Top 10 Highlights In The Market & Economy 2019

Jason Hartman chats with in-house economist Thomas on todays episode. The two discuss the top 10 things that are happening in the US and abroad that are making the most impact in 2019 including- the US/China trade war, interest rates, the Mueller Report, millennial household formations, and more.

Investor 0:00
After I started going to events and hanging out with some of the great people in your client base, I was talking to a group at the Cincinnati and poverty tour and one of the guy I told I’m maxing out my 401k they’re like, why are you doing that? What Why don’t you just do where the company matches and then take the rest and invest in real estate. You know, it’s like a big light bulb light bulb moment. So I did that I dropped my I was putting like, 17 18% you know, pre tax money into this, that I had no control over. So I dropped it down to where the company was matching, which makes sense. And then I’m taking the rest out and buying more properties with

Announcer 0:39
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 multi millionaire who’s actually been there and done it. 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 on Now, here’s your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Jason Hartman 1:29
Welcome listeners from around the world. This is Episode 1207 1200 and seven. Thank you for joining me today as we talk about the top 10 things that have been going on in the markets in the economy so far this year. What has been going on? We’ve got our in house economist back on the show. That is Mr. Thomas young Thomas, welcome back. Looks like interest rates are down. And that’s good news. If you want to borrow and buy another property or maybe even consider refinancing properties that you’ve got refi to you die My plan that I’ve outlined many times. But yeah, good news for borrowers. Oh,

Thomas 2:08
yeah, I think it’s the top thing that’s happened so far this year, at the end of 2018. Economists and other analysts were expecting mortgage rates to go up from 4.5%. But instead, they’ve gone down mortgage rates are down to 4%.

Jason Hartman 2:23
Yeah. And to be fair to all those prognosticators that are practicing the dismal science of economics and trying to predict things. Hey, why wouldn’t they predict higher rates, the Fed told us they were going to raise rates very explicitly. And then they decided not to maybe it was because Trump was picking on Jerome Powell about that, or maybe they just decided, hey, we don’t need to do any more rate increases. The economy is cooling off too fast. I think they reacted a little too quickly, and got too aggressive on those rate increases. So I’m really glad I have to see this, because I think it’s a more major thing. And I think that’s very good news for us as investors to have, you know, another good buying and lock in and refinance opportunity here. And then really some other good news number two on your list is that household formation is really booming now, not on a per capita basis. This isn’t quite as remarkable as it looks, but it could pretend some good news in terms of shadow demand for housing. Tell us about household formation.

Thomas 3:34
Yeah, it looks like the millennial generation is coming to the market. It took them a while it was a rough start. But in 2019, the core part of the millennial generation is turning 30. That’s the largest year largest segment of millennials. It’s 30. Now, yeah, yeah, it’s turning 30. They’re coming to the market. And it looks like although they got a late start, they still want to own a home.

Jason Hartman 3:59
Well, it isn’t Failure to launch they were just late to launch. And what’s been known as the boomerang generation is getting out of their parents house and, and forming their own household. So that’s good news. We know this generation, this demographic cohort has certainly delayed marriage. That’s a change. But the highest point before this, that was back in the 80s. Right?

Thomas 4:23
Yeah, the previous peak was January 1982. At 3.2 million. Okay. And, yeah, population is up. I think it’s around. It’s between 80 and 100 million

Jason Hartman 4:34
over sense for the sensor. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So we’ve got a lot more people living in the US. And the peak before was 3.2 million January 1982. And in 2019, it reached 2.9 million in terms of household formation, right. And that’s for the year I guess, is the way that stat is I’m guessing

Thomas 4:59
it’s household growth over the prior year, the new household

Jason Hartman 5:02
over the prior year. Okay, that’s good. Good. So on a per capita basis, this isn’t nearly as significant as it was for the baby boomers forming households in 1982. Right?

Thomas 5:15
Nope. To me that what that says is that we’re just at the start of a household formation boom. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I agree. No, it’s showing up big but there’s still a good amount of demand out there.

Jason Hartman 5:28
So if you’re thinking of buying more properties to invest in, or you’re thinking about the portfolio you already own as an investor, this is really good news for you. Because this means this household formation that is taking place is in two segments, its renter household formation, and its buyer household formation. So there is a lot of room for a lot more formation in the coming years and We heard a lot during Great Recession about shadow inventory, right, this inventory of unsold homes. But this is really a discussion about the opposite side of the supply demand equation. And this is shadow demand. Okay. And this is really good news for investors, it shows that the coming years are going to be very good to them, I think. Right?

