Episode 181 - Mark on the Markets: 2024's Final Lap-Q3 Recap and Q4 Outlook with John Coleman
Subscribe to the Podcast:
The Fed's long awaited rate cut took place. The US Election is just over a month away. In this episode, Richard Cunningham and John Coleman take a look at the many major headlines interacting with the economy and markets and provide some commentary and perspective.
We delve into the intricacies of today's economic landscape, from the Fed's recent rate cuts to the performance of the 'Magnificent Seven' stocks. John Coleman offers valuable insights on private equity, venture capital, and real estate markets, while also addressing the potential impact of the upcoming U.S. election on the economy. Learn how to navigate these complex times with both financial acumen and spiritual wisdom.
All opinions expressed on this podcast, including the team and guests, are solely their opinions. Host and guests may maintain positions in the companies and securities discussed. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as specific investment advice for any individual or organization.
Episode Transcript
Transcription is done by an AI software. While technology is an incredible tool to automate this process, there will be misspellings and typos that might accompany it. Please keep that in mind as you work through it.
Richard Cunningham You're listening to Faith Driven Investor, a podcast that highlights voices from a growing movement of Christ following investors who believe that God owns it all and cares deeply about the heart posture behind our stewardship. Thanks for listening.
Welcome: Hey everyone! All opinions expressed on this podcast, including the team and guests, are solely their opinions. Hosts and guests may maintain positions in the companies and securities discussed in this podcast is for informational purposes only, and should not be relied upon as specific investment advice for any individual or organization. Thanks for listening.
Richard Cunningham Welcome back, everybody, to another episode of the Faith Driven Investor podcast. It's episode 181. We are closing the book on Q3 2024 as when this releases, it will be September 30th. Hard to believe we are entering into the last lap of 2024 as it relates to quarters at least, and we're talking marks on the markets. We've got our resident expert, John Coleman, in the podcast studio. And before we welcome John onto the pod, just a couple of quick things I want to note. If you haven't yet, listen to our most recent FDI podcast that dropped a couple of weeks ago, episode 180 with Richard Garnett. It was a special tribute to his life. I just cannot recommend enough after you get your marks on the markets. Phil here, to go back and listen to that episode. It was unbelievably fantastic. I promise you, you will end up sharing it with a friend or someone you love. Just the wisdom and the principle shared in it are timeless and it's worth a listen. And the final thing I want to say is, I know we've got a lot of cross-pollination in the faith driven investor and faith driven entrepreneur audiences. And on Friday, the 20th FD hosted its annual conference. And man, it was a big hit. I know I got to attend a watch party here in Austin, Texas. There were dozens, if not hundreds of other watch parties across the globe, and I say that to tease out that if that was a really special experience for you, the FDI conference is coming up in January, which is hard to believe. It's only three and a half ish months away. And so it's conference season. It's the fall of 2020 for John Coleman. We're talking marks on the mark. It's great to have you guys on the podcast. How is Team Coleman. How are you guys doing. How's your summer. How's the fall kicking off.
John Coleman Yeah Richard, thank you for having me. Obviously fun to be on this side of the mic. With you interviewing me, the fall is off to a good start. We love the fall. Atlanta, like Austin, can be a little bit hot. And so it's starting to cool down just a little bit. We've got kids. Richard knows we've got four kids between 3 and 11. And so I was telling him a lot of my life is is unpaid Uber driver at the moment or chauffeur. And so, you know, but the kids are having fun. It's super fun to get out and watch them play sports or do their theater performances. You know, this age range is just really special. So the Colemans are having a lot of fun right now.
Richard Cunningham Great. Fantastic. Well, John, this pod comes at a great time because I feel like we've got kind of one of those organic stopping points in the calendar where it's the end of September, Q3 is over. And that's going to kind of be the theme of today is that's, you know, we're in an election year. We've got three fourths of the year covered. We've had some massive kind of markets and economic headlines. And so we're just gonna kind of go subject by subject on a few big items and let you kind of provide some commentary and some thoughts and always that kind of redemptive and biblical perspective on things. And let's start with the big one from just this past week, September 18th. The fed cut rates, and it is a long expected, long anticipated rate cut. They've been at, you know, multi-year highs, I think as a 23 year high cut rates down to 50 basis points. And so what has kind of been the storyline. Why did we go on this rate hiking situation and kind of cycle in the first place and kind us kind of some of the commentary and background as to the decisions the Fed's been making.
