously his name and I’m sure if him and his fiancé, Taylor Swift, would start showing up at Six Flags, you can bet that they will be all over the news giving the company some nice free advertising. Markets actually declined after the Fed rate cut  On Wednesday, the Fed announced they would lower their benchmark overnight borrowing rate by 0.25% to a range of 3.75%-4%. This marked the second consecutive cut of 0.25% and there is still one meeting left this year where we could see another rate cut. The keyword here is could and the lack of conviction around another cut is likely what spooked the market. Powell said a December rate cut isn’t a “foregone conclusion” and while recently appointed Fed Governor Stephen Miran again dissented in favor of a 0.5% cut, there was also a hawkish dissent with Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid voting for no decrease. Schmid's vote and Powell's language was likely what sent the market lower after the announcement as many essentially had the December rate cut factored in as a sure thing. Powell also added that there is “a growing chorus” among the 19 Fed officials to “at least wait a cycle” before cutting again. This resulted in traders lowering the odds for a December cut to 67% from 90% the day prior. Given the lack of data and an economy that still appears to be in an alright position, I do believe the Fed needs to be careful cutting too quickly especially since they are taking another accommodative stance with the announcement that they would be ending the reduction of its asset purchases – a process known as quantitative tightening – on Dec 1. This in theory will stimulate the Treasury and mortgage-backed securities markets, which should help with longer dated debt instruments, as the Fed was allowing these assets to just roll off the balance sheet and now will need to step in and buy new debt to replace the securities as they mature. While QT shaved off around $2.3 trillion from the Fed's balance sheet, Covid led to a major expansion from just over $4 trillion to close to $9 trillion. The question is with the rapid expansion just a few years ago, was enough removed from the balance sheet to put it at a more normalized level. Like with the Fed cuts, I do believe if monetary policy eases too much, we risk a return of inflation and a further increase in many speculative assets that could cause problems down the road. Financial Planning: When does a Solar System Make Sense? Buying a solar system generally makes the most sense if you use a lot of electricity and plan to stay in your home long term. Installing by the end of 2025 allows you to capture the 30% federal tax credit, which significantly shortens the payback period. If the system is financed with a mortgage or home equity line of credit (HELOC), the interest may be tax-deductible, allowing for little or no upfront cash outlay and after-tax loan payments that can be lower than the monthly electricity savings. Owned solar panels usually increase home value, though not always enough to fully offset the system’s cost, which is why longer-term ownership is important to recoup the investment. In California, including a battery is almost always recommended so you can store power generated during the day for use at night, reducing the need to buy expensive electricity from the grid. Leasing can be attractive for shorter-term homeowners if lease payments are well below current utility costs, but leases generally don’t increase home value and don’t qualify for tax credits. The main advantage is immediate monthly savings without an upfront investment, though leased panels can complicate a future home sale. In some cases, it may be best not to install solar at all—for example, if you don’t plan to stay in the home long term, or if your electricity usage and potential savings are too low to justify the hassle and possible roof wear from installation. Don't ignore the concentration risk in the indexes! I've talked about this before, but the S&P 500 is not as diversified as you think. The Mag Seven, which consists of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla now accounts for nearly 35% of the entire index. If you look at the QQQ, or the Nasdaq 100, the concentration is even more problematic with the Mag Seven accounting for nearly 45% of that index. If you include Broadcom in the mix, those companies would account for nearly 40% of the S&P 500 and 50% of the QQQ. While the indexes continue to climb, people continue to have the false belief that they have a sound diversified portfolio. It is when the music stops that people will come to realize how over reliant they were on the tech sector. Congratulations if you have consistently held these indexes, but the more I read, the more concerned I am that we are heading towards something similar to the Tech Bust that occurred more than 25 years ago. Maybe we will see a decline in the federal deficit next year I have said before that at this point, the federal debt is not a huge problem, but it’s something that needs to be taken care of before it does get too far out of hand. There only seems to be two ways to reduce the federal debt, one is to reduce spending, which would hurt the economy, or two is to increase taxes, which would probably hurt the economy even more. I recently read something in the Wall Street Journal that gave me a glimmer of hope that there’s another way that maybe we can reduce the federal debt. In one of the articles it mentioned that at the NATO summit in June, President Trump achieved something that has not been possible by every other president since Richard Nixon was in office over 50 years ago in the early 70s. Somehow President Trump convinced the Europeans to make a commitment to increase their defense spending from 2% to 5% of their GDP. This means they’ll be taking care of themselves and that’s less money that the United States has to spend to defend them. In addition to that, President Trump has also pretty much ended most aid to Ukraine and instead offered to sell Tomahawk missiles to the Europeans, which they can give to Kyiv if they want. That would make a lot more sense for the Europeans, and it would save the United States billions and billions of dollars, which should help reduce our spending and generate some revenue to add to our GDP. The tariffs are also generating billions and billions of dollars of revenue for the federal government. I think we could see maybe more ways to reduce spending and increase revenue that no one has thought of. What all this means is, we could see a slightly lower federal deficit by the end of 2026. Let’s keep our fingers crossed as this debt needs to be addressed before it becomes out of control. The much anticipated meeting between Trump & Xi ended with little news I would say it was positive that Trump and Xi finally met, but the meeting ended in what looks like a trade truce instead of a trade deal. Trump agreed to cut fentanyl tariffs on China to 10%, which brings the overall levy on Chinese imports to 47% from 57%. This also means the 100% tarriffs Trump threatened to go into effect on Nov. 1st over rare earths will not occur. The US also agreed to postpone a rule announced on Sept. 29th that blacklisted majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list. Beijing said it will work to stop fentanyl coming into the U.S. and buy American-grown soybeans along with other agricultural goods. China also agreed to pause for one year the export controls on rare earths that were announced on Oct. 9th, but China’s rare earths restrictions announced in early April remain in place. The two countries also agreed to suspend fees for one year on ships that dock at each other’s ports. A big problem here according to Trump, the rare earths deal will need to be negotiated every year. I'm concerned by this because there could be a major difference in philosophy with the next administration. Another negative was details were quite light after the meeting and it wasn't really clear what China agreed to in terms of agriculture and energy purchases and their cooperation on fentanyl trafficking. Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, said China will buy 25 million metric tons of soybeans annually over the next three years, but all China said was the two sides agreed to expand agricultural trade without providing specifics. Other major points of contention including TikTok and chip exports from Nvidia appeared to go unresolved. Moving forward, Trump said he plans to visit China in April and Xi will come to the U.S., either Palm Beach, Florida or Washington, D.C., at a later date. If we lower interest rates, it is possible we may never be able to raise them again I know that seems strange, but you have to realize that the United States is now nearly at its 1946 peak of indebtedness relative to the size of the economy. It's important to remember 1946 was just after World War II and the country was paying off all the debt that was run up during the war. I do believe going forward, if the economy can maintain or continue to grow and the plans from the current administration generate more revenue, I think we will be fine. However, if they don’t work and the debt continues to rise, it would be hard to raise rates as it could scare current owners of treasury debt as interest expense would climb dramatically, which would make it difficult to recover. This is one problem that Japan is already faced with. Their large amount of debt to GDP and the debt itself cannot keep going up forever as people will eventually become scared and begin selling their treasury bills, notes, and bonds. The average interest rate on US debt is around 3.4%, which is not too excessive and could be paid off overtime. Increasing interest rates in the future would be a problem because as debt matures, it could have to be refinanced at much higher levels than the 3.4%. I believe the best way out of this situation is to maintain the current debt but increase the GDP, which would then in the long term generate more revenue to not only service the debt but also potentially be in a spot to begin paying the debt down. Some states are thinking of putting price caps on insurance companies, bad idea! Illinois is considering a ban on insurance companies being able to increase rates because of catastrophes in other states. At first thought this sounds like a great idea, but the problem is it makes the pool of insurance much smaller and if Illinois would have a catastrophe of their own with a smaller pool to cover the losses, insurance premiums could skyrocket perhaps even double. Louisiana gave its regulator the power to reverse excessive premiums. New York and Michigan are looking at imposing reductions on insurance premiums on both homes and cars. These states need to review what happened in California when the state refused to let insurance companies increase their premiums. Many insurance companies said we will lose money if we stay so we are pulling out of California. After a while California realized their mistake and allowed double digit increases insurance premiums and the insurance companies came back. People, regulators and the government forget that in many places home prices in just a few years more than doubled, which is ironic since people loved to brag about it. The reason this is important is when thinking about insuring an asset, if your house went from $400,000 to $800,000, would it not make sense to have your insurance premium increase 100% as well? States need to think more like Utah that has 130 insurers in their market. This gives consumers the ability to shop for lower prices and in order to compete insurance companies will have to figure out how to keep their rates competitive. I also don’t believe that people in government understand how rigorous the actual analysis insurance companies do to figure out how to cover the losses is and that they still need to make a profit for their shareholders. If someone thinks profit is a bad word, just think about that the next time you look at your pension plan or the growth in your 401(k). If companies were not making profits, the value of your pension plan or 401(k) would never grow. Small business owners may not be putting your deposits into your 401(k) I was surprised to see this, but apparently there are some small businesses that deduct the money from your paycheck but then fail to make the deposit into your 401(k) account. Part of the reason could be retirement plans with less than 100 participants are exempt from an annual audit that the federal law requires. The Labor Department has retrieved almost $24 million in missing 401K loan payments and contributions over the last 10 years through 3,100 civil investigations. The agency has also recouped $14 million through 115 criminal cases involving theft of 401(k) money. What is more staggering is that on top of that, there was roughly $260 million that was voluntarily returned to employees after the companies got caught. They often said the mistake was due to confusion around the rules. A former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Labor Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, which regulates 401(k)'s, says when small companies are facing financial difficulties, they tend to use those deposits as a short-term loan with the intention of paying them back quickly. But unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen and in the meantime, it is possible that your 401K account is missing gains because the money is not invested. If you work for a small company, I recommend at least once a quarter looking at your 401(k) not to see how well it’s doing, but to verify that the deductions from your paycheck are actually going into your account. I would guess roughly 99% of small businesses withdraw the money and put it into your 401(k), but for those 1% that is not happening for it is something you want to be on top of and make sure the money is coming out from your paycheck and going into your 401(k) account. If you find that is not the case, I recommend stopping your 401(k) contributions as soon as possible. If it goes on too long, there are companies that just close the doors, leaving the employees with little help of getting their money back.