Thomas 6:25
That would be my guess.

Jason Hartman 6:26
Yeah, at least there’s not a shortage of demand. We’ll put it that way. Right. Because looking at your chart, and we are looking at a chart, and it doesn’t give the exact year numbers, but it looks like right about the year 2000. Okay, because the chart numbers are from 1998 to 2003. So right around 2000. demand was really low in terms of household formation, right?

Thomas 6:51
Yeah, the recession had its effect.

Jason Hartman 6:53
Yeah, that wasn’t really the same as I want to almost really call that bubble. More than recession that was the 911 in Bubble time, right? I of course, there was a recession, but I’m sort of looking at the big events versus the general recession in that time period. Would you say those two factors bubble and the loss of wealth effect from bubble bursting. And then of course, 911 really caused people to slow down in terms of everything, right.

Thomas 7:26
Yeah, that’s exactly what I’d say.

Jason Hartman 7:27
Yeah. Very interesting. Okay, good. On number three, talking about the Federal Reserve and Jerome pal. Tell us what you have to say there.

Thomas 7:36
Oh, I put this in there. Because I think it’s fascinating one month before the Federal Reserve announced that they will not raise rates in 2019. They were saying that they were going to raise rates and additional four more times. I think it speaks to how people that are policymakers or others that have some influence on the economy, their views can change on a dime.

Jason Hartman 8:00
To me, that’s good that Powell is sensitive to feedback. Maybe he wasn’t at first or and it’s not really him. He’s just sort of the icon for the whole Federal Reserve. But yeah, it’s good that they seem to be listening to that feedback, even if it looks like pie in the face, right. Like, they’re not being stubbornly or stupidly consistent, right.

Thomas 8:22
They definitely don’t want to appear political. So they never say that they’re paying attention to Trump, but they probably are.

Jason Hartman 8:29
Maybe they are. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. That’s interesting. Okay. So in terms of housing prices, the fourth big thing that has happened this year, the cyclical markets have really weighed on the overall market, right, these expensive cyclical markets, whether they be Los Angeles, you know, Seattle, cooling down New York City, definitely cooling down. Those prices really shot up quite a bit and the buyer is just said no more. We’ve had enough You sellers have to get a little more reasonable before we’re gonna buy any of these houses in these high flying cyclical markets. Right?

Thomas 9:07
Yeah, I think that’s exactly. You know, the Case Shiller index, I think places too much weight on these bigger cities outside of the Los Angeles’s there’s home prices are doing well, you know, especially in Middle America, they will probably rise by another five to 10%. Again this year, there’s definitely more upside risk to housing prices.

Jason Hartman 9:29
When you say upside risk, you mean upside potential? You mean if you were betting against it, right. If you were shorting the market, then you’d say upside risk. Right. That’s what you mean by that?

Thomas 9:40
Yeah, I wouldn’t short the housing market. I right. There’s more upside rest of the housing market.

Jason Hartman 9:45
I had been downside risk, right.

Thomas 9:47
There’s a good amount of more downside risks in the equity markets than there is in the housing market.

Jason Hartman 9:52
But if you’re looking at the housing market, from the Case Shiller index perspective, where 75% give Take of that index is high flying cyclical markets. It’s a good 75% of that index. And that’s why I think it’s so misleading. You know, the vast majority of the country is not the Case Shiller index. Okay. You know, but the ones that get all the attention are part of the Case Shiller index, right. And so if you were just doing it on the index, and you were going to place a short bet, I might do it. Because I think those markets still have some adjusting to go, but hey, rates came down again, that’ll put a little more demand into the market, a little more juice, a little more demand, more buying. So good stuff. Okay. So Thomas, in point number five, you’re talking about housing starts and how they have moderated a bit, right.

Thomas 10:47
Yeah. So housing starts started the year at 1.14 million on an annual pace and now they’re at 1.235 million. So right housing starts are still going up there. Just Not going up as strong as what they have been in recent years.

Jason Hartman 11:04
And that kind of number and I’m not sure in your chart doesn’t say it if it’s seasonally adjusted or not. Because the seasons definitely affect housing starts. Right.