John Coleman Yeah, obviously huge news this week, Richard, in softening in the fed rate. You know effectively we started this rate hike cycle because of inflation. So we went through this uniquely long period of low interest rates globally after the great financial crisis in 2008. And we've talked about this on the podcast before that period, 2008 to 2000, 22 or so was really one of the more unusual in economic history. You know, we began to think of that as normal because for most of us in our adult lives, that was kind of normal. But if you looked at the prior hundred years, for example, the interest rates that prevailed during that time were unusually low. Our current rates are actually more in line with historical averages. If you were to look back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and before, in fact, in the 70s and 80s, interest rates were obviously quite, quite a lot higher than they are right now. And so that period after the great financial crisis was unusually low. And what happened at that point was in order to avoid a Great Depression, you know, a repeat of 1929. In the 1930s, the central banks around the world, not just in the United States or around the world, felt the need to drop interest rates artificially low. And when you drop interest rates, that obviously spurs economic activity because money becomes cheaper to borrow, you can borrow money to buy a house, you can borrow money to buy business to finance new capital. And so it's stimulatory to the economy. As we rolled through Covid, right, interest rates were still unusually low in the United States and around the world. But then we got hit with a ton of fiscal stimulus. Right? So we went into Covid. The federal government just dropped from a helicopter a ton of money into the economy that was warranted at the time because it felt like in the initial lockdowns, we could risk going into a severe economic recession and then coming out of that, what a lot of people believe is the federal government, they can continue to stimulate the economy too far. So the Biden administration's so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which was like a very Orwellian term because it was actually a very stimulatory inflation causing act, dumped a ton more money into the economy. They continued Covid stimulus long after the lockdowns were over as a reality. And what happened on the backs of that is massive inflation, which we've been living through for the last couple of years. Right. And I say massive inflation. I mean, this wasn't like Argentine style inflation that we experienced as the United States, but it was very high inflation relative to what we'd experienced for the couple of decades prior. In response to that, the fed had to go through one of the most aggressive tightening cycles of our lifetimes. And tightening means they're raising the federal funds rate, which is the rate at which they loan to banks, which raises interest rates all over the economy. Right. And they did so up until we got to kind of like 5.5%, which was much higher than where we had been previously, or almost 6%. So what's happened most recently is the fed has now begun to loosen the economy. So inflation has slowed. There are some signs that the fundamental economy might be softening a little bit. You know, what was really interesting about this tightening cycle is usually when the fed raises interest rates, you slip into recession and they basically break the back of inflation by forcing the economy into a recession, which kills inflation, hopefully. And that's kind of what happened coming out of the 1970s. In this case, we never actually slipped into recession. We never actually saw unemployment rise to the level. You could characterize it as problematic or outside of historical norms. And we never actually saw at least the official growth rates of the US slip into recession territory. Although we've seen there there's been some funny business with those numbers over the course of the last 18 months or so. So it's difficult to tell. And so now the fed is living in this interesting period, Richard, where the economy is softening a bit, but it's not yet that the inflation is coming down and more under control, but not yet at their target rates. And yet they're anticipating problems. And so the fed is now trying to cut rates to get ahead of those problems so that they can have a so-called soft landing where, you know, the nirvana here is that we get inflation under control and then we start to lower rates in a way that keeps inflation under control, but avoids any sort of dramatic rise in unemployment or dramatic recession in the economy. And that's what they're targeting so far. It seems like they might have achieved that. It's a bit too soon to tell. We'll know in a year. But this week they dropped rates by 50 basis points. The prediction markets would tell us that most people are anticipating they'll drop it by another 50 basis points before the end of the year. So a full percentage drop between this week and the end of the year, which would be a fairly dramatic cut and would get us back to even below historical levels at like 4.5%. I think, you know, the fed is probably targeting getting to something like 3% by 2026, which may be the new normal for interest rates. More what we've lived through previously. If they can keep inflation under control.
Richard Cunningham Well, man, that's a fantastic run down. And so just to recap kind of some of the actual rate numbers behind it. So in March 17th, 2022, as John alluded to, the hiking began and it rates were down in the 0.25, 2.5 50% range to 25 Bips to 50 Bips, and they aggressively spiked them over the last two and a half years. And finally, on September 18th, 2024, we saw our first cut. And we're back in that 4.75 to 5% federal funds rate as John was speaking to John. Fantastic rundown. And so here's kind of, you know, hindsight's 2020. And I know it's as you've kind of mentioned right now, it feels like the fed has navigated us to a spot that is digestible. But there have been nine rate cutting cycles over the past 30 years that have taken place. Three of those nine have began with a 25 bips cut, and six began with a 50 basis points cut. As we just saw, history suggests that after the 50 basis point rate cuts, we tend to see recessionary periods and markets the S&P 500 declining on the back of that recessionary period. Do you think that is a possible outcome here, or would you kind of say, hey, I think we're heading in the right direction? This was the move that needed to be made. Recession is just TBD.
John Coleman Yeah. No one knows. For sure. But I do think there is a correlation causation issue there that we have to be aware of. So typically rate cuts are because we're already heading into recession. Right. So if you think about it, the rate cut itself might not be the causal factor throwing an economy into recession or increasing unemployment, right. It could be that the economy is already sliding into recession, unemployment is spiking and the fed cuts rates as a response. And so it would be natural that as the economy deteriorates, even if the fed is cutting rates, that it might continue to deteriorate. Right. And that that might be what's actually causing the recession or causing a decline in markets. I think that's entirely possible here. Right? We don't know how deep this slide and underlying the slip in underlying economic indicators is. I would say it's tough to parse the data right now because a lot of the economic growth in the United States, I think, is currently funded by deficit spending, by government spending, because we're still running massive historically high deficits and running up a huge, unsustainable debt, which we could talk about. We we also see employment information is a bit off in the sense that, a lot of it is spurred by immigration. And so, citizens in the United States, the employment data is a little bit weaker than in the economy overall, which would include a wide variety of workers. And so without any judgment on any of those underlying trends, it can be tough to parse just how strong or weak the underlying economy really is. I would say, given the way that this has played out, our chances of avoiding a significant recession or a significant rise in unemployment feel to me better than in the past. I think the economy, the fed, is really trying to get ahead of significant deterioration right now. So I think the real economy has a decent shot of maybe, maybe a mild recession, maybe some continued deterioration, but potentially not getting that bad. Markets are a little bit more difficult to predict in my mind, Richard, because they are at such high levels of valuation right now. So particularly at the top end of the market in large cap growth stocks, the Magnificent Seven, we are at much greater than average price to earnings ratios for those biggest stocks right now. And in fact for that top I think it's like quartile the Russell three 3000. The price to earnings ratios are above historical averages in significant ways. How that interacts with this rate cut with some softness in the underlying economy. I don't know if I were to tell you what I'd really be predicting is that if it looks like we're going to get a soft landing, that small caps will likely appreciate some, that The Magnificent Seven and some of the other large caps are likely to return to historical averages of price to earnings ratios, or that they're going to come down a little bit. The overall impact on markets is likely to be slightly negative on, kind of market cap weighted index perspective, but that's because the valuations of those are so high right now. So there's a lot going on in the economy right now. I don't think anybody has exactly the right picture of what's going on. But if I had to predict the next year, it's kind of a sluggish economy that's not quite in recession, where we're kind of chugging along the chance that markets kind of come back to historical averages for price to earnings ratios or decline a little bit would be somewhat high. And the fed is going to continue to be relatively cautious, do a 50 basis point cut, I think by the end of the year, and then take a wait and see approach in the new year to see how much of an impact that had.
Richard Cunningham Fair, fair, really good breakdown. Let's go to that next because I want to talk about how what's taking place in the economy with the fed is kind of dovetailed into markets and how they've interacted. So you spoke to Magnificent Seven. As we all know, a large part of the S&P 500 performance is attributable to those seven largest market cap weighted stocks. And so you've got the S&P is up 20.57% year to date. We're recording this on the 24th of September. So barring something massive happens between now and release date that's kind of where we are. Nvidia up 141.35%. Meta up 62.99%, Amazon 29%, Apple 21%, Google and Microsoft, respectively. Almost 17% Tesla, who's kind of that seventh member of the Magnificent Seven who had been on a really tough slog. Looks like they've benefited from the rate cut. They're back up and 64 bips on the year, but that is up almost 5% in the last five days alone. And then compare that to the Russell 2000, which is kind of the representative small cap universe, if you will, not having a bad year up 10.31%. But comparatively to what's taking place in the S&P 500 and with kind of the mega-cap stocks, if you will, still lagging far behind. So that's kind of one. Realm is the public markets and their interaction with what's taking place in the economy. But John, you're investing across multiple asset classes. And your role at Sovereigns Capital, whether it be private equity, venture capital, real estate and elsewhere, what have you seen kind of on a on a macro perspective with where the economy has been, what's been taking place and how it's kind of permeating into multiple different markets?
John Coleman Yeah. Great question, Richard. So to start with public markets, I think you highlighted the trends perfectly. We've been on this crazy run in stocks generally. I think people are starting to assume like I get 20% a year in stocks and that's not true. You know, the historical rate is like 7 or 8% in public markets if you look over time. And I would expect that at some point we kind of get back to that 7 or 8%, which means we've got to have some sort of significant decline for averages to start to take hold. There's really, as people have been fearful of a potential recession and also very enthusiastic about the rise of artificial intelligence and other technology trends. There's been a flight to quality at the top end of the stock market in these technology enabled stocks. And I would say that Google, meta, Nvidia certainly we could talk about that separately. Amazon. These are all stocks that are not just quality stocks. You know they're performing. They're profitable. They're growing. They also intersect with artificial intelligence quite a lot. Tesla is that story too in a very different way. They're not large language models, but Tesla is trying to develop artificial general intelligence for driving, for physical spaces and for robotics. And so you've got this thing where at the top of the market, there are these high quality stocks in a growth market where people are flying to quality, and they all intersect with the biggest trend in markets, which is artificial intelligence. And so they've been bid up above historical price to earnings ratios. And people have been a bit nervous about being in small and mid-cap because of the fears of recession. Again, I would expect if we hit a soft landing for some of that to normalize. I think that enthusiasm around artificial intelligence is also likely to normalize. I firmly believe that artificial intelligence is at least the biggest trend since the internet. I mean, it has the power to be incredibly transformative, especially moving beyond the large language models like ChatGPT. If you start thinking about like what Tesla is doing, trying to develop artificial intelligence for physical spaces, for driving, for robotics, that's where I think we take a leap where this begins to dramatically impact the economy, even as large language models are, you know, revolutionizing certain areas of the economy, like customer service or some legal tasks, things like that. And so I think those underlying trends are somewhat likely to continue. But I do think we'll see a normalization in public markets. I think in private markets you are seeing continued sluggishness. Right. And that has a few sources. One is we've just seen fewer exits in private markets lately. And private equity and venture capital real estate is its own segment, which we could talk about in a moment, because I think that's a totally different set of trends. You know, the FTC in the United States has been very aggressive about restricting acquisitions and mergers in the United States. So Lina Khan has been particularly aggressive about that, meaning the lot of potential options for venture backed companies to exit have not materialize. They haven't been able to be acquired or to go public with the public market. IPO market and the Spac markets have been quite slow lately, and so there haven't been as many opportunities for exits, which means that if you invest in in a venture capital fund ten years ago, you might not be getting your money back in the way that you thought, which means you can invest it in a new thing. Right? So I was listening to a very good podcast, the All In Podcast, last week, and they had a stat which I haven't had a chance to verify independently, but they had a stat where, you know, typically over the last period of time, first time venture funds, about 50% of them are able to raise a second fund. Right now, the stats are that about 15% one 5% of venture funds are able to raise a second fund after the first fund. Because it's been so difficult to fundraise, it's been so difficult to get returns. The vintages have been really challenged for 2019, 2021 because of the collapse in venture markets and the slow period to get liquidity. And I would say from my point of view, we're seeing that I think our team that looks at different fund managers, I want to say this statistic was something like the average fund manager was only raising about 60% of its target, according to the broad based indexes that we look at, which is resonant with this idea that most venture funds, that sort of fund one are not getting to fund two right now. You know, a lot of clients pay to invest in their new venture and private equity funds by getting DPI or distributions from their old funds. Nobody's distributing capital right now, which we've seen. People are not selling positions they bought at inflated rates. Financing is more expensive right now, so leveraged buyouts are more challenged at the moment because rates are higher. And so that's generated real sluggishness, I think, in the private markets, both for limited partners and general partners. What that hasn't meant is that the underlying companies are necessarily doing badly. You know, some of these fast growing tech stocks in the venture markets have obviously had a difficult time because there aren't many exit opportunities. And there's been this, you know, 2021 was this weird upcycle in venture where everything was really over bed. So valuations have come down from that. But if you look at like real companies in the economy, a lot of them are still doing pretty well. And you know, we see that across the companies that we look at. Employment was really tied a couple of years ago. It's hard to get good people still hard in certain skilled trades, but that softened a little bit. So hiring is a bit easier right now. Borrowings expensive but not out of control. Expensive like it was in the 70s, for example. So you can sell finance equipment and things like that. A variety of private lenders have sprung up in the private market, so it's a little harder to get bank loans right now because of some problems in banks where they've got exposures they're trying to manage. But there are private credit markets where you can get loans. So we're still seeing reasonable health in the underlying economy itself. But transactionally things have slowed. And that means that the funds markets have slowed. And again, I'll pause there. We could talk about real estate a bit if you want, but that's what we're seeing in the private company world.
Richard Cunningham Yeah, it's a great recap. And I'm looking at a couple of charts here that relate to what you've just talked about. And so going back to the venture and kind of the market for exits in the IPO market, you mentioned that wild year of 2021. And then there's kind of the Spac craze and everything like that going on. But there was and U.S. stock markets, public markets, there is 1035 exits that took place. And then in 2022, it dropped all the way down to 181 exits. In 23, it was 154. We are at currently 145 exits here in U.S. kind of IPO markets. And so, as John was talking about for these high growth tech companies that venture capital funds back, you know, it's either get acquired by a strategic to get distributions back or take the company public. And when those exit markets have dried up, as we've talked about, not fully dried up. These aren't crazy off of historical averages. It's just in 2021, everyone, when they're seeing companies go exit hand over fist, decided to launch a venture fund and said, I want to get in the game. We can go take this company public in a matter of months. Things have just come back to reality. And then additionally, John, you were talking about private equity and private credit and things like that, and just the difficulty for fund managers to raise funds. And there's just been LP hesitancy because of the lack of DPI or liquidity coming back to them. A vintage year is when a fund launches and ultimately, you know, kind of classifies the year that fund was launched and how their performance ranks amongst their peers. That also launch that year, 2023 vintage private equity funds are down 8.85%, venture capital funds are down 6.22%. This is a chart from PitchBook 2022. Vintage funds are a little better, private equity is roughly flat and venture capital is down 6%. And it takes you going back almost to kind of 2020, 2019 realms to find that kind of outsized market performance in terms of IRR amongst private equity and venture capital funds.
John Coleman And one thing to be cautious at there, you know, is the J curve. So I would expect that 20 2223 tight private funds, maybe even 2022 would be a negative right now because of. So for listeners unfamiliar, there's some called the J curve in private markets where money tends to go out quicker than it comes in, there are transaction costs to it. And so if you hold a private equity fund, it's not unusual to see it go negative for a couple of years and then come out of it. What I would say is like, you know, we were looking at venture funds that were posting 4,050% paper returns, IRR, you know, with no DPI, but 50% paper returns a few years ago. Some of those firms are still posting pretty good paper returns IRR. There is no DPI, right. Or there's very limited DPI and funds are stretching on past their like ten year windows and things like that. And so one of the challenges, particularly in venture private equity is a bit different is are the paper returns really real if you can't get money from them? And how are you going to start to get DPI? How are you going to start to get liquidity if the exit markets are not so good, that's where you can start to use secondary markets, which has come into favor. But secondaries are trading at deep discounts right now. So you're taking a hit on your IRR. So I think it's a bit too soon to tell how these most recent couple of years of vintages will turn out. I'm actually optimistic that the vintages starting in like 2022, where they're investing end of 2022, 23 are going to end up being positive. Typically, when you see a big dip like we saw in 22 when the rate cycle started, it hurts the vintage a few years prior to that, but really helped. The vintage coming out of that. So if you went back to the great financial crisis, I think it was like 20. 2006 vintages were really bad, and then like 2009 vintages were really good, or ten vintages. I'm maybe beginning that just a little bit wrong. You might see something like that here, but certainly, you know, the returns are going to be flatter than they looked for these like 2016 vintages that were just killing it in 2021 overbid. And we really don't know how the venture funds are going to turn out until we start getting real cash back. Right. These paper returns are much more difficult to assess.
Richard Cunningham Well said, well said. Yeah. And our actually two podcasts ago we had Chris Kim on who is from a secondaries firm breaking down just what it looks like to be a provider of those liquidity solutions where they come in and buy, you know, LP interest and private markets position. So definitely worth checking out. And if you're curious about kind of some of these exit solutions John is talking about and what a secondary is. All right. Let's quickly hit on real estate because we've alluded to it a number of times. It's, you know, acutely affected by the rate environment. And then let's go on to after we talk real estate, just some of the election year stuff. You've made a few nods to government intervention and activity throughout this podcast. And so I want to talk about that. But real quick on real estate, John.
John Coleman Yeah, so on the real estate markets, it's so pretty dicey right now. Honestly, Richard, you know, some of the more attractive segments like industrial or warehouses etc. got a little bit overbid. And so there's still a lot of demand for those as we have this kind of secular increase in the need for those types of facilities in the US office is still very precarious. I think any of these real estate cycles can sometimes take some time to work through because of all the lease agreements. You know, we're still working through leases that were signed five, six, seven, ten years ago sometimes. And so it's not a cliff. You know, those tend to roll off over time as rates reset, etc.. I would say office is still somewhat weak. We're seeing a lot more return to office, but I don't think we're seeing anything like the demand for office that we saw in 2019, for example. I mean that structurally things have just changed in the way that people work. And I think that's going to stick. And then residential is in this odd period of time where because a lot of people locked in rates for their properties that are renting a few years ago and rates have gone up so dramatically, it is much more expensive to buy an apartment condo house right now in most areas than it is to rent. There's been this inversion where, you know, the natural order of things is it's a bit more expensive to rent and to buy because landlords are getting rewarded for basically their outlay of risk capital. So you pay a premium to rent, not outlay any upfront or risk capital. And then if you buy something you kind of benefit from that over time. Right now there's an inversion of that where it's much cheaper to rent than to buy. I think because of the movement in interest rates over the last couple of years. I saw a chart recently where, you know, cap rates on rental properties right now, which is which is obviously the income from that property divided by its value are lower than the mortgage rate. So there's an inversion in that because mortgage rates are higher. And that's just caused a lot of sluggishness in the home market. Rates are coming down but they're still high. You know mortgage rates I think for really good credit score like six a little over 6% right now. Many people are locked in at like three, which is, you know, almost twice the cost on a monthly basis. I mean, not quite twice the cost. And so people aren't selling. A lot of people aren't buying. A lot of people who stocked up on these kind of rental properties, Airbnb, Vrbo that's coming back down to earth. And there's been some not distress in that area. But I think you're starting to see that space more challenged. And it still just doesn't make sense to buy a new property right now to rent. Right. That's inverted at the moment. And so that continues to be sluggish. The other thing that's been true for more than a decade now is sluggishness in new home starts, a lot of which never really recovered to pre great financial crisis levels. I think that's continue to be sluggish, although I think the August numbers said new home starts were up just a bit. Obviously there's a secular shortage in housing in America. Our population is growing faster than our housing stock, especially when you include immigration. And so there's a shortage of housing right now, whether rental or purchase. And so you would think that would lead to more construction. It's helping to lead to higher prices, right? Where there's the highest gap between the price of a property and the average median income in history, basically over the last couple of years. So that shortage is driving up prices. You would think it would drive up new home starts or new construction. And maybe that's starting to happen, although that's a pretty sluggish indicator. And so housing right now is still continues to be tough. The mortgage market continues to be tough. And if I were, you know, to predict I don't. I think that dramatically changes in 25. Even with interest rates coming down. Although if we come down another 50 basis points, and especially if the fed were to bring things down another full percentage point next year and we get in the kind of threes again on the fed funds rate, mortgage rates get down in the force. We see that starting to loosen up quite a lot. But I think that remains to be seen.
Richard Cunningham That's a really good analysis. I know the season of life we find ourselves in, it is friends and family. Friends and all that situation are looking to be that first time homebuyer. And they sit there and they say, man, my rent payment as you're talking about, would double because of where interest rates are and mortgage rates are, even though I can afford a 20% down payment. And so why go under that duress or that stress when you can rent it below market rates, if you will? And I know people are feeling that acutely. All right let's pivot John. And we've got a few minutes left here. And we have got an election coming up in a month and some change. We currently have a Democrat controlled Senate, a Republican controlled House and a Democrat controlled white House. Obviously, you've got Kamala Harris running and the Democrat Party, you've got Donald Trump running on the Republican side. We are in debate season. We saw the debate a few weeks back, and it feels like the tension and the temperature is up, as always in an election year, but maybe help kind of bring us back down to earth and steady us as you kind of provide some of the maybe economic commentary on both candidates or some of the things you're seeing and what the bigger issues are as we head into November's election season.
John Coleman Yeah. I mean, anybody who tells you they know what's going to happen right now is lying to you. This has been and this continues to be like the craziest political environment of my lifetime. Certainly, you know, we've had two assassination attempts. We've had a president be revealed to be in cognitive decline, ousted from office, a new nominee basically appointed by the party without a process, massive reversals in polls, obviously, just a number of kind of crazy policy proposals. And I think more than at any point in my lifetime, too, we're also seeing candidates just throw spaghetti at the wall in terms of policies. They think we'll get them votes right. So every day some new promise comes out to try and for lack of a better term, by a vote, right up. Student loan forgiveness, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. You know, mortgage, first time homebuyer assistance. I mean, we're running trillions of dollars in deficits. And every day I wake up and there's some new handout that people are proposing. I think, look, this won't be revolutionary analysis. I think that in general, it's likely that markets would react better to a Trump win than a Harris win at this point. What do markets not like about the Trump candidacy? I think and this is one man's opinion. I don't think they like some of what they perceive as the volatility of that, not knowing exactly what might come of that, not knowing exactly how the administration will behave in certain circumstances. What I think they favor versus a Harris administration would be a lot of kind of traditionally conservative policies that would be positives for the underlying economy. Right? I think a Trump presidency is staked out pretty clearly that it would try and slash regulation, that it would cut down on the regulatory burden of the business environment in the United States right now, or at least that's what they've stated they would do. They did some of that last time. That would be very stimulatory for business right now in a positive way. I think the Harris administration has signaled in alignment with the Biden administration on some just absolutely insane policy proposals on tax. To be honest, a lot of people now are saying, well, you know, she kind of doesn't mean it. She's just appealing to her base. But this idea of taxing unrealized capital gains, for example, even if they're only doing that higher income people of dramatically raising capital gains taxes at the federal level, of dramatically raising income tax rates, all of these would range from slightly negative to catastrophic for markets if they were to be implemented, and seemed so poorly considered that a lot of people are basically saying they don't mean it, they're just appealing to people. I think that with regards to potential negative shocks in the international environment, you know, we've obviously got very volatile situations right now with China, with Ukraine and Russia with a widening conflict in the Middle East, where Israel is now effectively, openly at war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has been a breaking thing this week as they've stepped up that conflict, moving beyond pushing back on the terrorist attacks that occurred out of Gaza. I mean, so that's very volatile. I think people are very split on which candidate would be positive for that. I think there are wide contingent of. Folks who believe that a Trump presidency would potentially change that environment a bit, that Russia and China would be a bit more cautious during a Trump presidency than during a Harris presidency. And there's a lot of fear, honestly, right now, with Joe Biden seemingly not as engaged as president, as he was before that something could happen between now and inauguration, right where it's kind of unclear how the power structure is operating at the moment. So I do think there are some near-term risks to that. And then, you know, one thing. I'll make an overarching comment, Richard, and it kind of goes back to this. You know, we're in the handout stage of the election process where everybody's just trying to announce new policies. They think people will vote for neither candidate, neither party has in their platform any significant way of addressing the structural deficits and debt that we're accruing right now. Early in the next year, our interest payments on the federal debt are going to go over $1 trillion, effectively, no matter what happens with rates, you know, our entitlement payments for health care and for Social Security in our interest rate payments now eat up the vast majority of the federal budget. They dwarf defense spending. They dwarf spending on the apparatus of the federal government itself. And I heard a stat the other day that almost half of the US economy in some way touches government spending, meaning either is directly a federal agency or state or local agency, or is reliant as a private sector business on funding from those. Right. So we're reaching this point where the government has just become an enormous part of the federal, state and local economies. Right. And that used to be a platform of the Conservative Party, the Republican Party, that was a loser electorally, because no one likes to hear that we're out of money and we can't spend anymore. And everybody wants to know that you can. No one likes higher tax rates, which is the other way to solve that. Although higher tax rates at this point, a lot of people think would be negative for the economy. You reach a point at which if you tax more, you actually hurt the economy. And some people think we're there, and I just don't know who's going to actually begin to fix that. It might be a significant crisis with our debt that forces us to do any sort of cuts or reform to things like Social Security and Medicaid or Medicare, which are really the only ways to fix this imbalance going forward. So I think the next couple months are going to be nuts. Honestly, next month and a half, whatever, it's in the election. I think it's going to be pretty dicey all the way through inauguration, because I think the likelihood that we definitively know who won the election on the night of the election is as low as it has been the case since Bush versus Gore, and I think we're going to see a lot of tumult no matter who wins. And so I would just be prepared for a ton of volatility through at least the inauguration. And then after that, you know, I do think Trump would be initially better received by markets, especially because of the tax policies that have been proposed by the Harris administration. But I do think the long term health of the US economy will be contingent upon whether either of the parties faces up to this deficit and debt problem that we have in a responsible way, and help the United States kind of fix the imbalances that are going on there, which it doesn't seem like either party or the voters behind them have any appetite to deal with right now.
Richard Cunningham Like one double clicking on the the debt problem is Donald Trump's proposed a government efficiency commission, if you will. And he's specifically and maybe this is just social media world, as you know, called on Elon Musk to be the person to come in and almost clean house and just let's evaluate where overspending is taking place. And to be clear, there's some phenomenal people that do incredible tasks for the US government. But as John has kind of alluded to, there has been some just wild overspending which has led to our debt levels. Any thoughts on just kind of that approach, if you will, instead of kind of looking across just government inefficiencies and waste of money, if you will.
John Coleman Look, I think it is I won't comment on the Elon thing. I won't comment on that specific circumstance. I would say, obviously government spending is inefficient right now. Right? I think there's been a lot of news recently about this, like Federal Broadband Initiative that put forward $45 billion and has not connected a single user to broadband, right? The cost to build infrastructure in US cities now is often two, three, four times as high as it is in European cities, which shocks a lot of Americans. The American government is not working well right now, and we need significant reforms to the way in which we spend to the structure of the federal government structure of state governments in certain circumstances, and there is huge opportunity for efficiency in that. I think it is a no brainer to try and take that on. I think it's quite difficult to take on because of various employment rules around the federal government. I think it's needed. I don't think it fully solves our debt or deficit problem, and I don't say that in a dismissive way, in the sense that I think we should do it. But ultimately, you don't solve the federal deficit problem unless you either dramatically increase taxes. And again, I'm skeptical that you can do that to fix our current deficits, because I think it would flip us in. To negative growth territory, or you have to rein in the entitlement programs Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and have positive interest rate movements, which would lower the interest rate on the debt a little bit. And there are some straightforward mathematical fixes to that. Like, you can mean Social Security, you can raise the retirement age, you can do some other things on the health care side. But right now, neither political party has expressed an interest in anything, which I understand because they're deeply unpopular with citizens. And so I think it's a no brainer to try and do efficiency in the federal government. I don't think it gets us all the way to fixing the structural imbalances that we have.
Richard Cunningham Fair enough. Well said. Well, as we're talking election volatility and just the chaos that is likely to ensue throughout the month of October and into November. Let's rein it back in with kind of the eternal and redemptive perspective and close here with just kind of man. What's the Lord been teaching you lately, John? And and through his word and just kind of in your time with him?
John Coleman Yeah. Apropos to this kind of discussion, Richard, I think I've mentioned it once on the podcast here. I'm writing this book on money at the moment for my publisher, Harvard Business Review. And the idea is like, what are the principles for money that can make it a tool for human flourishing rather than something that's destructive? And I just wrote a Substack about this particular point. I have this Substack on purpose, and I wrote about this passage from First Kings, about Solomon, you know, the passage where God asks Solomon what he wants, basically as he emerges as king and he asks of all things for wisdom. And because he asks for wisdom, God gives him wealth and power and those kind of things, at least out of the gates. And then, of course, we know Solomon kind of lost his wisdom over time, but it really made me reflect. In this latest piece, I put up on wisdom as a precursor to getting those other things right. I think one of the errors that we make in modern life is to turn means into ends. So power and money, for example, should be a means to doing something good in the world. You know, in the Christian world, we think of that as stewardship. Did that power money belong to God? He doesn't need us, but he can entrust us with those things to do his purposes. And the way to use that well is to do what God intends for it, right? To use that as a steward, not to think of it as ours, our money, our power for our purposes, but his money, his power for his purposes and to submit ourselves to that. A lot of people today confuse that as an ends. I want money for money's sake. I want power for power sake. That is the end of itself. And I think that's obviously distorting point of view. And the wisdom of Solomon was to ask for the right judgment and discernment in wielding the authority that was going to be given to him. And, you know, that's something that's natural to us. But I think we do lose sight of that in day to day life, right? That wisdom is an end of itself. It is good to be wise. It is a means to stewarding all these other things because it's discernment for God, but it is also an in. It's good to be wise regardless of anything else. It's good to be wise for wisdom sake. And so it's encouraged me to think a lot more about praying for wisdom, for discernment, for judgment. Many of the folks listening this have been blessed with financial resources. They've been blessed with professional position. They've been blessed with political power. They've been blessed with an audience like you, Richard, on this podcast. And those things aren't good or bad in themselves, right? They are only good or bad, depending on what we do with them. And so it should be each of our prayer every day for wisdom, discernment, judgment so that we can see the path God has for them and that we don't ask him to join our path, but we ask that we see and join his path, that we see his will for that, and that we align ourselves with it. And so that passage in First Kings about Solomon has caused me to just reflect more and more on am I seeking and praying for wisdom enough for discernment, for judgment in every area in which I've been given authority, so that God may trust me with that authority and whatever else he chooses to give me, that I would be trustworthy of that, and I would have submitted myself to his will for that, and that I would have the discernment to see it. And I think all of us could potentially lean into that.
Richard Cunningham Man, that's fantastic. Especially relevant to me as I turn the chapter this morning out of first Chronicles, and Samuel in the first Kings of David is handing over kind of the throne to Solomon. So historically relevant to me in my own scripture time. John Coleman, thank you for that, man. How fun to keep kind of this podcast inside the FDA host family this time around. And he remarks on so many things from the fed to the economy to markets to the US election, and just always grateful for your wisdom and your timeless kind of insights that apply on this podcast. And so, folks, thank you so much for joining us. We will catch you next time.
We are grateful for the opportunity to serve this community and see listeners coming from more than 100 countries. Faith driven investing can be a lonely journey, but it doesn't have to be. The best way to stay connected is to join a group study with other investors looking to get the same answers to questions you have, and find great community as they do so. There's no cost, no catch. In person or online, you can meet an hour a week with other peers from your backyard or the other side of the world. You can also stay connected by signing up for our monthly newsletter at Faith Driven investing.org. This podcast wouldn't be possible without the help of many of our friends. Executive Producer Justin Foreman intro. Mixed and arranged by Summer Driggs. Audio and editing by Richard Braly. Our theme song is Sweet Ever After by Ellie Holcomb.