12.22.25 Sub spaces

Good afternoon and welcome to Polarity Radio for Subscribers, re-broadcast only here, and in the cloud for those of you who are having difficulty updating your Safari 26.2, which is the one I'm told anyone who does that and reboots doesn't have any problem with the re-broadcast, but we are still sending up into the nest the recording of the spaces, which is an information only spaces. Don't make a transaction without a professional advisor. I'm not your professional advisor. I'm also quite ill. I had to go out to the site of where John Gotti used to have some craziness. I think we're all set. I don't have to go back tomorrow. I'm sick as a dog, taking medication. But we're doing our best. I was even going to take a COVID test, but there's no way it's COVID. I was stuck in cold rain, and that's what's given me this congestion. But I may do it tomorrow, because you can do PACS COVID for up to five days. So if it's COVID, PACS COVID. Anyway, but I didn't want to come on tonight. We're going to go tomorrow. We'll roll into a non-subscriber spaces later, but I have to give you the context, the way I'm seeing it. I can't believe the craziness I'm hearing on TV. There's a guy who's got a new fund. He's on CNBC. And he says, you know, we were the only one bullish in April, which, well, if you look at our episode on April 21, episode six on Apple and Spotify, we called for a prompt bank of suppression driven bank rally, because it was only a Trump spoof. And he said, after he was one of the only ones bullish, he said, and we might get our target of 7,100 without mentioning that the Fed has cut three times, the Fed has removed QT, and the Fed has gone to QE. And so this is the opportunity that I get increasingly excited about. And for those of you who aren't following, you could just go on QAGE.net, Q-A-G-E.net, and you'll see Professor Frank has become an advisor. And we are going to try to create a financial Schrodinger to help develop the Hamiltonian. I am not getting, I took a flu shot. Anyway, so, and so Frank is an atomic introspectory, which allows you to make very small images. Anyway, we have this just insanity that rate cuts don't matter, but they do matter. That no one acknowledges that the market's here because of excessive easing. But as I said, don't wish for too much. And as you can see in the next, is the behavior of the NASDAQ 100 divided by the S&P. That's what's important. The NASDAQ divided by the S&P tells you what the expansion is. It tells you what the expansion is. We don't care about anything else. Okay. The expansion, that's, you know, deck chairs in the Titanic. So if you look in the next, it's the one to the right. I think it's the triple one. You can see that, oh, that's the monthly. Let's go all the way to the right, and you can see the December 10th is 275.30. The denominator, we just multiply by 100 to get some decimals and subtract 100 to remove the par. And, you know, we gapped up this morning above the 50-day, and we're back below at 270.16. So we're down about 2% NASDAQ with respect to the S&P since the rate cut on December 10th. Let's go look at, oh, this is, if we do the ninth, it shows the 235. And then if we do a monthly, you'll see that 267 was the ratio going back 17-plus months. Our November, excuse me, July 9th of 2024, we had a 267. We're about 1% above it, and that's really essentially the dividend, which is 0.6 differential, a year and a half almost, 0.9. And so we're really essentially unchanged over this time frame, over this 17-month period. And then let's go to the other chart, the other thing that's up in the nest. Yikes. Okay, and this is going back to October 19th, and essentially I have the September 15th. Should have done the 16th, but it's about the same. So you can see all the way to the left in the two-pack, Amar Shakur, who incidentally, his middle name is Amaru because he took the name of a Bolivian revolutionary, Chupacabra Shakur. Anyway, you can see from Monday, September 15th, or about the same on the 16th or the 17th, it was straight up from 267 to 280. You know, what happens after that? On the 29th, we're down. And then if you look in the last set, you see that we're down from the December 10th cut. So as we've described, a rate cut is like a free punch. I hate to describe it that way, but when the curve is inverted coming from a high level, you just create money supply by lowering the rate. There's no contemporaneous duration destruction. It's just pure duration expansion. But what happens when you get steep and you're in the middle of the range? It's about neutral. So if you look and you measure, you'll see the last year rate cuts proved to be innovative compressive, not innovative expansion. Yeah, if you're looking against cash, that's one thing, but if you look at something much more important, against the S&P, and then we all know that Bitcoin is the world's worst performing asset since October 6th in the world, and it's only getting worse. So I also want you to keep in mind, folks, that Bitcoin must rise in the next nine days by 17,000, which is about 19%, I guess, or you have a quarterly engulfing candle. That means we are lower than we were at the lows of last quarter, and we traded above the highs, and that is considered very negative, but it's a three-month period, okay? It doesn't look like we'll get down to the 74, so you have another three months to try to get down to the 74, in which case you get an annual engulfing bearish candle. 