- 6/25/2025
Chris Versace and Peter Tchir discuss why a 'win' on Iran can jumpstart Trump’s agenda. Plus, the Fed, prospects for the second half of the year and much more.
Category
🥇
SportsTranscript
00:00Welcome to the latest episode of The Streets, Stocks, and Markets podcast, where, you guessed
00:06it, we talk all about things that shape and impact the stock market and investing. I'm
00:12Chris Versace, Portfolio Manager of The Streets Pro Portfolio, and if you've been paying attention
00:17to some of the headlines making the waves over the last few days, you know that we've
00:21seen a dramatic increase in geopolitical tensions. Lucky for you, lucky for me, that on this
00:27episode of the podcast, we have Peter Scheer to help break it down. Peter, for those of
00:32you who don't know him, is the head of macro strategy at Academy Securities, but he's also
00:36a Streets Pro contributor and a friend of the podcast. Peter, welcome back.
00:47Thanks a lot for having me again.
00:49So I'm just going to open it up with a quick comment, Peter. Trying times the last few days.
00:55What do you think? Yeah, so we've been looking at that and it's, you know, Academy Securities
00:59is kind of unique. We have about 30 retired generals and admirals, a couple of CIA people
01:04who provide the geopolitical intelligence. And so we kind of get to, you know, take a lot
01:08of that into account. And I would say things are actually going quite well. I think one
01:13of our views has been that we need to reestablish both deterrence or, you know, peace through
01:18strength. And I think one of the things we all have to realize is deterrence really only
01:23works if your adversaries are scared that you will use the equipment that you have.
01:28And I think over the last, you know, geez, probably decade or longer, we've done a couple
01:31of things. One, we talk about measured response. So everything that happens, we tend to have
01:36a very measured response, which is maybe why the Hooties are comfortable attacking ships
01:40that are destined for the U.S. or, you know, U.S. flag, but will not touch a Chinese ship.
01:45So I think that's been an issue. And we've also had, you know, kind of a tendency to draw
01:49lines in the sand, those lines in the sand get crossed, and we kind of shrug our shoulders
01:53and move on. So if we want to really establish, sorry, so it's kind of like that old Bugs Bunny
01:58cartoon. Exactly. So I think this is kind of, I think whether we destroyed, you know,
02:05Rand's nuclear facilities or not, I certainly think we damaged them, that's much as clear.
02:10But this is really a warning, I think that, hey, we have these tools, we have this capability,
02:15and we will use them if necessary. So I think this was a one-time strike. It's meant to push
02:21Iran. But I think it's also meant to signal to China, to Russia, that, hey, we are not afraid
02:26to do what we need to do to protect our interests. Now, that's interesting, because you're connecting
02:32some dots outside of, you know, the Middle East, as you mentioned, China and Russia. You know,
02:38but you also said you think it's a one-time strike. So when you see words out of President Trump of,
02:43you know, where if Iraq were to retaliate, and by now we know that they have,
02:48you're thinking this is more bluster? Or is he just kind of saying, if you guys really push it,
02:54not save face with a modest attack, but if you really push it, I will go further?
03:01Yeah. So I think it's much more the latter, where they have to do something much more aggressive. I
03:05think the attack that they've done so far has been very telegraphed. When you pull this back,
03:09right, Israel dominates the airspace right now. We obviously took advantage of the Israeli-dominated
03:14airspace to go in. Not a single shot was fired at us. Very impressive. But beyond that, I think we
03:21look at a couple things that's going wrong right now, why we think Iran will be very limited in
03:25their ability to attack. Unclear how many missiles they have, but the missiles, they've done damage,
03:29and it's horrible, and loss of life is obviously horrible. But the missiles have not been this
03:35existential threat that I think some people were worried about. So the damage being done by the
03:39missiles themselves has been, you know, limited and contained to a large degree, certainly much
03:44better than we feared. And it was only six missiles last report. Yeah. And I'm even talking
03:50about the attacks on Israel going back, right? Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry. Okay. Yep. So none of this
03:54attack has been very effective by, you know, any real, you know, standard. Separately, the missile
04:01launching capability is becoming in question. So, you know, estimates are maybe they had 80 to 100
04:05launchers. That could be as few as 20, because every time they launch, it sends a signal, you know,
04:10you can get the heat reading. And Israel is trying to take them out. I think they've been very effective.
04:14So their ability to launch a lot of missiles, even if they have missile stockpiled, is deteriorating.