Thomas 11:14
Yeah, that’s why I put it in as an as an annual pace because the raw numbers reported by the Census Bureau are not are not on a seasonally adjusted basis. Got it. Okay. That’s good. That’s good.

Jason Hartman 11:26
Okay. So a little better, but not much. That’s the takeaway, right?

Thomas 11:30
Yeah. I’d say there’s more upside than downside risk. And housing starts as well. I don’t think there’s very much downside risk at all.

Jason Hartman 11:38
Yeah, yeah. Yeah. And listeners, I think the word Thomas wants you to hear is upside potential. When you say upside risk. It sounds like that’s bad. It is bad if you’re shorting anything. That is upside risk, right. But yeah, so that’s maybe the way that financial people talk. But the way I would want to hear that as a listener is potential versus, you know, risk is down. Side upside is potential. That’s the way I think of it. Maybe I’m too much of an optimist. I don’t know. Is the cup half full or half empty? Okay, so let’s look at the big broader picture. Let’s look at gross domestic product. Let’s look at GDP. It was booming last year. I mean it really incredible frankly. It’s still really good, isn’t it?

Thomas 12:22
Yeah. First Quarter came in at 3.2%. The storyline that I don’t know I always have it in the back of my mind is the 2016 tax cuts and JOBS Act, the Trump tax cuts. They were sold on the idea that if real GDP grows at 3%, that the tax cuts would pay for themselves. And I’m sure you already know that most analysts thought that was preposterous, right?

Jason Hartman 12:48
Yeah, well, they’ve been proven wrong. It even came in better than the 3% where the tax cuts that they forecast they need a 3% growth. Look, let’s unpack that one a little bit. Okay. So, you know, I agree with Arthur Laffer and Ronald Reagan and the supply side, trickle down theory, I believe that if you cut taxes, you create more economic activity, because there’s an incentive for that activity. And if you increase taxes, you suppress economic activity. Now, people are welcome to disagree with me about that. I’m sure if Karl Marx were here rising from the dead, he would disagree with me. I’m sure that Obama would disagree with me, etc, etc. But that’s what I think. And so basically, what the naysayers were saying is look, in order to make the Trump plan, pay for itself, and not increase, putting the government into even more of a hole than it’s already in. We got to have 3% GDP growth, to pay for these tax cuts. You got to have that activity to pay for the offset in the reduction in taxes. And the reaganomics idea is that you can actually increase tax revenue by decreasing tax burdens, because you create a bigger pie, right? That’s the idea. And Thomas Feel free to interrupt me or correct me on any of this if you folks in the academic perspective, want to clarify or disagree, and so far it looks like that’s exactly what’s happening. I mean, point 2% better than expected, right?

Thomas 14:35
Yeah. I agree that it’s boosted economic growth and I don’t I don’t like to be told you so type of guy but I I told you so so far. So far, the evidence is on the side of it did boost economic growth. Yeah,

