Interview with Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang

Jason Hartman begins today’s show with some news about the Department of Justices and their decision to start investigating the big tech companies business practices. After, Jason hosts Democratic Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang. They discuss some of his policy proposals, including the huge idea of Universal Basic Income, the eradication of income tax and the implementation of a VAT.

Investor 0:00
2012 is when we did our first purchase. I think 2011 is when we started. You know, attending meetings, probably 2010 is when I started listening to podcasts. My husband was a little ahead of me. So he’s probably, you know, late 2009, early 2010. And you know, we just obsessively listened to I think you’re on episode 300. At that time, though.

Announcer 0:24
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 find Following Jason’s footsteps on the road to your financial independence day, you really can do it. And now here’s your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Jason Hartman 1:14
Welcome to Episode 1244 1244. And today, our guests will be yet another of many presidential candidates. And when I say presidential candidate, I don’t just mean any presidential candidate. I mean, serious, very legitimate presidential candidates. Of course, we’ve had Ben Carson on the show, Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul. And today we have Andrew Yang. We’ve had some other presidential candidates as well on the show. Forgive me for not mentioning them all. And I’m sure eventually one of these will be president. So we’ll see. Anyway, we’ll get to Andrew Yang in just a moment, but first, I wanted to celebrate with you Yes. Let’s celebrate. We have something to celebrate.

Andrew Yang 2:05

Jason Hartman 2:07
What are we celebrating? We are celebrating that another of my wishes. I don’t know, maybe this is a prediction. It’s probably a prediction. But it’s certainly been a dream of mine has come true. And that is what you heard about in the news. Just yesterday, the Department of Justice is now investigating the big tech companies for the absolute disgusting abuse of oppression, oppressive, anti competitive tactics they have been using to censor people to keep competitors out of the marketplace, and to do all the stuff that they’ve been doing all the abuses that they have been committing really just terrible behavior on the part of these big guys. companies. Now listen, we’re all customers of these big companies. We have listeners that work for these big companies. I love their innovation. Don’t get me wrong. I am a big fan of these companies in many ways, however, as Who was it? Voltaire said, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I may be misinterpreting that, but but I think I have the quote, right. And that’s what’s happened. These companies have become bullies. And it is time that one of the things that I have recommended for many years you’ve heard me talking about this for years happens, they need to be there busted up under antitrust laws. They need to be regulated like utilities as common carriers so that they cannot censor people anymore, or they need to make their algorithms public so people can see what they’re doing behind the scenes. So we have a step. In that direction, a serious step in that direction in the news. So I think that’s great news and do not misunderstand me. If you are new to the show, I am an ardent capitalist, okay? In fact, I’m not a fan of what our guest is about to talk about today, which is universal basic income. So we’ll get into that. But hey, I put lots of opposing viewpoints on the show. As you know, if you’re a regular listener, you’ve heard that for many, many years, so celebrate with me on the Department of Justice, the government doing their job for a change. It’s about time. This is long overdue, and hopefully we’ll see a more competitive marketplace and a different world in the next few years here. We shall see how it turns out but let’s hope for the best. Okay, without further ado, let’s get to our guest presidential candidate Andrew Yang. It’s my pleasure to welcome Andrew Yang Andrew is a Democratic candidate for president in 2020. He is founder of venture for America and former CEO of Manhattan prep, presidential ambassador for Global Entrepreneurship under Obama’s administration. He’s author of the best selling book smart people should build things and the new book, the war on normal people, the truth about America’s disappearing jobs, and why universal basic income, otherwise known as UBI is our future. Andrew, welcome. How are you?

Andrew Yang 5:30
Thanks for having me. It’s great to be here.

Jason Hartman 5:32
Yeah, it’s really good to have you on. You are a Democratic candidate. And it’s kind of interesting just by the titles of your books, and, and so forth. But I’m anxious to dig in this universal basic income concept. I am actually quite surprised about it. I don’t think I understand it very well, because some of my most staunch libertarian friends are actually in favor of it. And just my general maybe old Fashion thinking so please help me figure it out is kind of like, I can’t believe they’re in favor of that kind of thing that just feels like the welfare state to me. But it is different, isn’t it?