04:20And the Iranian military, unlike ours, is really top heavy. So it's very hierarchical. Only the leaders
04:27can make certain commands. So as Israel, through the Mossad and other things, has eliminated a lot of the IRGC
04:32senior leadership, it's unclear who the leaders are, what control they can do, what message, and even how
04:38motivated they are, right? If Khomeini is in hiding, how much are you going to go out of your way and put
04:42your life at risk if your leader's in hiding? So I think there's a lot of reasons to believe Iran will back down.
04:51I think I'm actually a little bit more worried. Is that enough for Israel? Or does Israel really want to push
04:56this forward, knowing that the proxies, you know, are kind of non-existent right now, that they have,
05:00you know, a once in a lifetime potential opportunity to really, really set Iran back.
05:05And the other thing I don't think that gets talked about anywhere near enough is, let's call it the
05:08tacit approval of the rest of the Middle East. Our view has been that the Middle East is desperate to
05:15move beyond conflict and fossil fuels. Saudi Arabia wants to become the data center capital of the world,
05:20right? They are excited. Just, you know, Wang came over, Jensen Wang came over, they're going to buy
05:25NVIDIA chips. They want to move us on. And I don't know whether they're outright helping Israel,
05:30but they certainly aren't on Iran's side. So there's so many things I think that we can look to
05:34that point to Iran's backed itself into a corner and no real way out. And again, to tie one last
05:40piece in, I think our view is that China is probably telling them, hey, it's not in our interest for you
05:45to shut down the Straits of Hormuz. It's probably not in your interest to do that. So all these things
05:49tell me that this is near the end rather than, you know, early innings of kind of some sort of negotiated peace.
05:56So you would think that, you know, as we're taping this early in the week, airing on Wednesday,
06:01you know, weeks time, maybe less, there is some, you know, more progress on a diplomatic solution.
06:07I think so. I think it's now whether they offer enough on the nuclear side to get Israel and or
06:14the president comfortable, that remains seen. But I think there will be some, you know, some sort of
06:19outreach, some sort of attempt to, you know, cease the hostilities, back everyone off, figure out what can
06:25be done, things calm down. And to be honest, that's when I think we're a little bit more hopeful of a
06:30potential regime change. And I want to be very careful when I talk about regime change, because
06:34we do not think that it's in the, anything should be started by either Israel or the US,
06:39anything where we kind of accelerate or create a regime change, I think much more is the hope that
06:44you get, you know, a groundswell in Iran, where the 90 million people kind of get sick of how they're
06:49living compared to how much of the rest of the Middle East is living, right? The areas around
06:54them are far less repressive than they once were. You can go to Saudi Arabia and see things now,
06:58you know, women driving, things that were unheard of even 10 years ago. So I think you're hoping for
07:03some sort of Arab spring, some groundswell coming up from the people. And that's where it would be
07:08helpful if so many of the IRGC leadership is gone. Is there the real, you know, willingness to
07:13crack down on the people? Or could this gain momentum? So that when, when I look at regime change
07:18in our geopolitical intelligence group, I think that's what we're looking for is something like
07:22that, rather than something started by the US or Israel. Okay. And earlier, you mentioned there's
07:28a concern that you have that Israel might keep going to use your words. You know, how do you game
07:34that out? Because I'm sitting here thinking that there are other parties around the world that up
07:39till now, they have been kind of on Israel's side. But if they go too far, I just get the impression
07:46that we're going to see other countries kind of step in and kind of rein them in.
07:50I think that makes sense, right? You, they will continue to attack the air defenses, make sure
07:55that, you know, Iran remains vulnerable, they won't let them rebuild. I'm sure if you see activity around
08:00any of the nuclear sites that indicate either movement or rebuilding or efforts to, you know,
08:05fix things, those will be attacked as well. But I think all that if it can contain like that,
08:11that lets us move on to that peace stage. And I believe you're 100% right that at some point,
08:16president might say, hey, we did this, we did these things. It's now your turn to back down,
08:21right? It's we are playing, you know, carrot and stick, carrot and stick. And it's now your turn
08:25not to use the stick. Right. So just to be clear, when we hear Israel say that they have a, you know,
08:31continued list of targets, you think it's just more towards winding down what they've already
08:36started? Yes, I think it's to finish off and make sure that they are not susceptible from attack,
08:41that they do derail the nuclear program. But again, that I think can then lead to
08:46a negotiated settlement of some sort. Okay, so, you know, maybe in a week's time,
08:51maybe a little more, maybe a little less, we have yet another geopolitical item that we have
08:56to be paying attention to this settlement, this peace negotiation. But at the same time, Peter,
09:01we're juggling how many trade conversations as you know, as the US. So how do we kind of trust
09:10trust that all things will be dealt with as they should, whether it's, you know, trade with China,
09:16trade with the EU, given the July 9th date, this obviously, and other things? How are you
09:22seeing all this come together? I think just like you, our weekend note was actually titled
09:26lots of moving parts with all capitalized lots, because there are so many things to look at. I think
09:31on trade, we're kind of boiled down that we expect pauses and extensions to kind of be the norm.