69,000 on 11, 10, 21, that adds up. 11 plus 10 is 21. If you adjust for inflation, Bitcoin's up 1%, adjusted for inflation, annualized per year, we're so strong we can take everything you throw at us. You know something? When Bitcoin was $1 billion and $5 billion and $10 billion and $20 billion, $50 billion and $100 billion, it's a lot different when it's $2 trillion. There's just not enough money there. I don't understand how people don't talk about it. They're all excited. Palladium's bouncing, gold and silver is bouncing. What do you expect when gold is outperforming oil and Trump seizes 1.8 million barrels of Chinese oil? Oopsie. I forgot to turn off the oven. Sorry, kiddo. I think your chicken's rumbling. We're going to be a little too chewy. Okay, let me open the door. Okay. So, you know, this thing, somebody commented today. Somebody commented today on something I said about Bitcoin. They said, well, you know, when it gets a much bigger market cap, it acts differently. And I'm thinking, exactly. I mean, they literally said half of the story. It's too big to go up. It's down 30%-ish. Not exactly. It's down 30%-ish. Um... And the NASDAQ's down a few percent. It's a massive leap. Leaping lower. We just had two rate cuts combined with QT reduction, combined with QE, like or whatever. And both of those easing episodes produced beta compression. You don't have one of these talking heads anywhere on TV or Twitter talking about that. No, because they can advertise the new ETFs. We're in compression. And the problem is, as I had said, when you go another 50 basis points, 75 max, it ain't going to be just compression. It's going to be absolute. That's my opinion. Because the problem is, if they don't start going 50, you're going to start getting curve flattening from... The system has a lot of fixed rate mortgages. And it has very few adjustable rate mortgages. When there's an adjustable rate mortgage, there is only a fraction of the hedging going on by the borrower. Versus the fixed. What happens when people say, you know what, I'm good, I'll take some of that risk? They're not buying the insurance from the banks. How is that good? How's that good for the banks? It's great for the consumer realizing, wait a sec, rates have been going down. My recollection is when they start going down, they keep on going down. Why should I waste my money and give it to J.P. Morgan? Who recently has been known to have been buying more treasuries. And why might that be? Maybe the stock market loan growth and the liability structure is such that they've got to neutralize it? So, of course for launching Bitcoin, it's been leading lower, but from the technician standpoint, if you can't get this thing to 105, you know, it could be that you can get over 105 to the policy support. That doesn't count. That's going to bleed off. What are they going to say when it's down 40%? So, 126 times 40 is about 50. Okay. So, 76. Okay. Sailor's level. I don't know how many of you have been, you know, in the markets for a very long time. Everyone says, don't let anybody know your position. They may come for you. And this guy didn't get it. He let everyone know he's advertising. I bet 700 and 670,000 coins, whatever the number is. I just don't see any math that allows them not to have to give that back to the system. People know that they can short them and cause them to sell, cause the company to sell. They'll be able to buy it back after the cascade effect. The whole thing is craziness. It's craziness. So, what is the mechanism of why oil is going up today because Trump used a 1.8 million barrel vote? Why is that good? Why was that good for markets today? Why did it allow the NASDAQ not to converge into the S&P? Inflation expectations. Rate expectations. Rate expectations. Rate cuts. You get foresawed. We're up 2.5% in oil today. Do I expect that to hold? Of course not. It doesn't matter how many votes we take from Venezuela. They're not a big player. But there's always a contagion here. That will go to Iran. Okay. So, what's happening is every single policy interference is always inflationary. What's the policy interference? Trump decided to juice oil by going after Venezuela. And then... Excuse me, I'm a little tired. We're going to break in. Oh, so, you know, you juice oil. What's