Andrew Yang 6:11
Tell us more. Well, it’s not surprising to me at all because there’s actually a very rich libertarian heritage behind universal basic income. Milton Friedman was a huge proponent of it. So was a high IQ was Another prominent economist with a libertarian Yeah, you get

Jason Hartman 6:26
you get FA Hayek and Milton Friedman. I’m amazed Why would they be in favor of it? But okay, go ahead.

Andrew Yang 6:32
If you think about the substance of it, libertarianism is often about individual autonomy and freedom. And there’s no better way to have people experience autonomy and freedom than to have a certain amount of money imbued into the fabric of citizenship. So if libertarians I believe often dislike bureaucracies and programs and paternalistic allocations of resources where they say, hey, we’ll give you money. It only for this and you have to do this, you have to do that. Whereas universal basic income is money, no strings attached. And so it’s not a surprise to me that your libertarian friends like it, it actually passed the House of Representatives under President Richard Nixon has been in effect in Alaska for 36 years, which is a very deep red state, conservative state and it was passed under a conservative governor as the petroleum dividend.

Jason Hartman 7:26
Right. But the petroleum dividend is kind of a different thing. Isn’t that more of almost an incentive to get people to move to Alaska because it’s all rich, or?

Andrew Yang 7:37
No, no, it’s if you look at the history behind it, the underpinnings are exactly the same where governor Hammond said, Let’s keep money out of the hands of government whether it’s going to build a giant program out of it. Yeah, let’s instead give the money directly back to the Alaskan citizens. Every Alaskan gets between one and $2,000 a year, no questions asked free and clear to do whatever they want with it. Right, right.

Jason Hartman 8:00
Okay, so what did you mean about Nixon, though? I mean, we didn’t have UBI. Under Nixon Did, did we?

Andrew Yang 8:06
We didn’t because it stalled in the Senate. But Richard Nixon was hugely for it. At the time, it was mainstream, economic and political wisdom, where 1000 economists signed a letter saying that universal basic income or the income floor would be great for the economy and for society. So again, there’s a very deep conservative and libertarian heritage around universal basic income.

Jason Hartman 8:29
Okay, well, where does money come from?

Andrew Yang 8:32
taxes. It comes from different places, depending upon how you plan have funded the way I plan to funded as I detail in my book, the war on normal people, is by implementing a value added tax or a consumption tax, because right now we in America are in a bit of a trap, where we have an income tax regime, but more and more work is going to be done by software AI machines, and our current income tax setup does not harvest that revenue at all, because the main beneficiaries of automation are global technology companies that are expert and not paying a whole lot of tax. So what we need to do is we need to move to an implement a value added tax the same way as every other industrialized country has it. So that a company like Amazon, that can say, Hey, we don’t have maybe profits in particular quarters, we don’t understand the income tax, under value added tax, you know, avoiding society receiving some of the gains from all the work that they do. So the way I pay for it would be by implementing a value added tax and half the European level. And because our economy is so large and robust, that would be enough to pay for the majority of universal basic income.

Jason Hartman 9:41
So would income tax go away if we had a VAT tax them?

Andrew Yang 9:44
Well, I think over time, that is the way to go. Because it really doesn’t make any sense to tax labor over time. You know, you want to tax something that you’re trying to encourage, necessarily, so I think in an ideal world, well that’s

Jason Hartman 9:57
it’s refreshing to hear that from a while from a demo. Crap, no offense, but I love it. That’s good. You don’t want to tax something you want to encourage. I like that. Very good. Okay. I couldn’t agree more, but it doesn’t work out that way. And in the political landscape too much,

Andrew Yang 10:17
maybe Can

Jason Hartman 10:18
you dive in just take a little dive just really quick and explain the VAT tax concept and why it’s better. I mean, I know you alluded to that, but I just want to give you a chance to, you know, Americans aren’t used to thinking that you’re totally think that way. But I was not

Andrew Yang 10:35
sure. So a value added tax is a consumption tax that gets paid by companies at every stage of production. So that every time that and the simplest way to think about is let’s say, like I build a car, every time I get a part, I’m adding value to this car and then like I pay of that on each component, and then when I sell it to the end consumer, the consumer typically pays the same percentage. So the great thing about events That you can control it because you can control your consumption. So if you consume more than you pay more in taxes, and that’s the way it ought to be, in a sense that the people who consume the most and benefiting the most from society’s infrastructure, and so instead of taxing people based upon the wealth and income, they make sense attacks on consumption. And also it’s impossible for very large companies to gain it in the same way that they currently gain income taxes by offering it to Ireland or what have you. Right, right. Yeah. Well, that whole double Irish twist and a complete scam Americans are getting totally ripped off by these multi national corporations. That’s just pathetic. But, you know, that’s another discussion probably. And maybe you can come back and talk to us about that because I just get super annoyed is that like, I agree with you. They’re like they’re trying to maximize shareholder value, which is their mission, but it’s not very helpful.

Jason Hartman 11:56
It’s it’s, it’s really the scam. It’s a benefit to the world. fee and everybody else doesn’t get to participate. It’s a scam. Okay, so let’s do VAT versus sales tax, there is a difference. Okay, because the VAT is charged along the way, the sales tax is only charged by the end consumer. Right. So would it be fair to say that that is a sales tax all along the way, like multiple sales taxes?

Andrew Yang 12:23
Yeah, that I mean, that’s a simpler way to think about it. Sure. In essence, that is the way it shakes out in most situations.

Jason Hartman 12:28
Okay. So how do you decide though, who gets hit with the VAT? I mean, wouldn’t it encourage I mean, you know, the National Sales Tax idea. I thought, well, that’s a good idea, I guess. But then I think, well, isn’t it going to just encourage hoarding and people won’t consume and when you’ve got an economy built on, you know, 72% of the economy is consumption, right? Won’t it just encourage people to just hoard money and, you know, save it? God forbid. I mean, savings isn’t bad, but

Andrew Yang 12:59
Well, the thing you have to Is that we’re taking every dollar of the event and putting in the hands of American consumers in the form of a universal basic income where every American adult is getting a cash grant of $1,000 per month. And so the Roosevelt Institute did a study as how this would impact the economy. And not rather than consume less, we consume a lot more because most Americans

Jason Hartman 13:21
right, they might have. Right?

Andrew Yang 13:24
Yeah. 59% of Americans campaign unexpected $500 bill right now. Yeah. So you can imagine if you put cash in their hands, how much it’s going to be spent. Right. It’s going to be spent locally in mainstream businesses throughout the economy. According to Roosevelt Institute, this would create 4.6 million new jobs and grow the economy by two and a half trillion. So even if you have slightly higher prices, and you’re putting buying power into the hands of the American consumer in a way that’s going to much more than counterbalance that.

Jason Hartman 13:54
Alright, so let’s take so people can kind of understand where this is coming from. This is part of your platform. And that’s great. But what would let’s take three people that we all know and love or hate in the political sphere? And let me ask you, what do you think? And maybe you have to speculate a little bit. What do you think they would think of your that program? What would the Hillary Clinton think? What would Bernie Sanders think? What would Donald Trump think?

Andrew Yang 14:23
You know, I hesitate to guess what each of them would think. But I do want to suggest that we are going through an enormous economic and technological transition right now. And the reason why I’m so passionate about both the freedom dividend which is what I call universal basic income, and movement to that is that we are in the process of automating away the biggest labor categories in the United States. I right now, I

Jason Hartman 14:47
was definitely going to get to that. I think that is a potentially in my eyes, the biggest and best argument for a UBI universal basic income. And that was the angle From which I thought a lot of the libertarians were coming, is that look, we’re not going to have the choice, because automation is going to take away the transportation jobs, which is arguably the biggest job category.

Andrew Yang 15:15
Yeah, right, right.

Jason Hartman 15:16
Yeah. Or worldwide. So that’s going to be automated away in the not too distant future. A lot of other things will be. And you know, Andrew, I really struggle with his automation question because the human mind is, is limitless, the human desire for more stuff, and more services is also limitless. It just gives you can’t placate it every right because, you know, think of us back 200 years ago, and the minor insignificant wants and needs we had then versus what we consider a need or, you know, certainly a want today, right? You know, our expectations have just risen dramatically, of course, so there’s just no end to it. And when you look at automation, it’s always ultimately worked out. It’s never been this horrific job killer that everybody was worried about at the time. You know, when I lie is how invented the sewing machine. Women were asking what are they going to do with all their free time? What am I going to do with all my free time? Right? Like how ridiculous that sounds today. Right?

Andrew Yang 16:16
But they said that back then what I would suggest is that we have to get out of the realm of abstraction and into the realm of concrete and direct Go for it. So to your earlier comment, there are three and a half million truck drivers in the United States. 94% male average age 49 average education High School a one year college, the financial incentives automate truck driving are $168 billion per year in saving not just from labor, but equipment utilization, fuel efficiencies, fewer accidents, etc. The smartest people in the country are working on right now. Right? They’re making progress every day. And so you can say Hey, no limits of human ingenuity etc. But if you’re standing in front of like, Half a million truck drivers who’ve been newly displaced, right? Who are 50 years old and are accustomed to making between 40 and $50,000. And now who knows what their next jobs going to look like. Because even it’s not even going to be possible to go work in retail because the retail sector is shrinking, where 30% of malls are going to close the next four years. So if you were to say abstractions to like, you know, these newly displaced truck drivers, they look at you like you were, you know, an alien, which is going to be the reality in many communities. The thing that tipped me over the edge is when I did research my book, the war on normal people, the simple fact is, is look at what happened to the manufacturing workers in the Midwest. After 5 million of them lost their jobs over the last 15 years. They did not relocate, they did not magically find new jobs, they did not get retrained 40% of them left the workforce entirely and went on disability. suicide rates spiked. Many of them pretty scary stuff. Yeah, yeah. Like really just epic social dysfunction. in despair, where our life expectancy is declining as a society for the last two years because of just an increase in deaths of despair. So when you start looking at the data, which is what in my mind, any rational person should do, then you see very clearly the pattern that’s going to play out for truck drivers, retail workers, cashiers, fast food workers call center workers. We’re talking about the biggest labor categories in the US. And people are not moving for new opportunities. They’re staying where they are and disintegrating. No,

Jason Hartman 18:34
no, I mean, I, I see it, it scares me. Okay, so give all of these people $1,000 a month, or do you give it to just everybody, even the millionaires and billionaires? Does everybody just get 1000 a month? Yeah, everybody gets it. Okay. And it comes from the VAT tax, and the income tax ultimately, goes away is the dream, right?

Andrew Yang 18:57
Yes, that would be the dream. Yeah. It’s gonna take a long time ago. Because obviously, you know, we have a very built up

Jason Hartman 19:03
a lot of iron triangles in there. Yeah. A lot of special interests that are gonna protect their turf for sure. Yeah, absolutely. Okay, so talk more about the war on normal people, if you would, you know, to look at the title of the book. It almost seems like a cultural title. But it’s not right. It’s it’s just john Oh, no

Andrew Yang 19:22
class jobs, right. Yes. I mean, to me, like the cultural stuff, in my opinion, is a bit of a distraction. The reason why people are angry and upset is that their economic security has disappeared and their password for them and their children have disappeared. And that’s where the despair and anger is coming from. And it’s completely rational, in my opinion. Like I think all of the indignance is just like doing everyone a disservice. We are in the middle of the greatest technological and economic transition in the history of the world. And we’re dealing with it by pretending it’s not happening, which is, in my opinion, an incredibly terrible way. Deal with problem, which is why I’m running for president is to wake people up and say, Hey, the problem is that we automated away millions of manufacturing jobs, we’re about to do the same thing to retail jobs in the transportation jobs and the rest of it. And if we don’t get our act together, by the time we get to inning six or seven, there’s going to be no turning back. You can’t reconstitute societies and communities and civilization if it disintegrates. I mean, you know, we have to preempt the great trucker riots at 2025. And we do not have that much time. Right.

Jason Hartman 20:31
Well, that I was just going to ask you to kind of outline that for us, if you would, of course, nobody knows for sure. But what is your vision of the timeline? Is it that they you know, the, the truckers and the Uber drivers and the taxi drivers, and the you know, maybe the postal and the ups and a lot of these, will they be automated out of the job by you know, so it’s 2025 is that, you know, it’s it’s seven years away, you think or what kind of what’s the timeline here?

Andrew Yang 20:57
Well, I was in Silicon Valley, and I talked to an official at one of the very large ride sharing companies. And he told me that their internal projections are that half of their rides will be given by an autonomous vehicle in 2022. Wow, that’s it’s coming. Sad,

Jason Hartman 21:13
folks. It is coming fast.

Andrew Yang 21:17
Wow. Yes. That’s why we need to get our act together. And that’s why I’m running for president so that we can come together and come up with some real solutions, because we’re talking about society level problems. And it’s something that no municipality or state can address. This needs to be a national level solution.

Jason Hartman 21:35
And what is the the too late part of it, you mentioned, reconstituting, and so forth. So say we have the great trucker riots of 2025. As he as he put it, we can’t just decide after the fact that hey, look at these people. And, you know, this is terrible, what’s happened to them and society’s got to pitch in for the good of everybody, not just them, and do a UBI Why can’t you do it as a reactive thing for A proactive

Andrew Yang 22:00
thing. The issue is that I always try and think about this on like a individual and family level where if you look at Americans on disability right now, there are more Americans on disability than there are that work in the construction industry right now. Yes,

Jason Hartman 22:15
somehow everybody became disabled, I just failed, understand how that happened. But apparently, it’s a

Andrew Yang 22:20
well, it’s all it’s all tied together. They’re all related. So the churn rate from disability or the proportion of people that get off of disability, zero because no one’s ever going to jeopardize a lifetime of benefits for a tenuous part time job that could disappear. And then after that job disappears, then you don’t get your benefits because you’ve proven yourself to be able bodied. Right? So the point I’m making is that after someone gets to a point where they are not functioning at a high level are not viable, like they become dysfunctional, and it’s likely that they stay that way. And so then if you show up and say, hey, it’s time to become functional and much, much harder. It’s much easier to keep people and communities functional than it is to wait for someone to become dysfunctional then expect them to return the viability that’s just much, much harder. Yeah, I agree, you know, especially at scale. Yeah, very, very good point. But what do you say to all the criticism would would say we you know, this isn’t this just welfare, isn’t it just another form of welfare? I mean, you dress that earlier, but

Jason Hartman 23:25
I don’t know. It’s still kind of reeks of that a little bit, doesn’t it? Isn’t that a fair statement?

Andrew Yang 23:31
Well, it depends upon your framing. I mean, to me, it doesn’t because to me, you know, the dividend where the owners and shareholders of this society the richest, most advanced society in the history of the world, I’ve never seen anyone get upset when shareholders of a company declare a dividend. Everyone’s like, Oh, that’s great, great management Sure, like we’re in the same place. And we need to let go of this like fixation on you know, institutions of the past somehow having like, you know, various connotations associated with it. Like we are the owners and shareholders of the stakeholders of the greatest society in the history of the world, we declare ourselves a dividend. And we should do what we want with it, which hopefully means starting new businesses, building organizations and institutions in our communities that make our lives better. The issue is really what people their minds like others will do. But the data is incredibly encouraging, where people use cash grants and this sort of situation to improve their lives the vast majority of the time. Okay, well, I

Jason Hartman 24:30
couldn’t agree with you more Andrew in concept, I absolutely agree. Hey, look, we’re the owners. We deserve a dividend. But if you look at the deficit and the debt, there’s no money to pay a dividend. Not right now. I mean, we’ve got you know, this the corporation. It’s a mess, isn’t it? No, no.

Andrew Yang 24:50
So this is a great way to look at it. If we were a corporation, we would see like how this corporations doing 19 trillion in revenue up 4 trillion in the last year. 10 years alone, we can easily afford this. Now you can look at and say, Hey, this corporations been badly mismanaged for several decades. Like that, and is a kick the can down the road and like, generally let a lot of things laughs and all of that is completely accurate. But past mismanagement does not mean that we do not have the means and we do not have the resources because we 100% do, again, 19 trillion. Unfortunately, in the last 10 years, we can easily afford $1,000 ahead if we decided that we wanted.

Jason Hartman 25:33
Okay, so we first we would just add to the deficit and the debt probably right

Andrew Yang 25:38
now, I believe with a 10% that this thing is neutral. And if you look at the numbers, so the headline numbers 2 trillion a year, but we’re already spending between five and 600 billion in welfare benefits and disability and everything else, which This replaces, because it’s not like if you have benefits now you get another thousand dollars. It’s like opt in so you know It ends up defining the cost 10%. That gets you between seven and 800 billion. So now you’re at 1.3 to 1.4 trillion, we get 25% back of any economic growth, because that’s the revenue to GDP ratio. So if the economy grows by 2 trillion, we get another 500 billion. And then we’re going to save 10s of billions on healthcare because instead of people showing up to the ER, as their primary care until I have enough resources, so they’ll do a little better than that. incarceration, homelessness services, mental health, like all of these things that we currently spend a trillion dollars on, we’re going to spend a bit less right so this thing ends up being neutral. Like we can’t nickel and dime our way to prosperity on this one, right. We’ll see that by spending the money will end up getting it back many times over by making people we’re going to make the labor markets much more dynamic to a lot of Americans are stuck in place because they don’t have the means to move. There. Under Water and mortgages etc, etc. With this, they’ll be able to move for new opportunities that will make the labor market much more dynamic.

Jason Hartman 27:07
Okay, I get all that and I get what you’re saying, however, wouldn’t the cost of every product and service increase by at least 10%? I mean, you know if there’s a bad or that 10% is actually being charged multiple times along the supply chain, right. So we didn’t make the cost.

Andrew Yang 27:23
I mean, it adds up to a grand total of 10%. Perfect, final good. Okay. But if you look at the prices that are driving everyone nuts right now, a lot of things are getting cheaper, everything. Sure markets working on the technology work on so that’s clothing, entertainment, consumer goods, TVs, etc. Much, much better and cheaper. Think about the things that are infuriating as all and just keep on going up and up in price. What are they

Jason Hartman 27:48
to health care, housing, education, health care, right? Sure. Why is that? It’s because we don’t have true markets in any of those three realms. Where education Is that subsidized by the government? Because it’s a total scam, you know, jacking up their prices and just like failing to keep paying more and more helpful error. Well, you know what, you know, we should we should mention because a lot of our listeners are real estate investors. And yes, education is subsidized by the government through Sallie Mae. So the worst mistake ever to increase the cost of education was to offer these government insured student loans that was a mess, and it’s still a mess. It’s just ruined it for people. Real estate is subsidized through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. So that’s another government subsidy, the price of real estate would be lower, they went away. But then you can also argue that, hey, you know, there might be less development because a lot of a lot of that happens on the supply ends, but I think still be lower overall. And so you’ve got all these government programs in there that are distorting the free market, you know, so you’re right. Yes.

Andrew Yang 28:51
Yeah. So that’s what’s causing inflation is that we have these nonfunctioning, protected giant marketplaces anything where Where technology and the markets have been allowed to do their work? You know, obviously we’re getting cheaper over time.

Jason Hartman 29:06
Absolutely. Interesting, interesting viewpoint. I’m really glad you came on to talk about this. I gotta ask you, what do you think if anything about crypto currencies and what’s going on there kind of a crazy world?

Andrew Yang 29:19
It is a crazy world. I mean, it’s like a lot of other trends whether there is there a solid new underlying technology? Yes. Has it gone overblown and probably ahead of itself? Yes. Will there be a retrenchment? Yes Will like new things develop after the retrenchment? Yes. One thing I do want to convey to your listeners, if what I’ve described is of interest to you please do visit Yang 2020 calm, check out more information about my campaign, but we have to get ahead of this and fix the economy before it’s too late. Because we are heading towards impending disaster. And if you look at the numbers, you can see all the signs are there. So if you agree that we need to take dramatic steps to alter our economy and prepare for the challenges of 2020 then please do join me at Yang 2020 calm and check out the book the war on normal people for all the facts and figures because I’m a very rational evidence based guy. Yeah,

Jason Hartman 30:13
you sure are. And I really appreciate you coming on and sharing some of this stuff, Andrew, so thank you for that. You know, this has been an interesting discussion. So thanks for sharing it.

Andrew Yang 30:22
No problem. My pleasure. Keep up the awesome work. Let’s go create some wealth.

Jason Hartman 30:25
Sounds good to me. Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you don’t miss any episodes. Be sure to check out this shows 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 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