Ric Chooses Between Harris & Trump on the Big Topic: “The Economy, Stupid!”

And, is your advisor overlooking better options for your investments?

Ric Edelman: It's Tuesday, October 8th. We're going to continue our series through this month on my addressing the 34 topics that are issues in the presidential election, but that's not all this podcast is about. So, I'm going to begin with a question that I got from Bill. He's in Massachusetts, unrelated to politics.

Here's his question: “Just listened to your podcast about ETFs vs mutual funds and their tax implications. I have most of our assets in accounts managed by our financial advisor. There are both types in the accounts. Should I ask him to look for equivalent ETFs to replace the mutual funds?”

Yeah, Bill, I would definitely have that conversation with your advisor. It is possible that your advisor might be able to give you some really good reasons why you should keep the mutual funds you've got, but it also might be possible, and I think frankly more likely, that the advisor simply hasn't given it much thought.  They haven't really been proactive enough to say, gee, these mutual funds that I recommended in the past, which made a lot of sense at the time I recommended them, they have now been supplanted by newer, cheaper, similar ETFs. It's worthy of a question. And you might even want to ask that question of a second financial advisor. Anytime I see anybody owning mutual funds via a financial advisor, I always have to raise the question of potential conflicts of interest.

Mutual funds are almost always more expensive than ETFs. They are often commission-based products compared to fee-based products of ETFs. So it's worth getting a second opinion. Go to another financial advisor, show that new advisor your portfolio, let them comment on it. You would do that if you were going to be touting surgery, right? And you know, you would take the x rays from the one doctor to the new doctor and say, you look at the x rays. You tell me if you agree that I ought to have surgery, you ought to do the same thing with your investments.

So, yeah, I would do that. And this way you'll have information which will allow you to make an informed decision as to whether or not you should keep what you've got, which maybe you ought to do, but it's nice to know for sure. Right?

Let’s move on now to today's topic of the 34 political issues pertaining to our choice of president. As you know from having listened to my podcasts of late, I am undecided and I have identified 34 topics. We're going to cover all 34 in 19 podcasts that began yesterday.

If you missed yesterday's show, you can just click the link in your show notes and listen to it today. We're going to be talking about the economy, stupid. Yeah. The big broad umbrella of taxes, tariffs, inflation, interest rates, the fed, the federal deficit, federal debt, federal spending, crypto, and CBDCs. Exponential technologies, AI machine-learning and large language models. All of this broadly under the economy umbrella.

And before I share with you my thoughts, let me share with you the comments that I've received from many of you.

Here's what Mark had to say: “CNBC commentators say that Kamala Harris’s plan to give people $25,000 to buy a house will increase housing prices. She will allow the Trump tax cuts to expire. She wants to increase the corporate income tax, which will make American companies less competitive. She wants to tax unrealized capital gains. When asked how she can reduce inflation, she talks about how she was raised in a middle-class family, and she doesn't provide any real answers. She stole Trump's idea about no taxes on tips. She never talks about cutting spending. It's always about helping people achieve their dreams and aspirations, which means spending more money that we don't have. She doesn't talk about equality. Instead, she talks about "equity," which I suspect means giving government benefits to certain selected groups. She has very little private sector experience, and has never run a business, as far as I know.”

And here's the email I received from Michael. “Trump's proposals mostly reduce income taxes on lower income individuals and families at a time when they are struggling. He has also proposed raising tariffs, which can offset lower income taxes. But tariffs affect consumption similar to the way that a consumption tax would. They raise the prices of imported goods, thereby reducing their consumption. Domestically-produced goods will replace some of the imported goods no longer purchased. Higher demand for domestic goods will encourage investment and increase jobs. Lower consumption, in general, will encourage savings and investment.”

I got an email from George. He's in Pennsylvania: “Am I crazy or is the idea of student loan forgiveness, reparations, universal basic income, child tax credits and home buying assistance gonna double and or triple the national debt in a blink of an eye?”

And on the other side of the country, from Washington State, here's what Brad said: “How can you possibly equalize Kamala’s bad economic policies with Trump’s January 6th insurrection?”

Sticking on the West Coast, here's Ron. He's in California: “The number one danger to our country is the movement from a solid capitalist-based nation, to a socialist controlled central governance. The economy as we know it will cease to exist if we let left-wing Marxist radicals convert this country to one controlled by the government. Donald Trump is not perfect, but he was a very successful CEO of our country during his previous term in office. Where almost every aspect of American life was better and improved from his predecessors. He is NOT advocating a reduction in tax revenue. What he is going to do is replace the draconian, unfair, progressive tax system with a consistent steady tariff system that interestingly enough, our country had before the 1930s shift to socialism. Donald Trump is imperfect, just like all of us. But he is very clear on saving America and American values, as compared to the radical left that is interested in turning us into a Marxist socialist state. The choice is clear!”

Bill from Fort Collins, Colorado sent me the following: “If one cheats in golf and is convicted on 34 felony counts for falsifying business records, one can only wonder how such a candidate can be a fiduciary for the American people. Thus, I would question those in the RIA industry who support Trump.”

Dave is an insurance agent. Here's what he wrote: “This election is not about renewing the trickle-down economics that only benefit the wealthy, or that Tim Walz has a pension and doesn't own stocks or that economic stuff you care about...it's about democracy vs. autocracy. Period.”

Jim wrote to me as well. He's in Florida: “Trump is the better choice because he supports cryptocurrency and capitalism. I’m eager to follow your thoughts as you resolve your final presidential choice.”

Hannah is a CFP, a certified financial planner, and here's what she said to me: “I find it extremely interesting that both candidates' economic policies are projected to be terrible for the deficit. Since both individuals have poor projected economic policies but only one is not being held liable for sexual abuse and is not surrounding themselves by individuals with questionable opinions on our non-white, non-straight, and non-Christian brethren, I think Kamala is the best choice for you.

I also got an email from Dan. Here's what he wrote: “I am a political centrist. I agree with what you stated about Kamala Harris's economic policies, that her proposed policies could cause economic havoc. She initially ran for president as a liberal extremist. Now that she has the nomination, she has moved more toward the center. She had to, to politically succeed. A ban of fracking would lose her Pennsylvania, the state that might determine the next president. But I believe she is still far too liberal.  But we should consider not just each candidate's economic policies but everything else related to the presidency. When I do that, I conclude that a vote against Trump is a no brainer. I will vote for Kamala. But that is more a vote against Trump than a vote for Kamala.”

Susan from Merritt Island, Florida chimed in: “Trump is the only one to save our republic from becoming socialist or Marxist.”

Barge in Pennsylvania added this to his email: “You vehemently opposed students who signed a contract to pay back a student loan being relieved of that contractual obligation (except maybe if after first semester). You don't want hairdressers and waitresses paying for doctors and lawyers college education--Harris does!”

Doug in Texas wrote the following: “Trump is far more business & economics savvy than Harris. He believes in free-market capitalism, and is dead set against socialism/Marxism in all it various destructive forms. He wants America to be energy independent, and has accomplished it before.”

Here's what Glen had to say: “Trump has shown that he can do it, based on his previous tenure. Unemployment rate hit historic lows during his presidency.”

Here's what Walter wrote: “Hello Ric. As has been the case for my voting career of 40 plus years, I have voted for the lesser of the two evils. True, Kamala's economic proposals do not make economic sense, but neither does Trump's. Trump proposes a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports which will inflate prices.  And Trump's proposed tax cuts will increase the national debt by $5.8 trillion over the next decade.”

Here's what Ken wrote to me: “Harris supports reparations to descendants of slavery . She supports taxpayer funding of transgender surgeries and transitions for minors, illegal aliens and criminals.”

Jane, she's in Greenville, South Carolina. Here's what she wrote: “When we lost power due to the hurricane early Friday morning, our whole house generator kicked in to keep our lights on.  Those nearly 6 days of running caused us to need our propane tank filled. In August of 2020 propane cost $2.99 per gallon. This week propane is $5.34. Trump will end inflation.”

I got an email from Paul:  Hi Ric! I am voting for Trump because of Kamala's proposed tax on unrealized gains, and because she supports student loan forgiveness. We paid for both our children to attend college with much sacrifice. Both have graduated with Mechanical Engineering degrees. Having to pay for others' degrees of questionable value is personally insulting.”

I had another email from Heather: “You're concerned about Walz not owning any stocks, so how could he possible know how the economy works? I'm way more concerned Trump still doesn't know what our nuclear triad is. And he couldn't be bothered to read the Presidential Daily Briefing memos.”

And from Nashville, Daniel wrote the following: “More than 400 economists and former White House advisors endorse Harris and warn against Trump’s policy agenda. Most of them served in Clinton’s Obama’s or Biden’s administration but a few worked for Republican administrations.”

Here's another Dan, here's what he wrote from Raleigh, North Carolina. “Hi Ric. Please support Harris for president. Donald Trump's promise to cap credit card interest rates at 10% is a dumb idea – even Republicans say so.”

Here's what John in Raleigh had to say: “I am a father of 5 kids and I have 3 foster kids. I own a home care business. I am a Christian. I love football and baseball and this country. I love history. I have a great wife. I will vote for Trump even though I think he is arrogant and a jerk at times. He is by far, better for small business owners like me.”

Also in North Carolina, this time Chapel Hill. Here's one from Daryl: “While I definitely commend you for performing a valuable public service by alerting your listeners to the seriousness of the looming social sSecurity crisis; to imply that voters need to weigh such considerations when making their choice of candidate in the campaign for the presidency this year, is just a bit preposterous. I recommend a straight Democratic ticket and that we concerning ourselves with all lesser issues like social security only after our democratic form of government has been secured.”

And here's what Stephanie wrote to me: “Economically, neither candidate is perfect. Harris's proposal around taxing unrealized capital gains raises questions about her understanding of how the American economy and capital markets work. But her policies are aimed at correcting wealth inequality and helping lower and middle-class Americans, who have long been neglected by Trump's tax policies, which heavily favor the wealthy. Harris also focuses on addressing the housing crisis, a pressing issue for millions of Americans.

In addition to these concerns, Trump's policies fail to address critical 21st-century issues, such as climate change. Denying climate change undermines the long-term viability of essential industries, from agriculture to energy, and threatens the global economy. Harris, on the other hand, recognizes both the domestic and international stakes at hand. Her acknowledgment of the need for environmental sustainability demonstrates a far more responsible and relevant understanding of the economic and ecological balance necessary for future prosperity. She also values global cooperation, understanding that the complex web of international relationships-unlike Trump's admiration for authoritarian rulers-demands mutual respect and collaboration to tackle issues like climate change and global security.

In this century, global challenges require leadership that can work with allies, not pander to autocrats. Harris's approach to governance-focused on democratic values, environmental sustainability, and economic justice-offers a clear alternative to Trump's alignment with autocratic regimes and his outdated policies. If we are to thrive as a nation, we need leadership that is forward-thinking, not stuck in the past. If we want a leader capable of creating policies that benefit the majority of Americans, Harris represents a far better option.”

Well, I am grateful for the comments that I have been receiving. They are continuing to arrive. And yes, with yesterday's broadcast and with yesterday's podcast, my very first talking about politics and my viewpoint on a particular issue in politics, I'm starting to get hate mail. I expect it won't be the last.

Here's my view on today's issue regarding the economy. There is no question Donald Trump's economic policies will be far superior for this country than Kamala Harris's. And I say that precisely because Donald Trump is a despicable narcissist. Look, we all know he cares only about himself. We all know that he's a liar and a cheat, and that he's built his career as much through lawsuits and manipulation as he has through shrewd deal making. But that means one thing. Donald Trump is consistent. That makes him predictable. The fact that he cares more about himself than anyone else, and above all, that he wants to make a profit beyond anything else, therefore, I'm pretty confident, Donald Trump will not engage in any policy that harms himself.

Personally, frankly, that's lucky for us because the very things that will make his investments successful are the very things that will make all our investments successful. Donald Trump will see to it that the stock market and the bond market and the real estate market and the energy market and the crypto market all flourish like never before.

Will he do it honestly, ethically? I count on the media, and his political opponents, and the courts, to keep him in check. That's the way our system of government is supposed to work. And I think it will. And in the meantime, your 401(k) will rise. Your financial security will improve and our nation will enjoy far more economic prosperity than it ever would under Kamala Harris's inane economic policies.

She just issued an 82-page list of her economic plan. Higher taxes on corporations and the wealthiest Americans among them. She says they're going to have to pay their fair share. But wait a minute, the richest 5% of Americans already pay 66% of all taxes. And you know, when I say the richest 5%, you know who's included in that?

Everyone earning $250,000 or more. Did you know that if your household income is $250,000, you're in the top 5% richest of all Americans? Kamala doesn't know that either. Or, if she does know, she doesn't care. She says you’re not paying your fair share. So her plan will increase your taxes by a combined $5 trillion.

We're talking about her proposals for a 25% tax on unrealized capital gains for top earners. I've done a show on that in the past. You can check it out by clicking on the link in the show notes on how absurd this is and how it has been so widely panned.  She's also talking about a 33% top capital gains rate for everybody.

She says these are, “common sense tax reforms”, but in fact, they represent the biggest tax increase in history. For some stupid reason, Kamala Harris thinks that you strengthen the caboose by weakening the engine. In other words, if you raise corporate income taxes, you're going to make it better for lower income Americans.

That's utterly insane. And anybody who has any business experience would know this. If you increase the corporate income tax, the corporation is not going to pay it. There's really no such thing as a corporate income tax in reality, because if you create a corporate tax or you increase it, they're just going to pass that extra cost along to the consumer in the form of higher prices.

They're going to cut other expenses to maintain their profits. And when I say cut other expenses, you know what that means? They're going to cut other expenses. Salaries. They're going to reduce payroll. People will lose their jobs as corporations struggle to maintain their profitability for the benefit of their shareholders.

Kamala doesn't seem to understand this, because I don't think she's ever worked in the for-profit sector. She also wants to give $9,600 in child tax credits. That includes $6,000 for every newborn. She also wants to triple the earned income tax credit for adults who don't have children. And all this money would be going to people who, by the way, right now don't pay any taxes.

She also wants to give $25,000 to first-time homebuyers. Think about this. The average price of a new home in America right now is about $420,000. Most people make a 5% down payment. That translates to about $20, 000 as a down payment. She wants to give everybody $25,000 who's a first-time homebuyer.

How is this really going to solve the problem? First of all, if you're a seller, and you know that a first-time homebuyer is now flush with $25,000 in their pocket, what are you going to do as the seller? You're going to raise your price. Kamala is going to be contributing to massive price inflation in the real estate market, making it even harder for her first-time home buyers to buy houses that they're already struggling to buy.

Even if they manage to buy that house, thanks to the money she's providing as a down payment…wait a minute. How are they going to be able to afford the mortgage on that huge house? How are they going to be able to pay the property taxes and the insurance? How are they going to be able to handle the maintenance and repairs?

How are they going to be able to furnish it? All Kamala is doing is setting people up for future failure. Yeah, they might be able to buy the house today, thanks to the money she's going to give them. Money she's giving them that she's taking from other people, meaning you. And in the future, next year or two or three, these folks are going to discover they can't afford to keep the house.

They're going to end up losing the house anyway. It's going to be like a return to 2009. She doesn't seem to get that. She also wants to sue landlords who raise rents. She wants to maintain Joe Biden's efforts to forgive student loan debt.

And the worst policy of all? She wants to impose, for the first time that would ever occur in this country, a federal ban on price gouging for groceries. This means she wants to decide the prices of everyday products, instead of the market doing this. That is socialism, pure and simple. It represents the end of capitalism. Trump, on the other hand, says he'll promise to cut the corporate tax to 15% while Kamala Harris wants to raise it to 28%. Citigroup says that Kamala Harris's economic policies would cause the stock market to fall 4% to 6%.

Goldman Sachs agrees that her plans would reduce stock market profits and that Trump's tax plan would increase earnings. All of this is a very big deal. 80% of Americans say that the election will affect their retirement plans. 73% of retirees say they're worried. BlackRock surveyed registered voters in August and 90% said that there is a retirement savings crisis in our country.  78% said they're not going to be able to retire because they won't be able to afford to. 78% fear they won't be able to pay for long term care. 75% say they won't be able to maintain their standard of living in retirement. Only 39% of registered voters have more than $10,000 in savings. 26% of them have no money at all.

And almost nobody, only 10% of registered Democrats and 10% of registered Republicans, think that officials in Washington are trying to help them plan and save for a secure retirement. And it's even worse for undecided voters. Only 3% think politicians care about this. Both Trump and Harris are bad on this issue. Harris is worse. And this is a huge issue for this country.

Let's talk now about the federal deficit, the federal debt, and federal spending. There is no question that we have too much debt. That's because our government spends too much. And on this point, both Trump and Harris fail. We'll tackle this issue. Under both of them, spending will rise, the deficit will rise, and the debt will rise. So, I toss this out as an election issue, because neither of them are going to help with this.

And finally, there's technology. Crypto, CBDCs, and other exponential technologies, most particularly artificial intelligence, machine learning, and large language models. Crypto, is the single best investment opportunity of the decade. Kamala Harris will walk the party line of the Democrats. They hate crypto. They've been doing everything they can to kill it. They are failing in that goal, however, and they will continue to fail because crypto is a global asset. Not an American-controlled invention, but Kamala can slow it down here in the U.S. just like Joe Biden has done and Gary Gensler at the SEC.

And now what that means is all the crypto companies that are right now doing business in the U. S. will simply go elsewhere, losing all those good, green, high-paying American jobs. This happened elsewhere. When China banned bitcoin mining, bitcoin miners didn't shut down. They simply left China and they came here to America. They went to New York. They went to Texas. They went to Florida. They went to Arizona. They went to Wyoming.

There's now crypto mining in over two dozen states and those very crypto miners, if they are oppressed under a Kamala Harris administration, they'll get up and leave the U. S. just like they got up and left China.

They'll go to other countries that are more crypto-friendly. Donald Trump is championing crypto. Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't think it's because Donald Trump really understands crypto. I don't think it's because Donald Trump fundamentally believes in the benefits of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency.

Donald Trump recognizes that there are 50 million Americans who own bitcoin. And they are going to vote their pocketbook. If he's for Bitcoin, he'll help win their votes. He also knows that there's $200 million of PAC money from political action committees funded by the crypto community. Donald Trump knows that he can generate some of those dollars for his own campaign by supporting crypto. Like I said, Donald Trump is a narcissist, he's going to do what's in his own best interest, that is actually a big reason why the crypto community loves Donald Trump.

But you know what, in a weird way, Trump's involvement with crypto could actually hurt it. Because Trump is inadvertently turning crypto into a political issue. He loves crypto, Democrats hate him, and therefore Democrats hate crypto. This could impact legislation. I mean, just look at this. Trump has already been selling his own NFTs, non-fungible tokens, and now his sons, Donald Trump Jr.and Eric Trump are selling a new DeFi platform, decentralized finance, called World Liberty Financial. You think Hunter Biden has been a crook building on his father's fame? Just wait to see what Trump Jr. and Eric are up to. Don't be surprised if the Democrats weaponize crypto in their efforts to oppose Trump and everything he does.

I don't see how this helps crypto at all, quite frankly. But still, Trump's support of crypto, for whatever reason, has got to be better than Kamala's anti-crypto crusade. And listen to VanEck. They're one of the asset management firms that offers a bitcoin ETF. And here's what VanEck had to say: “We would argue that a Kamala Harris presidency might be even better for bitcoin than a second term for Trump, because it would, in our view, accelerate many of the structural issues that drive bitcoin adoption in the first place”.

That is an incredible point. Backhanded compliment. They're saying go ahead and elect Kamala because her economic policies would be so bad everybody will have no choice but to run to Bitcoin. I don't think Kamala. would really appreciate the so-called endorsement that she seems to be getting from VanEck.

In fact, though, Harris has said that she will encourage the crypto business, and she also said she wants to protect consumers in the meantime. Frankly, I don't believe her. She knows nothing about crypto. She's been silent on it for the past four years. I cannot imagine that she's going to devote any effort at all to this issue.

So, on crypto, like the rest of the economic topic, I choose Trump over Harris.

And now let's talk about the income gap, the wealth gap, minimum wage and universal basic income. On all of these points, Kamala Harris clearly wins. There is one thing we can be pretty sure about Kamala Harris. This is a woman who has a lot of empathy. This woman definitely feels our pain, right? I'll take that as a line out of Bill Clinton. I think she is a very human, a very personal, a very caring individual. And she, especially as a woman, we know that women earn less than men for equal jobs in this country.

And as a black woman, we know that minorities earn less than whites in this country. This is an issue that is close to home for her. She is acutely aware of the income gap in America, that there is a massive disparity between the wealthy and the poor. She is equally aware of the wealth gap. The income gap is how much money are you earning this year? The wealth gap is how much money do you have?

And we know that whites in America have far more wealth than minorities in America. We know that men have far more wealth than women. And she is going to pay a lot of attention to this and help far better than Donald Trump would in reducing the gaps in income and wealth.

This is why you can count on Kamala to be more supportive in increasing the minimum wage. Many on the right, including Donald Trump, argue that the minimum wage is fine. It's not fine. When you look at the minimum income in many corporations compared that to how much money the CEO is earning, it's obscene.

She is far more likely to improve this than Donald Trump. And universal basic income, the notion that we will provide checks to people without them having to work for it. This way they get to tend to their children, to sick or ill members of their family, to focus on their community rather than having to put themselves under massive stress to go get two jobs in order to make ends meet.

Universal basic income has far greater strength and potential in a Democratic administration than it does in a Republican one. Kamala Harris clearly wins on all of these points.

How about jobs and employment? Donald Trump's got the better case. His economic policies are more likely to spur economic growth. That will result in corporations increasing the number of jobs they offer. I think that we can debate this one, but I think that the Republicans have a stronger position on jobs and employment.

And how about social security? You know, this is a very big hot button for me. I've been warning you for over a decade that the Social Security Trust Fund is going to be collapsing in 10 years. If nothing is done, all social security retirement benefits will be cut 23%. That's according to the Congressional Budget Office. It's according to the Social Security Administration itself.

And what did Donald Trump and Kamala Harris have to say about it? They both say the same thing. Neither of them are going to reduce social security benefits. So, what does this mean? It means they're going to have to raise taxes. Frankly, though, I think they're going to ignore it because they're only going to be in office for the next four years. They don't have to do anything. The trust fund isn't going to go broke until 2034. That's 10 years.

I think Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are going to do absolutely nothing on social security. That, as much of a crisis as it is, means that I don't see any differentiation between either one of them.

And how about pensions? We have a pension crisis in America. There's a $4 trillion gap between the amount of money retirees are going to need, and how much money retirees have in savings. This is a real problem. Pensions are going to become increasingly important in the future, especially because people are living longer than ever, which means they're going to be getting their pension incomes longer than ever. Pensions are not collecting enough revenue in the form of contributions into the fund, nor are they earning as much as they need to actuarially to deliver on the benefits that they're going to be paying out.

So, who's better? Donald Trump or Kamala Harris? By a very close margin, I have to give this to Donald Trump. Merely because pensions have a lot of their money invested in the stock and bond and real estate markets. And Donald Trump is going to be better for those markets than Harris. But quite frankly, neither Trump nor Harris are going to be doing anything particularly beneficial to improve pensions directly.

It'll be indirect under Trump because of his overall economic benefit compared to Harris. But I frankly give this short shrift in terms of decision making for who to vote for president.

And finally, lifetime income. If you were to ask any pre-retiree or any current retiree, and perhaps you fit into one of those two categories, the most common thing people say that they really want in retirement, economically, financially speaking, they want guaranteed lifetime income.

People want to make sure that they don't run out of money before they die. People want to know that they're going to be able to pay their bills, provide for their health care, and hopefully have something left over to pass to their children. Guaranteed lifetime income is a huge hot button in asset management and financial advice.  Neither Trump nor Harris have had much to say on this topic. It's really a shame because it's a huge issue for millions of voters, and neither one of them has had much to say.

And that's what I find too often happening in this election, neither one of them commenting on hugely important issues. When they do comment, it's often gobbledygook from Harris, or Trump says one thing and next week he says something totally different.

It's a bit of a challenge, which is why I am at the moment, undecided. But on this issue, specifically on all things economy, Trump is my choice.

Tomorrow, we're going to talk about housing and home ownership.

And also tomorrow, Wednesday, October 9th at 1:00pm EDT, I've got a webinar for you: Crypto for RIAs. We're going to talk about yield, staking, lending, and custody much beyond the Bitcoin Bill Barhydt, the founder of Abra is going to be with me.

It's going to be a really cool event. I encourage you to come. It's free. You get one CE credit. You can register right now for free. The link to it's in the show notes. I'll see you tomorrow when we talk about housing and homeownership and the election. And then, at one o'clock, Crypto! See you then.

If you like what you're hearing, be sure to follow and subscribe to the show, wherever you get your podcasts, Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and remember leave a review on Apple podcasts. I read them all. Never miss an episode of The Truth About Your Future. Follow and subscribe on your favorite podcast app.

-----

Subscribe to podcast updates: https://form.jotform.com/223614751580152

Ask Ric: https://www.thetayf.com/pages/ask-ric

----- 

Links from today’s show: 

Click here for Ric's worksheet to help you evaluate the candidates

Kamala Harris Official Campaign Website Policy Page: https://www.kamalaharris.com/issues/

Donald Trump Official Campaign Website Policy Page: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform

10/9 Webinar - Crypto for RIAs: Yield, Staking, Lending and Custody. What’s beyond the ETFs? https://dacfp.com/events/crypto-for-rias-yield-staking-lending-and-custody-whats-beyond-the-etfs/

10/23 Webinar - How to Factor Longevity into Your Financial Planning: https://www.thetayf.com/pages/october-2024-webinar-how-to-factor-longevity-into-your-financial-planning

----- 

Follow Ric on social media: 

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RicEdelman

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ric_edelman/

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ricedelman/

X: https://twitter.com/ricedelman

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@RicEdelman

----- 

Brought to you by: 

Invesco QQQ: https://www.invesco.com/qqq-etf/en/home.html

State Street Global Advisors: https://www.ssga.com/us/en/intermediary/etfs/capabilities/spdr-core-equity-etfs/spy-sp-500/cornerstones

Schwab: https://www.schwab.com/

TAYF Disclosure page: https://www.thetayf.com/pages/sponsorship-disclosure-fee