09:37I think one thing about this administration is they're relative, they're way better staffed up
09:41front than Trump 1.0 was, but not every deputy undersecretary has been in place. It's unclear
09:46whether all the staffs are in place. You know, Marco Rubio is effectively doing two full time jobs
09:50right now. So I think this administration, it's, you know, very Trump centric. And he has his handful
09:56of people who do a lot of this. So I think that's a limiting factor, right? How many things can you do
10:01if your main people who work on one thing are in the ready room getting ready for this attack,
10:06other people are, you just don't have that. So when I'm looking at trade, I think the market's
10:11right to extensions are the likelihood, maybe we get one or two sort of UK style announcements that
10:18are okay. I think he's kind of backing away from, you know, trade. I see Canada, I think he hated,
10:24you know, and we'll go back to one step. So, you know, our belief has always been Trump likes to do
10:28things personally, right? He likes to walk into a room, shake someone's hand and come out with
10:32quote unquote, a deal. And we can agree whether they disagree, whether the deals are good or not.
10:36That's how he likes to do it. He hated Trudeau. I don't think he hates Carney. So that's been an
10:41improvement. One of the things we're seeing to the Canada US tariffs and Mexico as well are much
10:48less impactful than we would have thought. Because one of the things is the USMCA compliance is
10:54allowing companies that had not yet, you can actually go through a process to get your products
10:59labeled USMCA compliant. A lot had not bothered to do that because it was expensive and there was no
11:05added benefit from that. Now with the tariffs, you're actually seeing a lot of companies go
11:09through that, get the approvals. So the effective tariff rates actually quite manageable, I think
11:14right now, you know, energy was 10%. So you're seeing that move away. I think Europe, unfortunately,
11:19is going to bear the brunt of any remaining kind of anger. And part of that's because it doesn't
11:24suit Trump style, right? There's no one to go into Europe and say, okay, what's the deal?
11:28Right? Individual countries barely have the say and the head of the EU, who knows what they're
11:32like, are they even a figure? So I feel the EU is probably where we might get some risk. But
11:38I think this moves on. We've kicked the can down the road. We get these extensions. I think markets
11:42can live with that. I'm a little bit afraid that Trump might be encouraged by how well the stock
11:49market is done and decide, let's give tariffs another go. I don't think that happens. I think
11:55he's turned. I think he's moved away. The other thing, I think he's listening to a lot more people.
11:59I think he's starting to listen to, if you look at migration issues, he's clearly listening out of
12:03farmers. He's listening to, you know, the hotel and leisure business and seems to be backing off a
12:08little bit there and making, you know, concessions that would allow those migrants to stay. And I think,
12:15and I keep hearing that he's hearing a lot more from small and mid-sized businesses through chambers
12:20of commerce and direct connections and through a lot of the state representatives or local
12:24representatives that, hey, you are hurting your face, right? Small and mid-sized business people
12:28loved you. You are not helping them right now. So I think he's moving away and hopefully we can move on
12:34to, you know, national production for national security, other things that are far less, you know, tense
12:39and, you know, zero-sum gains. So the one country you didn't mention in that was China.
12:45And, you know, my thinking just on all of the tariff front, just to share it with you, Peter,
12:49is that we're gearing up for the June quarter earnings season, right? It's right around the
12:55corner. Companies will be resetting guidance for the second half of the year. And to the extent that
13:01we have these unresolved issues or extensions, right, there's going to be a lot more uncertainty
13:06about what the final terms will be. I suspect that we'll see companies guide probably more cautious
13:12than not. Something similar that we saw in the March quarter earnings season, you know, and we'll
13:16see consensus EPS numbers for the S&P 500 in the back half of the year come down. But I also think
13:23that it's past a certain point, Trump needs to get some wins on the board. So, and I think once you
13:30get that first domino to fall, you know, call it China, call it the EU, call it the UK, it becomes
13:35easier for the others to kind of fall on top as well. Do you think, so what do you think of that?
13:43So one, I think I completely agree that he needs some more wins. And I think if Iran plays out like
13:49we think, that will actually be a win. Obviously, it's not trade related, but I think that momentum
13:53carries into other things, right? It's all of a sudden people may look at the, you know, the president
13:58as, oh, now you've won. Now you've done something aggressive. You've done something different than we
14:02expected. And I think that could translate into trade deals. I think it would be helpful.
14:08I agree with you that I think companies are going to be a little bit conservative. I think we are
14:13going to see one question I've wondered is, are we seeing sales of US brands globally diminish with
14:19this? Is there an anti-US brand backlash that might start showing up in some of these earning calls?
14:25So I think that's where we'll see it. You know, I think the one thing that's offset a lot of the
14:29potential risk is every company I think we talk to AI spending remains high. And I think reality of
14:35that is, if you think the economy is going great, you want AI to be efficient. If you think the
14:39economy is going poor, you want AI to be efficient. But my view is we're going to start seeing weaker
14:45job numbers in particular. I think the data has already been a little bit overstated and not all
14:50the data has been particularly good. And I think that will coincide with what you're saying, kind of
14:54bringing down to Q3 and Q4 numbers, a little bit of weak job front, and we're going to put the Fed
15:00on board. And Trump probably has to be cautious about pushing anything too far.
15:05So I'm glad you brought up job numbers, because, you know, there's a number of different sources out
15:10there, whether it's the employment report, ADP, challenger job cuts, and all these others. And,
15:15you know, there was an interesting line in the May employment report that kind of alluded to the fact
15:21that, you know, government workers that were taking the packages that were offered by Doge,
15:29that they were still working until the end of September. So I am a little concerned that come,
15:37you know, the October timeframe, we're going to see a rollover in those public sector jobs,
15:44which we haven't seen yet.
15:47Yeah, I don't think we've seen that. There's a couple of things I look at, too.
15:50The birth death models attributed a lot of jobs the past two months, I think it's 600,000 jobs out
15:56of the past two months, so more than the total jobs. And why that concerns me is, and this gets
16:00a bit wonky, but bear with me for a second. So you apply for an EIN, an employment identification
16:06number if you're starting your own business. And that traditionally, I think really worked well as
16:10a good indicator, like, if you apply for that, maybe you're setting up a bakery, so you'll have
16:13three or four employees. So I think they try and judge that. I think what happens now is,
16:18as you see your job deteriorate, you're like, well, maybe I'll do some Uber Eats, maybe I'll do
16:22some Lyft, or I'll do, you know, something along those lines. And you go ahead and apply for an EIN.
16:26There's all sorts of companies that help you try and set that up. It's a good way to track that
16:30money separate from other things. So I think EIN is much more a sign of weakness. You know,
16:34who was really starting jobs, you know, their own businesses in April, May? It did not seem like
16:39an ideal time to like, hey, you know what, I'm going to start my own business. It felt like an ideal
16:42time to, ooh, maybe I should do some Uber or Lyft to supplement my income. Yeah, I was just about to
16:48say that. It seems more like the gig economy taking over. Yeah. And the other thing I point to,
16:54and you might think it's insane, but I think it's actually fairly rational, is law school applications
16:58are off the charts high. And to me, if you're a senior or a junior and your job prospects aren't
17:03looking great, you apply to law school because, hey, there's another three years to, you know,
17:06do something quote unquote productive. I have, let's just say that given when I graduated college,
17:13I knew more than a few people who did that very thing. Same thing with grad school too.
17:17Right. And so I think all those things to me are indicating that the official data,
17:21and you look at ADP, which in theory, ADP should have better data than the US government, right?
17:25The US government relies on these surveys where we get 30% response rates, which is abysmal,
17:30right? If you ask 20 people for an answer and like six of them gave you an, like,
17:34are you really going to base your whole number on that? Aren't you going to try and figure out
17:37why the heck are the other 14 not sending a response? So I think ADP has been very weak.
17:43I think all those things are going to tell us that they've been overstating jobs for the past two
17:47months and things are weaker than we thought. And that's when the tariff impact will start kind of
17:52like, Ooh, there is something going on behind the scenes. Well, I think we saw that too,
17:56in the flash June PMI report from S and P global. It's one of the data sets that I track rather
18:01carefully. And it's kind of interesting, you know, on the one hand, it showed a pickup in
18:05employment. It showed, you know, the, both the manufacturing economy and the service economy
18:11doing okay, manufacturing improving compared to May. To me, it seems to raise some questions
18:16about potential restocking from the pull forward ahead of tariffs. But the thing that really jumps
18:22out at me was the inflation data, where clearly compared to April, compared to May,
18:29the inflationary pressures accelerated. And I was just kind of sitting back chuckling to myself
18:34because, you know, last week we had Fed Chair Powell who said, you know, we got to wait,
18:38see more good data. Someone's got to pay for these tariffs, let it flow through the system.
18:43And it seems like Powell was correct. Yeah. My view on tariffs has been that let's say it settles
18:50in at this 10% sort of level, which given that I expect another pause, I feel the exporters will
18:56eat some of it and not, you know, call it three, 5%, something like that until they can push through
19:00there. Plus a lot of the exporters already agreed to, you know, pricing, then the importers will
19:05gradually try and pass some of this through, but it'll probably take time, right? They've had some
19:09long-term contracts. So it's not like you can up it all at once. And then I think the other thing
19:13we all forget is if something sells for a hundred dollars, the purchase price might be $40,
19:17the tariffs on the $40. So it's $4, not $10 of tariffs that have to get eaten. So I think
19:22ultimately it'll get passed on to the consumer. So I think we're going to see a steady kind of
19:27one to 3% kind of upward pressure on inflation coming from tariffs. But I don't think it's going
19:31to be this one time spike. You're going to see it bits in here. I saw someone else pointed out,
19:35you know, canned vegetables or canned food went up on the last CPI report, not vegetables or fruit
19:41themselves, but the canned vegetables and fruits. And that's because the price of the cans have been
19:44growing up. So it's going to hit in all sorts of weird little ways. I think it's going to be more
19:48of a steady kind of grind that's going to be offset by the jobs. But I think it's going to start
19:54showing up. And the other thing I think none of us who try and track any of the data can really tell
19:59you is you had this huge pull forward and, you know, goods purchased to get ahead of the tariffs.
20:03And you had to slow down while everyone waited. Then you had another huge response while the
20:08tariffs were paused. It's really difficult to try and figure out what's the steady state of the
20:12economy right now. So does that argue for the Fed to sit back until maybe September when they're
20:18when they have a policy meeting, collect data over the next three months and say, OK, yeah,
20:23inflation is picking up. Maybe the employment numbers are softening where we can contemplate
20:28doing something or maybe something completely different unfolds. You know, I think if we get the
20:34extension, it's another 90 days. I think the Fed could at least think about a July cut and certainly put
20:40the next meeting on the table because really the big uncertainty was when we were throwing out those,
20:44you know, Liberation Day tariffs, everything was it was just insane. Right. And 90 percent here,
20:4935 percent there. And I do think that at this kind of 10 percent, it's just a little bit more manageable.
20:55So I think they could put it back. But that's probably partly because I think the job numbers
20:59are going to be weak enough to justify that. So I think on the balancing, inflation is still going to
21:04be in not coming down to where they'd like it. But I think jobs are going to start
21:07decelerating at a point where like, OK, we better do something here.
21:11So let me ask you this on the jobs front. Do we need to see one or two months of job losses for
21:18them to act? Or do you think that we can still see minute job creation and they can still deliver
21:24maybe one cut? I we probably need one month of job losses or very small jobs with yet massive
21:31revision so that the net number looks bad. Right. I'm also to me, the unemployment rate's tricky
21:36because I believe that stayed at 4.2 percent. But that's again, this all gets wonky and I'm
21:41learning on the fly all these things, of course. But, you know, the household survey is what they
21:45use to calculate that. So household survey showed 600,000 jobs lost. So that should have moved the
21:51unemployment rate up by 0.2 percent. But 0.2 percent dropped out of the labor force. So that's
21:56why it stayed at four, you know, 4.2 percent. But to me, 0.2 percent dropping out of the labor
22:01force, maybe it's migrant workers, maybe it's something that tells me again, things aren't
22:05great when people kind of are dropping out of the labor force. Right. Totally agree. Totally agree.
22:10Well, we will see. We've got, you know, I think three months of data before we get to the next Fed
22:16policy meeting. Depending on the data, I think that we could very well see the September SEP go from two
22:24cuts to one cut. But again, we got a lot of data between now and then. Right. And that it's so hard
22:30to tell where this stuff's going to come through, how it's going to come through and what the
22:33reaction of the Fed. And I will say, I think if Trump was less aggressive with Powell, he'd be
22:39more likely to put cuts on the table. I feel it's backfiring. I feel this pushing someone into the
22:45corner has been backfiring. You know, I think Powell's largely a straight shooter, but I would
22:54agree. I think there are times he gets his back up a little bit, understandably so. I mean, he's out to do
22:58a job that he, you know, he knows what his mandates are. He knows what he has to do. I just
23:03think that, you know. And it's an incredibly difficult job to do. Oh, yeah. At the best of
23:08times, let alone when data's all over the place, when economic policy. And again, we haven't even
23:13touched on all of this has still been just really by executive order. So the big, beautiful bill would
23:18be actually nice to get something passed that's official that we could all point to and like, ooh,
23:22we will have this for a long period of time, as opposed to executive orders, but some of them are
23:26being challenged. That to me would be the beauty of getting this big, beautiful bill through is,
23:30okay, we now have a baseline that we can work with. I'm so glad you brought that up because
23:34before we get out of here, I'm going to ask you this last question, Peter. Do we see the bill get
23:39passed, the big, beautiful bill get passed by July 4th? I doubt by July 4th because I think there's
23:46going to have to be a little bit more corralling and cajoling to be done. And that's probably hard to
23:50be done. Again, I think Trump moved things along. He talked to the right people, the right groups,
23:55and pushed this through. I would say the more he wins on Israel and things like that, the more
24:00likely it is that this moves through. If we start seeing breakdowns, I think there were a number of
24:04Republicans who don't feel he's necessarily lived up to what they were looking for, some even from
24:08the MAGA side. And then beyond that, I think initially there was this huge fear amongst everyone
24:14that you would get primaried out by Musk if you kind of did anything against the president's wishes.
24:20Some of that may be dissipating. So I think we can push this through. I think it's crucial that we get
24:24something done that's reasonable. I could see this breaking a little bit apart. So that's why I'm so
24:29excited by what I think is going to turn out to be a big win with Iran, that it just pushes everyone
24:34over the hurdle and let's get this gun and move on, even if we don't make quite the July 4th deadline.
24:40Well, that could set up a good second half of the year.
24:43And I think that would be the exciting part, right? And to me, I'll come back to this national
24:48production for national security, right? How this wasn't a wake-up call five years ago, I don't know,
24:54but whether it's chips, but you look at the last two negotiations with China, rare earths and critical
24:59minerals are at the heart of it. And I keep trying to get this in my messaging, sometimes it's hard.
25:06I really don't care that much about the raw commodities, the rare earths and critical minerals.
25:10They're available everywhere. We will be able to buy some from places. It's the processing. China
25:15controls 90% of the processing and refining of these rare earths and critical minerals. That's
25:20what we need to be doing domestically. And the one thing I've been a little bit disappointed with in
25:24Academy Securities, we were talking about national production for national security that tended to
25:28include our allies working with Canada, working with Europe, where people could use their strengths
25:32to kind of bring this to the table. We moved away from that. Maybe we kind of start pivoting back to
25:38working with our allies. We're not there yet, but there's hope certainly that over the next six
25:43months, but that's what we have to do. We got to address that. Trump, to me, a lot of that's
25:47deregulation. That's pushing things through. That's the stuff Trump loves. He's good at. If he can do
25:51that, I think that still takes away jobs from China. It takes away jobs from elsewhere in the world,
25:56but it's not as upfront and, you know, in your face as policy that it doesn't make for as good
26:04of a headline, right? As in battling China for rare earths, when you've got to talk about building your
26:09own, as you say, domestic refining and production capacity. But hopefully that's where we can see
26:15this shift. You know, and Besson, I think really started some of that back at the Milken Institute,
26:18when he talked about the three-legged stool, like that to me was, I think what our goal,
26:22our hope was with Trump. He kind of caught us off guards on how far he went with Liberation Day
26:27tariffs and stuff. Now that he's back down from that, he's talking to other people. That to me
26:31would be the direction and that could be really good for the economy. And I like owning things that
26:35will benefit from those types of things, the processing and refining of rare earths and critical
26:40minerals. Picks and shovels, so to speak. Exactly. Excellent. Excellent. Peter, thank you so much for
26:47joining me on this episode of the podcast. As always, insightful, informative, and folks,
26:52if you're not reading Peter's stuff at the Street Pro, you really, really should. I encourage you
26:58to do so. And that, my friends, is this week's episode. Thank you so much for listening.
27:03We'll be back with a fresh one before you know it.
Recommended
1:15
|
Up next
1:04
0:58
25:11
0:35