Jason Hartman 14:49
yeah. Well, I mean, look at Time will tell we’re not it’s not over till it’s over. But so far, it’s looking good, right. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, stuff. We got to talk about a few more things here. But let’s take it quick break and play one of our blog cast, I really want to bring some of these to you because I’ve been listening to them on my Alexa app. I hope you’re doing that too. That’s a little secret. And so yeah, as I listened to them, I think, you know, we got some great old content here. And I want to share that with you on the show from time to time. So we’ll take a little break and Thomas and I will be back to finish up the 10 big things that happened. We’ll be right back after this. Creative Destruction how innovation makes the rich get poor. You know, the phrase no dominie is creative destruction was popularized by the Austrian economist Joseph school, Peter is a way to describe the flow of innovation and progress in a market economy. The way that this phenomenon unfolds is through the course of normal business where new and existing businesses attempt to profit from their ideas. Now, some will succeed if their idea addresses the needs and desires of their consumers and can be produced at a low enough cost to generate profits. Some will fail However, because their ideas are not quite tuned to the current marketplace, or it can’t be brought to market in a cost effective manner. In other cases, you have companies who attempt to ride the profits of old ideas indefinitely. The dynamics of a market economy are such that customers mercilessly switch to companies and businesses that provide for their wants and needs more effectively. This means that large bureaucratic endeavors are eventually crushed by their own weight. As innovation declines costs increase, and new companies with new products begin to make their old ideas and existing products irrelevant. As this effect aggregates it results in sustained economic growth through the destruction of established companies and their monopolistic pricing power by new entrance. The unique characteristic of this creative imagination and penetrating innovation that result in the next phenomenally successful idea, sometimes referred to is the next Google can’t be manufactured in a laboratory. It’s not possible to ask You really predict the next great innovation or to institutionalize its creation. The reason for this phenomenon is because large companies are beholden to their shareholders to produce profits, and they’re impaired by their management hierarchy. Thus, the business life cycle is one where venture starts out with a new idea that may succeed or fail. Now note that most new businesses fail before anybody’s had a chance to see them become an overnight success. If success is achieved, the business will frequently go through a period of rapid growth. This growth frequently requires additional capital that’s raised through debt and equity offerings. As the company continues to operate, it must decide whether to invest in new developments to its core product line or in new developments. Since the company is an established presence and its core product line, it will always realize greater returns from extending its core rather than branching off in new directions. This systematically biases the investment decisions of established Businesses away from new innovations. Therefore, new innovations almost exclusively come from new entrants instead of the entrenched entities. Now a poignant example of this phenomenon is in the music industry, vinyl records were displaced by a track tape players which were themselves made extinct by cassette tapes. Compact Discs subsequently swept away tapes and are now in the midst of decline because of mp3 players and smartphones that can hold large amounts of music in an extremely compact package. Walmart has become famous for its inventory management, marketing and personnel management strategies that allowed it to gain a competitive advantage over industry giants such as GM reward and Woolworths. Now, Walmart faces the same threat that it poses to other industry giants if another entity comes along who can innovate around them and provide services to the customer at an even lower cost. The most fascinating characteristic of creative destruction is the fact that it does not need to be dictated by A politician or government committee, the systematic dismantling of inefficient or ineffective companies is the result of market competition. The only thing that can stop this process of consistent productivity growth through elevating successful entities and sweeping away the inefficient is government fiato and the corporate state. When the government provides artificial competitive advantages or bailouts to large entities, it stifles the dynamic competition that is necessary for sustained economic growth to occur. The more influence over the economy that belongs to government, the less this process of systematic improvement will benefit the economy. As the process of creative destruction plays out it results in a world where the big don’t eat the small but rather, it’s the fast that eat the slow. The people and companies who develop the best ideas and move to accommodate the customer more quickly, are the ones who will be the winners of tomorrow. Consider that the only company from the original 20 Dow Jones list of The most influential businesses in America is still in business. That one company is General Electric. And the reason that has remained prominent is because of its constant drive to reinvent itself. And even GE is constantly at risk of being made irrelevant if its core product lines go into decline in the market innovate around them. We’ve seen that the conventional wisdom of the rich get richer may hold true in the short run, but a longer timeline yields the process of creative destruction where the new and nimble outrun the big and slow, the good become rich, while the rich become poor. Now, as an entrepreneur, it’s important to keep a longer term perspective and understand but it’s the power of your ideas and your ability to act decisively that will ultimately determine success or failure. Come rich while the rich become poor. Now as an entrepreneur, it’s important to keep a longer term perspective and understand but it’s the power of your ideas and your ability to act decisively. That will ultimately determine success or failure.

Jason Hartman 21:04
So Thomas, you know, the dems have been trying to sink Trump. And they thought the Mueller report would do that, I think. Right. But that didn’t quite happen. That’s actually number seven on your list is a political thing. But its implications on the economy, right?

Thomas 21:24
Yeah. So far, Trump’s been good for the economy, as I’m guessing most everybody knows. And the Mueller report basically, at I don’t know how to characterize it, because it’s highly political. But in terms of for the housing market, it’s real good because it creates confidence that at least for another two years, there will be no drastic changes to economic policy. And if anything, the policy is going to be more towards encouraging investment. It’s going to be more positive to the economy.

Jason Hartman 21:58
Yeah, that’s definitely good. For the economy, that we’re not going through impeachment proceedings, or, you know, any big scandals or anything like that. What about trade? You know, we hear about the trade, you know, I’m not calling it the trade war anymore. I’m going to call it the trade negotiations, because that’s all it is. But I guess you could argue that negotiations are more. Okay, fine. What are your thoughts on the trade negotiations on the trade situation?