the problem with oil? People are asking. No, what's the problem with oil? Oil has commodity trading advisors plus other people and they get margin calls. And it's involuntary liquidation. Right. Right. But commodity trading advisors, they're ruthless. But if they did not juice oil, you wouldn't have got that little lift in rates. You wouldn't have got people saying, hey, rates are going up, let me show it. It's a terrible mistake. They're allowed to do it. We have to just watch when they exhaust themselves. So, I don't know what to say. Every policy interference has a way to affect one thing or another. Okay. What else is going on? Anybody want to come up and speak and save me? I'm sick. I'm ill. But I didn't want to go today without just commenting that oil gave a little lift to NASDAQ. And it gave it up all day long. The Nikkei. The Nikkei is a joke. All these high yields over there. They're not serious, folks. They're not serious. Someone, I think Kasabi or whatever high yield pronounces, said, foreigners are selling American treasuries. They're down $6 billion. And then he says, China sold $11 billion of those $6 billion. So, in other words, are you saying that international buyers of the China are accumulating dollars? Okay. Who wants to come up and give me a little respite? I'm falling apart here. I need a nap before I do my evening spaces. I just want you to just track with me. We didn't capture the October and the December 10th or the September 29th. We didn't contain those apologies. Come on. Who's coming up? I'm falling apart. I need some help. I want you to go right after the market. You could be going out for dinner, dressing a treat, cleaning out your candelabra. No, I think you have to look down. There's certainly also a client waiting to hear from you. I'm looking at Amazon. I see a company looging. Okay. There we go. Somebody. Somebody. We got a handsome fellow coming up to speak. Big smile. What's going on? David, what is going on with all these shiny metals across the board? Palladium? Well, so there's a special case in palladium because of getting rid of the EVs. But, you know, they just eased and drove the dollar down a little. They went into QE. They steepened the curve. But there's no dollar value. I mean, gold is up a little over a share to touch. It's all silver and the palladium. Bitcoin, they're not getting the lift. It's just a liquidity pump at the end of the cycle. People are saying, I can concentrate all my energies in silver and I can move it up. And I wouldn't go near shorting silver yet. I will later, but not yet because it's the only thing that will work for them. So they care. You know, nobody's going to be shorting volatility in silver. It just made a new high. It'll take time, but it'll work out. But you can't take a lot of signal from a microcap. Like IWC. Is that at an all-time high? That's the microcap ETF? Let's see if it's at an all-time high. IWC, IWC. Is that at an all-time high? Is it real? No, it's liquidity. You can't put real money in silver. You can't put real money in palladium. You can't put real money in platinum. People can play. And that's what it is. It's not a deficit. What happens when the dollar goes up? Take a look at the dollar. Take a look at the dollar over the last, since GFC, when they took it down to 74. What's it say? 70.80. And we're just, you know, the 50-week moving average is, the 50, excuse me, the 50 period, which is, I think, three months, is rising. Getting ready to go into a golden cross. Getting ready to take the dollar up to 125. It was 160 back in the three yen days. There's no signal there. Traders are going to trade. I've been saying they're leaving, they're leaving the Bitcoin fix, and they're going to silver. And you got a nice piece of gold, you can short the fund. The problem with all of them is what's going to happen when oil breaks? And I can't imagine it doesn't break. Take a look at the Indonesian currency. It's ready to go. Goodbye. If Pakistan's already on an IMF ID drip. It's all a problem. But it's not liquid. What's liquid is the NASDAQ underperforming the S&P since the last two rate cuts, and they're playing with the shiny objects where you can't put any real money in. Okay, you have bond volatility down to 59. NANDL, now, what's up a little? I don't think it stays up. They keep on trying to make sure NASDAQ volatility doesn't rise. I mean, the VIX is at a similar low compared to... I like the VIX. I'm a seller of the VIX. I'm funding in the VIX against the VIX. That's going through the looking glass. That's going to... Oh, I didn't put that up. Let me see if you can give me an updated chart. A cleaned up one. It's not cleaned enough, but it's good enough. I'll post it and swing it. So now it's... Okay, now it's in the nest, and this is the important thing. It's not the financial big bang. It's the financial now, okay? The financial big bang is way back there, the financial now, and you have to smother your volatility to an incompressible level before it can go to the other side and super expand, and you got policy makers that are interfering with that process. But this is telling you, future and the past, market signal and risk field, entropy minimum, entropy explosion. You know what happens, you know? We're just... We've compressed the NASDAQ to the same as the S&P. They are not. And we've gone through the wormhole and observed the status of them now. They'll realize that rate cuts beyond these levels are not supportive. What's your take on unemployment going from 3.4 to 4.6? Because they crowded out everybody with this AI nonsense, and now you all know that my credit default swap cousins, they're not buying that collateral. It's worth nothing to them. But as we finally get rates lower, like what happened today? I think we dropped a basis point. Let me check. We dropped an entire basis point, and the SOFR was up too. So we're at 6.24. We're at 13 basis points from a reaction low going out 18 months. Do you want to break an 18-month low? It's housing entropy. It's going to happen. They'll drive that mortgage, and they can drive those mortgage rates down 50 basis points on nothing. I'm just struggling how you don't get a recession when you get unemployment just going into price discovery here. I mean, where's the hiring going to happen all of a sudden? Housing. Housing. Have you noticed any of the retail stocks, my friend? Have you noticed five above? I call it five above now, not five below. How about energy prices coming down? How about natural gas? Look what your friend, I don't mean to say it like that. Look what Biden did to natural gas, okay? He said no more natural gas permits while we study to see if it's safe, okay? How insane is that? What person above three years old doesn't realize that natural gas is safer than coal? So it was never about the safety. It was about trying to keep the price up. Okay, so this is what's crazy. If you started at the beginning of the year, you'd see, based on what Biden had done, oil, natural gas was up 150% versus last year. I just went up to the next. Was it 2.42% versus last year? How are you going to get your inflation to be maintained when it says we're 2.48% versus last year? The problem is equities had been conserving enormous amounts of liquidity with crypto. And that was going to be a vehicle, you know, to transmit the fears of inflation. And now, inflation's dead? Now, what are they left with saying? Well, it's not really dead. It wasn't good data collection. How about the freaking two-year, three-year? How about 25 basis points and we're 5.99? What's that going to do to people? And then we're going to be shifting to the adjustable rates. We're not going to run short. But we're going to run short of duration. Now they're trying to pretend like they're not going to cut rates and drive down the interest expense. Yeah, Jan, cut odds are at 20%. I'm sorry, I didn't hear that. Jan, cut odds are at 20%. Yeah, well, let's see what happens over the next, let's see. We have 19.9 because of the stock market. You also have oil. And you have Cathamic say, oh, she's good with no more cuts. This is a sick lady. This is a lady who doesn't care from her ivory tower how much people suffer. So you have a 53% chance of a cut in March, including some chance of sequential, and a 65% chance of something by later. But, you know, I always wonder whenever Trump does something, how much of it, what's the ratio of spoof to policy? Because he's a good spoofer. What's the ratio? And I think it's a high ratio. He leaves Venezuela alone for five minutes, oil's going to break it into the 40s. I mean, he's just tricking people into buying oil with his crazy story. He's a provocateur. All I know is NASDAQ is not trading well. I don't know what you want. Anyway, what's going on? Give me some stuff before I collapse. Okay, so Airbnb is up to 10 straight days, but that's only 10%. That's a lot more anemic. And Citigroup is 17-year high. It was just a four-year low. The company is a joke. It's a joke. It's a bad joke. These people, listen to the caveman, Chris McGarrity. He's out of control. There's no context for what's going to happen when the curve flattens. U.S. Navy vet, what's going on? Bail me out. Bail me out, U.S. Navy vet. Yeah, you were trying to say something about Chris McGarrity. He's an analyst for KBW about Citigroup. And, you know, he's a lover. They're a lover. They're a lover. Returning significant capital. Do you have any idea how much they're going to suffer when the curve inverts and that the only reason it's not is because the Fed's interfering? Stop counting your fingers with all the good stories. You're a freak. You don't know anything. You just have a nice green tie. But you're selling people down the road when you talk