Doing Capitalism In The Innovation Economy with author Bill Janeway

Jason Hartman records this show from Croatia where he discusses the difference in investing with private companies involved versus when the government is involved. Private companies follow supply and demand as well as try to maximize profits. Governments, on the other hand, have more difficulties maximizing profits given their structure.

In the interview segment of the show, Jason brings on Bill Janeway, an active venture capitalist, director of Magnet Systems and OReilly Media, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Cambridge in America, and author of the recently revised and updated book Doing Capitalism in the Innovation Economy. They discuss a 3 player game set up and the government’s role on both sides of supply and demand. They also talk about the digital revolution and the green revolution.

Announcer 0:02
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. And now here’s your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Jason Hartman 0:53
Welcome to Episode 1025 1025. Thank you so much for joining me. This is your host Jason Hartman and I am coming to you from a scene so beautiful that you probably wouldn’t believe me if I told you. I was standing on the boat and I thought I would do this little podcast intro from our, our sailboat here in Croatia. But I didn’t want to wake everybody up because it is 539 in the morning, and I am watching the sunrise over the beautiful sea. And the sky has all sorts of great colors in it. And wow, it’s just really stunning. Anyway, today we are going to be talking about the different actors in the system. The different actors, whether it be the state, the marketplace, the marketplace of businesses, the consumers, the different actors involved in the system that makes the economy work. And as we talked about these different players, these different actors in the system. This is where the disagreement lies, doesn’t it? The disagreement between some think that the government should have a bigger role. I mean, here in Europe, I’m constantly amazed at how people think the government should play such a big role in the marketplace, in commerce, in business. In the US, thankfully, most people seem to think that the government should have a rather limited role, and that the marketplace the the real actors that are engaging in commerce should fulfill most of what goes on in the economic world. We also think about how difficult it is to predict things in the economy. Because when we have all of these different actors, especially government, it gets really, really difficult because the government does not act as rationally, as the private actors do. The private actors are rather simple creatures, aren’t they? You know, you can understand their motivations and you can pretty much predict what they’re going to do. If prices are high. They will buy less of a commodity prices are low, they will buy more of it in depending on the trend of prices, it will either incentivize or disincentivize, purchasing more or less of an economy. Take for example, of course, the housing market, right one that we’re all very tuned to, as we love to invest in income property, the most historically proven asset class in the entire world. And we have all these different dynamics in that marketplace, right? But the price dynamic is more complex in many commodities within any marketplace, especially in the real estate marketplace. Why is that? Well, because it’s not just the price of the property. It’s the price of the financing for the property. Whenever you have a credit based asset, the financing cost becomes extremely significant in that whole price equation. And then we have to compare it to the income and when we compare income to price and Financing cost, we basically get the housing affordability index, one of the more reliable indices, when you’re trying to understand where the market is going what the market is doing, and make predictions. But again, it’s not everything. Why not? Well, as I’ve told you many times before, the housing affordability index has a major flaw doesn’t, you know what I’m going to say? Yes. The major flaw to the housing affordability index is that it does not account for foreign money moving into a market. It does not account for people that would be retired in a marketplace, and maybe they don’t have high income, yet. They have a lot of assets, they have cash to buy properties. And so that index is flawed. Every index is flawed, there is no master index, no one can accurately predict where the market is going in terms of appreciation. depreciation cycles. And that’s why for my money, I like investing in these linear markets, where the properties make sense the day you buy them. So in those linear markets, rather than the cyclical markets, you’re much less likely to make mistakes when it comes to your investments. Because you see the perils of trying to predict the market. You know, I love the old joke about saying that economics was created as a field of study to make astrology look credible. Okay, so think about that one for a while. It’s pretty accurate really, well pay I’ve got some boats are starting to come by as the sun rises here, over the sea in Croatia. I am looking at a harbor with old I don’t know how many sailboats are there in this harbor. Maybe there are 200 yachts here in this harbor and some of them are just absolutely stunning. You know, it’s a hole in the water you throw money into. That’s about right. We didn’t buy one. We just charged it. One minute, it’s really easy. You don’t have to worry about all the maintenance and all the things breaking all the time. And so the sun has crested the mountains here, and it is shining on the sea. And let’s get to our guests today. Before I go on too long and the boats are starting to come by and make a little noise here and sloshing water all around. I’m not sure how much of that you can hear. But that’s what I’m witnessing right now as I pace up and down this dock. Try not to wake people up on my boat. Okay, so one more thing. Congratulations to those of you and few of you are starting to just register as we’ve opened up the early bird pricing for our Hawaii event our inaugural our first event ever in beautiful, stunning, spectacular Hawaii. This is our profits and paradise event, a two day conference with totally new content. Well, I don’t know if that’s fair to say. It’s not totally new because hey, you hear me talk about this stuff all the time. But it is a new program, a new educational format where we’re going to cover a lot of new stuff. We have basically now in our lineup we have Jay Chou, the Jason Hartman University event. We have creating wealth, the oldest and longest running conference I’ve been teaching and then we have our meet the Masters event. Just had that last January. We’re gonna push that into the spring now, to space these events out a little bit. So November the first week of November will be Hawaii, and it’s a doubleheader. We’ve got two events there. We’ve got our venture lions mastermind event, immediately following the two day conference only one day in between so you can travel. So Waikiki Beach, most iconic Hotel in Waikiki Beach for our main event, I think that’s November 3, and fourth, if I’m not mistaken, it’s on the website at Jason Hartman calm then we take a day off in between for travel, take a little $75 plane ride over to Koh beautiful island of Hawaii, and we’ll have our venture Alliance mastermind retreat there. So it’s going to be a phenomenal thing. And not only do we have early bird pricing We have a fantastic opportunity that you will see when you check out in that cart, where you can get a big discount on the venture Alliance retreat as well when you buy them together. So really a phenomenal deal. In fact, the cost of two of those together will be about the same as just a ticket to the two day conference event, you’ll almost get the retreat for free by the time those ticket prices escalate when it gets closer to the event date. So we’re about three and a half months out, I believe, from that event. So join us for that Jason And without further ado, let’s get to our guests and let’s talk about these different actors within the marketplace.