Thomas 22:24
Yeah, it’s something that I think the US has to do. Unless, if you look 50 years from now, and China keeps growing at 9% in the US gross at 3%. China’s economy will be three times as large as the United States. If you want that to happen, then you don’t do anything. Right. You just let it go. But if that’s important, right, if it’s important for the US to be the leader in world economics, then you gotta do something about it. The way you dress it is called there. I don’t know You call it cheating, but right, address their intellectual property issues and address the idea that the yuan is

Jason Hartman 23:08
artificially suppressed. Yep. So what that does is it increases their exports because it makes them cheaper when they artificially suppress their own currency. But that also hurts their people because it makes their currency weaker than it. You know, the argument is that it would be stronger if it were floating in the free market and it wasn’t artificially suppressed. Right, Thomas that are you would say that?

Thomas 23:33
Yeah, that’s exactly how I’d say it. I don’t. You know, I think it’s taken a president that has some guts. I don’t know how else to describe it. Right. I think both political parties understand that. The trade balance can’t keep going the way it is. You got to do something about it.

Jason Hartman 23:48
Right. And I always say that look, I’m all for free trade, as long as the parties trading are equally yoked and they’re not you know, China doesn’t have worker safety laws like we do. It doesn’t have employer liability like we do, you can’t sue your employer for looking at the year the wrong way in China, like you can in the US. And, you know, they don’t have the minimum wage laws we have, they don’t have the regulatory burden. They don’t have the environmental laws. It’s not a fair fight. So you got to equalize it. And the only way to really realize it, at least that I can think of our tariffs. And so that’s what’s happening. And, you know, everybody can argue about Oh, protectionism. It didn’t work before, you know, Wonder Taft or whatever it was, well, you know, it’s a different world. Okay. So, I don’t know, you know, it’s not the same world we lived in before. You know, I think you got to negotiate the deal. When you still have the power and the US still has the power, but like you said, if it waited, then the US would be negotiating from a position of weakness later. We’re still the big customer on the block. Right. As the big customer we got to negotiate our best deal. Well, we can Not 10 years from now, when their economy is much larger, and ours is floundering. Okay, that’s that wouldn’t be good. So, yep, that’s the scoop on the trade. How about another element, obviously, of the trade negotiations or the trade war is, is, you know, we’re not just trading goods, but we’re trading. We’re trading dollars because it’s the reserve currency. And we trade that in many ways. But one way in which we do it are with the Treasury markets, right? China is asserting its power there, right. That’s item nine.

Thomas 25:39
Yeah, they tested their, you know what some people might call their nuclear option and selling their 1.2 trillion of Treasury holdings. Obviously, the question in that is whether it would have an effect on the yield curve.

Jason Hartman 25:52
So just explain that to the layperson if you will. So a sell off of Chinese US Treasuries, bonds, right, essentially, would change the yield curve. And you know, the yield curve is we went into that a little bit before, but just give us a very quick explanation of that.

Thomas 26:15
Yeah, the idea is that the bond market has a supply and demand. And when demand rises, yield goes down, because there’s more people wanting to hold treasuries. And so the amount that gets paid on those treasuries goes down. But if the opposite happens, if demand goes down, then yields go up, and what China did, so they sold the 20 billion that was the first part of March, but then, in the first week of May, their interest in the Treasury auctions, they were testing the waters to see what the effect they would have if they showed less interest at the Treasury auctions. And the bid to cover ratio dropped from 2.55 to 2.17, which was the lowest sense March 2009. The bid to cover ratio is the amount of money that is pledged versus how much is actually needed.

Jason Hartman 27:08
Okay. So who pledged and who needed to come up with the money? I mean, what do you mean there? What’s the dynamic?

Thomas 27:15
So when the Treasury says they’re going to issue notes, a dealer broker dealers say, you know, JP Morgan, they can buy those treasuries or a foreign government such as China, right? The European Union buys a whole bunch, they can buy the treasuries and they make a bid and say this is you know, how much I’ll buy. And this is the rate of which I’ll buy him at the first week of May, the Treasury was expecting the yield to go down, and rather going down and went up 1.4 basis points. So it’s a risk out there. I don’t think China would actually do it right, because it would hurt them more than it would hurt the US.