about a garbage pile bank. And I have a pension socket. I'm not happy about that. Okay. I was listening to one of your recorded speeches from November 29th. Okay. It's a lot easier just to read, you know, listen to the podcast. So, anyway, good stuff there. And I tried to review it, but, you know, you were talking about the charting you mentioned many times, dividing some equities. A price by its own volatility. Yeah, and in this case, it had to do with a residual policy interference. Oh, yeah. And I couldn't find the graph there or quite figure out how to quantify it. What I would just do is I would use 5.375 minus an 18-month future SOFR contract. So you can know what the peak was, or you can go one year out, whatever. You subtract the terminal low rate. That means that's what's already priced in. 5.375 minus three, that means they're doing two and three-eighths. That means you've got three left. Okay. Okay. So isn't that, that's just a constant on the graph. I don't understand how that would affect this. No, because it changes. In other words, what happened when they only cut 25 base points to five and three-eighths? You still had a ton of stimulus. Now the deferred contract is down to three. Okay. All right. Now you can do another type of analysis and say instead of five and three-eighths, you can say you only get 3% of easing before it doesn't help at all. Because when you get that much easing, you start to accelerate the prepayments, and then they flatten the curve and lift the dollar. Okay. So you're plotting that residual figure, whatever it is. I'm using that as a denominator because you want to reduce whatever a price is by the fact that you're not going to get that much stimulus going forward. All right. You're reducing the price, so you're graphing the price through time. So it just sounds like a constant to me. No, no, no, because it moves. It's not that you're dividing by five and three-eighths. You're dividing by five and three-eighths minus what they've already cut and telegraphed. So if you have A divided by B, AB, and then you divide that by five and three-eighths, that's divided by a constant. But what if you divide it by five and three-eighths, which is then denominated in something that's less than five and three-eighths? It presents more of a drag. Let's say you cut policy in half down to two and five-eighths, and that gets you five and three-eighths, okay? Okay. So if you take it to two and five-eighths, two and three-eighths divided by five and three-eighths divided by two and five-eighths is two. So you're denominating whatever you have by two. And it's going to be weak. You know, when you denominate in a bigger number, you're going to get a rollover. It's a trend adjuster for volatility. Okay, but the denominator is the same over... It's not, because we said the residual. We said the residual. So if you start the data series in September 18th, you had a four and seven-eighths, which meant you've already used up a lot of your policy. Okay, so you can drag that residual policy rate as a variable? Yeah. Yeah, because you could use the starting in September of 2024, the first cut. You could say, well, what is the lowest cut on the curve? And use that as a base against your reported assets. That's not, that's a ticker? A tick would be ZQ. I don't know how they, I mean, on Trayview they don't do it, but you would just do ZQ-18, meaning that it would be the 18th month out. So you're not getting it here, so you could just approximate it. But are we losing the residual policy support? I think so. Okay. So with the graph then, there is, you say it doesn't show up on Trayview, but if it is, is it? No, what you could do is you could divide, you could include in parentheses 5.375 minus ZQ-M6. Oh, I got it. So then it would just be, it would set the graph up or down. Yeah, but you would have to make some adjustments because the five entries are on one side and it's using a 97 on the other, so you would have to multiply that number by 100. Okay. And some other adjustments. But the point is, as you see them cutting, it's more of a drag. Why? Because the fact that they can't cut more means that they're limited. And then the yield curve is going to flatten, and that's going to be bad for the banks, not with Citi, what Citi Group is doing right now. Okay. All right. And then, well, yeah, one thing on the curve, on that same episode you mentioned at that point, I think it was a seven-year, you said, was point. There was two basis points above, I think it was the window, you know, the Federal Fund window. So what's the significance of that? It was like 402 instead of, as opposed to four. Well, the low yield on the adjust rate mortgage got only to 559 at the cycle, and we're at 582 right now. But when you have a 6% mortgage rate, you know, a 5% mortgage, and you're able to borrow at Fed Funds 3 and 5.8, aren't you doing that all day long? There's no credit risk. So I was saying when you have a 2% advantage, not 4.0, 4 to 4.02, I was saying 4 to 6. When you're able to borrow at 3 and you're earning 5, because if you look at the deferred contracts, you could short a SOFR, and this is going to cost you 3%. It's not going to go above par. You short it at 97. But when you're at 5 and 3.8 on the Fed Funds, and you're at 3.6 on the 10-year, and you're at 5 and 3.8 on a mortgage, let's say, you're not making any money borrowing at 5 and 3.8 to buy your mortgage. It's the same yield. Okay. They've cut 175, so they're making it a lot cheaper to buy these things on leverage. Okay, yeah. Not leverage. That's called carry trade. Right. That's beyond me. So, I mean, in concept, so carry trade. No, no, but what's happening is the lower the rate, the greater the intensity of desire for people to buy on leverage, because they're just getting more and more, and then you get to a point where a rate cut goes right into that, and then it's so disruptive you start to get a bull slap in there, not just a bull sweep in there. Yeah, I understand that. People are incentivized to. To go on leverage because it's cheap money. More and more so. I mean, obviously that's out of my league, but in concept, like day after day, that mortgage broker or whoever it is, borrows and then sells that, borrows and buys that mortgage and blah, blah, but they're doing it back and forth and back and forth. No, no, so they're issuing the paper to an end user. Okay, it seems like a small amount. No, it's 50% of all mortgages are the independent guys have. But because they're rolling at small percentage. No, because they put in the giant pastors. They put in the giant pastors. The UMDS. They make it on every transaction. No, but they're trying to make their money on the servicing, not just on the fee. Okay, yeah, no, I was just talking about the interest differential part. But the interest differential is for other people, not the broker. Okay. It's for an investor. Okay, the broker can't make that much on this transaction. Because they don't make it that much. They don't care. They have no costs. Yeah. You know, and then they're just. But the bankers do because they're holding the paper. Yeah, but it's very risky now. Yeah, okay. You know, and then what happens when the spread goes from two down to one? Yeah, end of show. That's why the Fed is rolling off the paper. To keep inflation up. To make houses stay unaffordable. So the banks are fat and juicy. And can make loans. Once they let spreads tighten, banks make less. And they can't leverage it up. And you slow down the economy and bye-bye inflation. Right. So that's the perniciousness of rolling. What? What? I have that at a conceptual level. It's just the rolling off of mortgages is a sadism. They're directly saying we want to keep mortgages out of reach of Americans. Sure. Okay, okay. Yeah, no, the whole political angle. And depositing that P&L in banks. Yeah, no. They only need it installed for 20 months. Because of the midterm election. I don't think it's going to work. I don't think they're going to be able to hold it together. Yeah, no, I heard you on that. I tried to introduce this on just someone that was talking about an election. I mean, there was somebody with a lot of followers and so forth. I just wanted to introduce the concept. What if, you know, in spite of the narrative and the pushback. On policies on immigration or whatever it might be. That if the economy is responding to Trump's policies. Mortgage rates. Shoot themselves in the foot by not recognizing it. Why not? Give them credit where credit is due or else just lose. And the response was, I was blocked. You know what I mean? The problem is that the newspapers are a wholly owned subsidiary. They have a study of late night TV. 99% of the guests are liberal. 92% of the jokes are attacks on conservatives. Why should they have broadcast rights? That's not a public good, a public charge. Well, maybe still on some of the networks. But, you know, local media, AM radio and so on and so forth. Yeah, but the broadcast, ABC, NBC and CBS are supposed to be public. And they're not neutral. Yeah, well, the conservatives said they didn't want it to be. They were the ones that threw out the feminist doctrine, right? I hear it. I hear it. I'm just, you know, I'm just looking at rates. Rates are weak. Yields are weak. Rate cuts, QE, and the last two rate cuts produced declines in the NASDAQ with respect to the S&P. Yeah, no, it's a horror. It's a horror. You know, I mean, I'm, you know, I wouldn't say a rocker, but, you know, a left-wing agitator or supporter. But to see, you know, policy like this being weaponized, yeah, it just doesn't add up. It doesn't pass the spell test. It doesn't. Psycho Beth Hammack from Cleveland, Florida, formerly Goldman Sachs, she had wanted to say, she had said, we should be selling mortgages. We should be making Americans suffer more on the same words. We're not causing enough pain amongst Americans, she said. She's a very disturbed lady. We've got a lot of support of people, oh, rates are going higher. We think they're going higher. Except they're looking at the Internet stock known as a bond, and they're not looking at the decline in the shorter yields, which going out to the two-year is 17 plus trillion. Going to the three-year, no, excuse me, the three-year is 17 plus trillion. Go to the five-year, it's 20 trillion. And it just keeps on going lower. They can play all they want in the long end, and they don't have the guts to play in the short end because they can run over. They don't have the balance sheet. Seems like a disease, like the guy that attacked you about, oh, Bitcoin doesn't have anything to do with mortgage rates. Not when you're not looking. When Bitcoin is below 75, and mortgage rates are pulling them down, and then when they take back all of MicroStrategy's coins, that's what they're going to do. You can't leave those coins in MicroStrategy's control. They'll deny it when it's obvious, right? You'll see mortgage rates down, the curve flatten, the dollars go up, Bitcoin breaks down, but, oh, no, no, just wait, just wait. Yeah, but like, you know, if Powell and Biden were basically, you know, pursuing a disastrous course, why don't we recognize that? It's going to help us in the long run. Because they don't care. Do you think when they import? I'm stabbing, you know, I'm not loyal. I'm not a loyal soldier is what the accusation was in that case. I'm just looking at, they don't care if 1% of the people that come in are real tough folks. They don't care the violence and the damage. It doesn't matter. It just guarantees 20 million more votes. Yeah, the dynamics of that, I'd really like to dig into it, but has that been a strong supporter of immigrants? Legal or illegal? Legal or illegal? Well, legal, but in the sense that, you know, who's been picking on cops since, you know, ever? I will tell you this, Cesar Chavez, Cesar Chavez and the Democratic Party was vigorously against illegal immigration because it drove down wages. And I can assure you they're going to be making crops robotic before you know it. Yeah. Okay, on that, yeah, we're bouncing all over the place. So, anyway, yeah, I appreciate it, and I'm going to save up some more questions for you. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Novo Nordisk, they have the pill version of whatever, and the stock's up 7%. What stock? No, Novo Nordisk, they have the GLT-1 oral version. Oh, okay, here we go on health care. And it's up 7.67 after hours. Okay. Yeah, I'm overweight on health care, it seems like. Are you overweight or are you the correct weight? Well, I'm adjusting, I'm zeroing in on the correct weight. You're flowing with the capital. Exactly. You're surfing the capital. Exactly. It's like the movie Dooms. Worms, sorry. Anyway, I just, I don't see how people don't know. See, when oil goes up and everyone is either long or short, and the people that are long are suffering, they're getting liquidation, that's selling pressure. When Trump drives up oil $2.50, it relieves some of the selling pressure, and people don't have to liquidate, and they can buy other things, but it's not going to last. This oil's going much lower. All right, does anybody else have a question or a comment? Otherwise, I'll take a nap and then try to come back later. Otherwise, we'll be back with you at the subscriber space in the morning with the overnight. But I do want to highlight something that I've said. Mortgage rates can make their way into the fives without the 10-year going down because the spreads are so wide. So they could drop a quarter percent without the 10-years going down, or they could go down more than the 10-year 10-year goes down. But I don't see any way that mortgage rates don't go to the 599 because you have all this built-up, you know, tension, and no matter what the Fed pretends they're going to do, it's very difficult to hold up rates when the funding cost to buy things on leverage drops. They don't care. I care. Anyway, it's disgusting, the cheerleading. It's grotesque. Okay, folks, if there's no one that's coming up, then we're going to close it out. I'll take a nap and then I'll be back. We'll be back on Tuesday and Wednesday, and probably Friday for subscriber mortgage basis. And maybe Wednesday afternoon we'll do one also. But we have to watch this beta compression. We have to watch the Bitcoin acceleration lower. People don't have to agree with what we're seeing just because it's basic addition and division. They're not required to. But that's the opportunity that they fight with all of their might and with all of their money against reality. Okay, with that said, it's nap time. Thank you, everyone. Goodbye.