Jason Hartman 8:48
It’s my pleasure to welcome William H. Janeway. He is former vice chair at the leading venture capital, behemoth Warburg Pincus co founder of the governing board of the Institute of new economic thinking Faculty of Economics at Cambridge University and author of the new and updated best selling book doing capitalism in the innovation economy, reconfiguring the three player game between markets, speculators, and the state. Phil, welcome. How are you? Very well. Glad to be with you. It’s good to have you in this book is fascinating. You are coming to us from Maine today. Is that correct?

Bill Janeway 9:22
That’s correct. Julie got here. Wonderful. Good. Good to have you.

Jason Hartman 9:26
You talk about the three player system. And I really like the way you put that that sort of triangle between the marketplace, the speculators, and I guess you could call them investors, but sometimes they’re just speculators, and the government the state. Tell us a little bit about the the thesis of all of that if you weren’t

Bill Janeway 9:44
sure. It grew out of my own experience as a working venture capitalist, investing at the frontier of information technology, from the late 1970s through the great bubble at the end of the 20th century, about halfway Through I realized that I, myself, the entrepreneurs that I was backing, and all of my peers and competitors, we were all dancing on a platform that had been constructed by the United States government, specifically by the Department of Defense, which had funded the upstream research and the early deployment of all of the technologies from Silicon to software, and onto the internet. That combined to create the digital revolution that we’re living through now. Then, coming out of that generation of experience, everything that I did, and all of the comparable investors and entrepreneurs in information technology, had our work enormously amplified and accelerated by the great speculative financial bubble in the late 1990s. So I realized when I went back into history, you could see this pattern before you could see how government subsidy and support for the railroads was accompanied by massive waves of financial speculation that built the transcontinental railroads and created a national market in the roaring 20s. Same thing occurred with electrification, enormous increase in the generating capacity, and the regional electric grids that made electricity just part of our lives and produced a revolution in manufacturing and in household life, as the electrical appliances were proliferated like Apple iPhone apps. So I saw this game as a reciprocal interaction, that in turn again and again, had transformed the market economy, the place where we work and consume and spend and save money and invest, whether it’s in houses or new businesses. So this three player game I realized it was kind of like in physics, they talked about the three body problem where you had the interaction action of three bodies, three planets, for example. And the configuration, there are infinite number of ways that they can interact with each other, and none of them are stable. And that’s how I’ve come to read what I call the innovation economy, where at the frontier, we progress by trial and error and error. And we need that funding that comes from a legitimate, motivated and driven government, as well as the financial speculators to mobilize capital at enormous scale, to take advantage and to push forward these new technologies as they emerge out of the laboratory. That’s the three player game.

Jason Hartman 12:41
Yeah, that’s fantastic. That’s very, very interesting. I like the way you put that. And it sounds like you know, sort of painting this onto the backdrop of the great economic theories of our time and ages past it sounds like you would be then in favor of kind of that Keynesian approach of priming the pump, you know, and having the government do that first. And then having the more hyack approach of, you know, the investors coming in, and the capitalists doing their thing. Would that be a fair statement?

Bill Janeway 13:11
Well, I think you would stand back a little bit because I’m talking now about the role of government on the supply side of the economy, making investments for highly risky, uncertain projects, that private investors are very reluctant to take on themselves that mean by which I mean, the kind of investments that the defense DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or the National Institutes of Health are making. I also happen to have studied at Cambridge University under Keynes’s students, and I do agree that there come times and 2009 was one of them. When we need government at the demand side of the economy, adding income flows to supply For an economy where the private sector is an acute stage of contracting, so on the supply side in driving innovation, we’re talking about long term investment, right, versus the shorter immediate requirement, when the private sector is contracting for government spending on the net government spending on the demand side of the economy,

Jason Hartman 14:24
give us maybe an example on the demand side of the economy where the government save the day, if you will, because some would argue that, you know, that’s what Schumpeter taught us creative destruction, right,

Bill Janeway 14:34
let them die. So something new can be born. It’s a little bit harsh, you know, let me tell you Shunk, even Schumpeter, and I can even the reference is in my book, even Schumpeter came to realize that there are times when the private sector is contracting so radically, that it can’t correct itself and it needs government. Even some Pedro agreed to that, although we only put it into a footnote, but the most immediate example Of course, is 2009, the global financial crisis, which was utterly unanticipated by mainstream economics, mainstream finance, the global financial crisis, fed back, as it flows the banking system around the world to deprive the private sector of the ordinary working credit it needs for spending employment to continue. We had a moment of seizure that was as extreme as what introduced the Great Depression. But this time, and the big difference was not only that the central banks of the world responded with very, very easy money and tried to get people to borrow. It was that from Beijing, through Berlin, to London to New York, the governments of the world, all initiated programs have stimulus of incremental spending to keep people at work to keep their flow of income continuing in this country, the Obama stimulus act played a central role in putting a floor under the contraction of the private economy. So certainly forget, but it was only barely 10 years ago, when we were looking at unemployment, which went from about four or 5% to 12%. Overnight, looking at that, rolling on and continuing, if the government’s not just the United States, but of the conservative Germans, that nationally driven Chinese, and across Europe and Asia, if all the government’s hadn’t stepped up, to provide support for demand and income and consumption and investment. Okay. All right. So

Jason Hartman 16:47
I agree with you generally, and I do believe there’s a place for government no question. However, is it fair to consider the concept that I love to talk about it You know, in Sherlock Holmes, I guess was the originator of this idea. You can’t hear the dogs that don’t bark. See, we don’t know what would have happened in the vacuum. Right? had those things not happen? I mean, certainly from that perspective, you’re 100%. Right, but just a devil. Do

Bill Janeway 17:14
you know, as I say, the great line of those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat as an example, in 1931, there was a global financial crisis, as complete as what we experienced in 2008. Nine in 1931 32. Banks all over the world closed in the US the entire banking system closed, right? We have about a 10 to 12% unemployment. We had more than 25% unemployment in the US. In Germany, they had 30% and they got Hitler. We got lucky. We got FDR Yeah. But the entire economic system of the Western world was in despair. And that was sufficient motivation. Both for the central bankers of the world and for the politicians, political leaders of the world. You may remember what happened when Congress briefly. And this was when George W. Bush was still president. When Congress rejected the funding that was necessary to keep the banks open in the United States, and the markets, the stock market and all the other financial markets collapse. And we went into a moment of freeze and George W. Bush himself actually said, quote, the sucker may go down on quote, speaking about the United States economy. Fortunately, Congress did step up. And then the Obama administration came to office with a much clearer view of what was needed. And we put a floor under the economy and although it took it took a full nine years to recover from that enormous shock,

Jason Hartman 18:53
yeah, absolutely. Okay. So I want to talk about bubbles. You have a chapter in your book, but Part Three is about that. The role of the game of speculation in the chapter seven the banality of bubbles. Talk to us a little bit about bubbles and sure your feeling about them. And I mean, I guess we all know why they were created, why they happen, but are they all intentional?

Bill Janeway 19:17
Well, when you go back and look at the historical record, back to this 500 years, wherever there are markets and assets, wherever it becomes possible to buy and sell assets, from tulip bulbs to Bitcoin, you can find momentum investing, bubble behavior, the emergence of speculation which drives the price of the asset out of any reasonable relationship to its cash flow, its value in use the return you get from owning it was true of tulip bulbs. And of course, the end of last year it was true of Bitcoin, in between, again and again and again, whether it’s real estate Whether it’s commercial or residential real estate, whether it’s financial securities, wherever there’s the market and assets, you will find bubbles. But occasionally, occasionally, the focus of speculation is one of those technologies, those new innovations, which, if built out at large scale, can transform the economic life of the nation and the world. That was true of the railroads. before the Civil War. It was true, as I say, of electricity electrification in the 1920s. And it was true of computers and the internet at the end of the 20th century. And that phenomenon means that while bubbles are banal, and they usually just generate needless waste, occasionally, they produce productive revolutions in technology that change the economy. Now, it also matters. It also matters where the speculation is taking place. When it’s in the public capital markets, the stock market, the junk bond market, when it’s limited to those liquid markets, then there’s relatively little leverage little borrowing to support it. And when it bursts, as it always does, the damage that’s done is limited. When it infects the banking system, as the credit bubble around us real estate did in the years leading up to 2008. Then when the bubble burst, as I say, it can freeze the whole economy, the consequences can be catastrophic. So you can think of 1998 to 2000 as a productive bubble, that generated enormous investment in the infrastructure to support the digital revolution, as well as the exploration for what to do with it to create an Amazon or a Google and because it was only in the public Markets when it first, there was no major damage done. Whereas 2004 567 were the exact opposite. The investment was focused on, you know, beach houses in the Nevada desert. And when it burst, it almost brought down the whole economic system of capitalism. Right. But that

Jason Hartman 22:19
bubble wasn’t sort of like I, I looked at the Great Recession, and I sort of segmented into two parts. Let me know if you agree with me on this or not. The first part was the mortgage meltdown. And we all knew the lungs were way too liberal. I mean, I predicted that part of the problem that seemed rather easy to predict. I guess it’s easy to say that now you

Bill Janeway 22:38
weren’t alone. But yeah, yeah, great job of getting ahead of the bank right would

Jason Hartman 22:42
have been looking for exactly but but the problem was on the back end of all those mortgages was the Wall Street scams, you know that selling the same loan into multiple loan pools, but in the docks weren’t even there. No one in the system had any incentive to put the brakes on it. I mean, That’s what the big shorts about right?

Bill Janeway 23:02
Absolutely right. In fact, they had every incentive to keep it going. And you have to remember that when Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers went bust, they were leveraged their actual hard capital, as a percent of their total assets was under 3%. So a 3% decline in the total value of their assets and they went bust. And that’s a fundamental difference when you try to sort through, you know, good bubbles, bad bubbles. It’s both. What’s the focus of speculation? Could it possibly contribute to increasing the productive possibilities, the living standards of the country on the one hand, and second, where is the speculation concentrated? If it’s concentrated where there’s a lot of debt within the banking system, when it inevitably burst? The results could be very, very bad indeed.

Jason Hartman 23:56
Yes. So you talked about bubble and said Wasn’t that damaging because it didn’t spill over into like government insured mortgages or like pseudo governmental insured through Fannie Freddie, the implicit guarantee that they all talk because we’ve got these sort of like pseudo governmental agencies, right. Yeah. But I don’t know a lot of people that lost a lot of money in stocks and those VC firms, they probably thought it was pretty tragic.

Bill Janeway 24:23
Well, you know, it hurt. I mean, we, john Doerr of Kleiner Perkins used to say before it burst, we’ve created $6 trillion worth of value, greatest creation of value without committing a crime in the history of capitalism, and then the 6 trillion went away. But here’s the point. When the bubble collapsed, what we were left with was a digital revolution that was now generating its own momentum. It was reaching takeoff velocity, with the internet available increasingly everywhere at higher and higher speeds, and the killer applications, Amazon and Google Then Facebook taking off. Now, this is the real message. And this is the real reason. I went back and rewrote and extended that book because we’re now in a world that’s very different. Just from six years ago, the digital revolution, as I say, has hit escape velocity. And having been sponsored in every respect, in every component by the American government, it’s now attacking the authority of this government and others through its role in the great globalization on the one hand, and it’s disruption of markets from Uber and Airbnb at the local level. And, and this is the kicker, the US government and not alone, not only the US government has proved incapable of buffering its constituents from the economic consequences of the digital revolution. It was responsible for launching

Jason Hartman 26:00
Interesting thought, Well, what were you gonna say?

Bill Janeway 26:02
I was gonna say is that spilled over into the political sphere. It spilled over in 2016, the US presidential election in the British Brexit referendum and across Europe in these new extreme right wing, anti immigration, anti government movements that have even affected Germany which has the strongest economy in the Western world, and which handle the impact of the Great Recession better than almost anybody else. So what I’m talking about in this book, let me put it this way. When I first started out, I was writing a kind of celebration of this unwitting collaboration between the American government legitimize to win make investments because it was investing to win the Cold War. That was the legitimate mission. And then the financial speculation that followed and launched the digital revolution but Now we’re looking at a very different configuration of this game, where the people in the working economy have been hit and harmed by the consequences of a digital revolution and meaning lashing back out at the political process at the government, which has been rendered effectively illegitimate, incapable of acting effectively and responsibly. Okay, in the economy.

Jason Hartman 27:26
Okay, hang on a second, we got to unpack a couple of those comments, because I’m not sure. I’m not sure we got them there. There’s some fairly bold comments there you just made. So I want to just make sure I understand and our listeners understand what you’re talking about. So the government created the digital revolution through DARPA, etc. Right. And, you know, and right internet and all of that, right. And then there were the speculators that came in after the government and threw money at it for better or worse sometimes. And then what you’re saying is now the cats out of the bag, if you will, and right, the government can’t control it will I guess first question is why should the government be controlling it? Isn’t that the point? It’s decentralization, not its power to the people.

Bill Janeway 28:06
Okay, it’s dealing with the consequences. We’re looking at what consequences is

Jason Hartman 28:10
it? Is it? Like, what, just let me give you one more comment to feed on. Okay. When you meant that people are hurt by it, I assume you’re referring to automation and, you know, the job losses that have been created through technology. Right, of course. Okay. Go

Bill Janeway 28:25
ahead. Go ahead. You’re well, what I’m saying is that the, in this country, also in Britain, there’s been very little assistance in supporting people who have to change jobs or have lost the jobs have lost the livelihood that went with those jobs, who in this country uniquely in the world, are threatened with losing their health insurance. If they don’t have the job. Health insurance has been tied to jobs, which is silly,

Jason Hartman 28:53
silly idea. I know that that needs to go I couldn’t agree more.

Bill Janeway 28:58
And if you go back again, I keep asking people to take a look backwards and see what we can learn from the past. So we aren’t due to have to repeat the past again and again. At the end of the 19th century, when we had the second great industrial revolution around steel and heavy industry and mass production. And the railroads, there was a different but equivalent in scale kind of disruption and particularly affected the farmers who were much larger portion of the total population. And it produced the first great populist rebellion in the 1890s that almost elected William Jennings Bryan, President of the United States, and threatened to overwhelm what had been taken to be the principles of free market capitalism. We got instead as a kind of compromise, the Progressive Era, which produced indeed regulated like the FDA, like the Interstate Commerce Commission, like the Federal Trade Commission. And that was a responsible response to political public outrage against the great railroads and banks, that it transformed the economy in the two generations after the Civil War. Today, we’re seeing something that is comparable to what, as the digital revolution, which is far from over, continues its job through automation in particular, as well as through the local market disruptions as services that had been delivered traditionally, are transformed by the digital services by companies like Uber and Airbnb. And the question is, is the response one of simple public rage, an outrage, or can there be programs that help people make the transition, you know, as people lose their jobs as machinists as they lose them on the automobile line and the new job ABS open up in the healthcare system. That’s not an easy place to transfer, you need some re education, some training, some interim support. Germans have done this pretty well, by the way, a lot better than we have, even while maintaining rigorous fiscal discipline. And despite the attack from the outside, not the attack, but the challenge of the immigration movements in Europe. So that’s what I’m talking about what I say that this three player game has moved from the enormously constructive and productive state in the generation to generations after world war two into a much darker, much more problematic, much more difficult configuration today. Okay, interesting.

Jason Hartman 31:47
What else do you want people to know as we wrap it up here? Maybe a question I didn’t ask you

Bill Janeway 31:53
what I’m talking about the failure of the American government and other governments, not just the American and British Government is For example, that’s looking back. But it also raises a really important question looking forward. You know, if the government if the Defense Department hadn’t made all those investments upstream, and the digital revolution would have been a digital evolution, it would have taken longer, it would have been more haphazard, might have been less disruptive, of course. But we’ve got a new challenge. We’ve got a new technological revolution, that I for one, and along with 99.9% of all scientists in the world agree, is the need for a new Green Revolution, the introduction of technological change in our infrastructure, and in how we use that infrastructure, radically to reduce the generation and consumption of carbon. The US has abdicated from that revolution. That revolution is going to be led by China. China is investing far more than anyone else in the new technology. And is beginning to impose the constraints on consumption that have to go with it.

Jason Hartman 33:06
They’re not very strict about their environment, though. I mean, they may have constraints on this thing, hey, they have to be it’s an emergency, right?

Bill Janeway 33:14
Because if they’re not, it threatens the legitimacy of their regime. And that message seems to have gotten through in the last six to 12 months. If you now go look at all objective sources of data, the Chinese are now investing enormously in alternative energy sources, as well as beginning to close down and close on those coal plants that they were building on an enormous rate up until the last year or two. So this is a place where the US has enormous technical resources. It has at least as good probably better research resources than any other country in the world. But we’re kind of willfully standing back and saying, you know what, not our problem. And of course, when you think about we We’ve just

Jason Hartman 34:01
did the consumers in the US have simply outsourced their pollution to China?

Bill Janeway 34:05
Well, we the pollution, we don’t have, but we certainly do have the generation of carbon. And when you think about the number of jobs and the profits that would be generated by investing in serious reconfiguration restructuring of the transportation, and housing, residential, commercial, as well, real estate other country to reduce the generation of carbon, you think about how big an investment program that would be, it would dwarf what we did for the digital revolution. It would be the most enormous opportunity for new jobs, new businesses and new profits, and, frankly, protecting 50,000 coal miners versus investing in that future and all the jobs and profits that would generate seems to me as bad choices American government has made in the last hundred years. Well We shall see where it goes, Bill. Yes. The argument on the other side is, you know, if it works in the free market, we’ll just take off with it. But I get the whole point about government, you know, priming the pump. And you know, we talked about that already. give out your website and tell people where they can find out more about your work. Sure. It’s www. Bill Janeway calm. It’s got a lot of stuff about my book. It’s other things I’ve written. It’s got reviews and essays and interviews. And this interview will be up on it as soon as it becomes available.

Jason Hartman 35:29
Excellent. Well, I think we will run your show tomorrow. That’s been a fascinating discussion. Bill Janeway. Thanks for joining us.

Bill Janeway 35:34
Thank you. Thank you very much.

Jason Hartman 35:38
Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you don’t miss any episodes. Be sure to check out the show’s specific website and our general website Hartman 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