Jason Hartman 27:54
That’s the thing you know, Peter Schiff has been saying for almost 20 years that this is going to happen. You know, the decoupling that he’s talked about, and I’ve told him why he’s wrong so many times on the show. And you know, he’s not the only one, you know, with these ideas that just they just don’t happen, right. But it’s certainly interesting to listen to him. No question about that. He talks about how, you know, trying to stop spying our treasuries, we’re screwed, you know, all of this stuff. It just it just doesn’t happen. There’s too much interconnectedness for anyone to use that so called nuclear option. It’s I just don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon. I wouldn’t, wouldn’t worry about that stuff. wrapping it up. Let’s go back to our millennial Home Buying demographic. This is the largest demographic cohort in American history. 80 million strong, little bit bigger than the baby boomers. Tell us a little bit about them as a home buying group and let’s wrap it

Thomas 28:53
up with this Thomas. Yeah, so millennials now will probably account for about 45% of all mortgages in 2019 And that’s compared to 17% for boomers and 37% for Gen Xers. So the millennials that have gotten into a home, they’re at the point now where they can move up to upper tier price points or, you know, just move up to the middle tier price points that the millennial generation will be the biggest purchaser of homes for the next decade. And so far, although there was a large amount of concern so far, it’s it’s okay. It looks like Actually, it’s going to be a positive experience for millennials and for the economy in general.

Jason Hartman 29:36
Yeah. So you know, what’s really, really startling about the percentage statistics you just talked about. I mean, folks, this is kind of, you know, I’m kind of trying to dissect this and and think about it. Okay, so, it says that over the next year, Millennials will be about 45% of all new mortgages. 17% will be baby boomers, essentially mostly their parents. 37% of them will be Gen Xers that’s my generation. And what’s interesting about that is that the millennials are the largest cohort that’s 80 million strong. The baby boomers are almost as big as they are 76 million strong. And the Gen Xers are really small. My generation is really small. We’re like this lonely generation. We’ve only got about, I don’t know, 40 million people, about half the size of the millennials. So it’s interesting that my generation is taking up 37% of the mortgages, baby boomers only 17%. And just last week, on one of our episodes, we talked about how baby boomers are renting more and more. And how startling that was. I think the statistic we cited was 43% rent growth and baby boomers. Which Thomas that’s Amazing. I mean, that would have been unheard of years ago. Because baby boomers, always the plan was own a home, retire in your home, pay it off, right the old fashioned plan or you know sell your your big home when you’re an empty nester and then buy a condo, right? But now, the stigma for renting seems to have been removed and a lot of these baby boomers are renting. So that could attribute to the lower percentage of mortgages. Or it could be that they’re paying cash or they paid off their homes, right, that’s a possibility. The Gen X or certainly aren’t free and clear. They’re getting a mortgage. So I’m kind of curious, what really is happening here, you know, and I don’t know the answer. I just know the question or, or one of the questions. But it’s kind of interesting to ponder that, don’t you think?

Thomas 31:54
I wish I had a good quote or something intelligent to say

Jason Hartman 32:00
I don’t have anything intelligent to say either. I just asked questions.

Thomas 32:05
37% Gen Xers that’s I don’t know, the Gen Xers they they’re doing well, I think a good amount of them are doing really well. That’s a lot

Jason Hartman 32:13
of mortgages for such a small demographic cohort, you know? Now granted if you follow Harry dense work, and of course, he’s been on the show many times, and he talks about how either the peak earning I can’t remember now, but the peak earning or the peak spending they’re very close to each other. So it doesn’t matter, his age 46. Okay, so certainly some Gen Xers are 46 years old, right? So, you know, they might just be in their peak spending phase, you know, the baby boomer that not the baby boomers, they’re not in it anymore. They’re coming down from that. And, you know, the millennials are going to enter that in about 1516 years. So, yeah, it’s kind of interesting to sort of ponder this stuff and see what it’s like but next year might be the peak year for millennial home buying and they’re turning 30 so they’re going to start forming families here sometime soon. We’ll see how it all works out. It’s really interesting. Thomas, thank you for joining us today and sharing this 10 things. It’s a great list. It’s very insightful as to what’s going on and what it means to income property investors. So I appreciate having you back. Yeah, good to be with you. All right. Go to Jason Hartman comm check out our properties and check out our upcoming cruise to Grand Cayman Cuba and Jamaica mon. can do that right there. Jason Hartman calm it’s right on the front page. Until tomorrow. Happy investing. 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 heart and Mediacom for appropriate disclaimers and Terms of Service. Remember that guest opinions are their own. And if you require specific legal or tax advice or advice and any other things 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.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks