No Surrender with Greg Sher, Erin Dee & Coby Hakalir
No Surrender is a livestream featuring three of the housing industry's most outspoken voices. Hosted by Greg Sher, Erin Dee, and Coby Hakalir — covering the news, macroeconomics, and political forces reshaping the industry in real time.
No Surrender doesn't just report on the industry's challenges — it confronts them head-on. From consumer-facing crises to the nuanced, inside-baseball developments that only industry insiders truly understand, the hosts bring sharp opinions, deep expertise, and the kind of honest disagreement that actually moves the conversation forward. These three don't typically see eye to eye — and that's exactly the point.
No Surrender with Greg Sher, Erin Dee & Coby Hakalir
Episode 10: Vacant Homes, Trump Accounts & the Fed
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
This week on No Surrender... we've got a lot to say.
Join us as we breakdown:
🔥 Lending Tree says 1 in 10 Homes in the US are Vacant
🔥 Starter Homes: Are first-time buyers entitled, or do we have a cost-to-build problem?
🔥 Big changes coming to Condo lending. Is the industry ready? Can the market bear it?
🔥 We say a final goodbye to Lindsey Graham.
🔥 Trump Accounts are here. What does the gang have to say?
🔥 More signs of the conventional credit box tightening?
🔥 Another TCPA lawsuit hits the industry. Noise or signal?
🔥 Fed Tax Forces? Warsh's proposal could reshape the Fed as we know it.
🔥 Will the supply crisis get solved by Americans having less babies?
Thursday.
SPEAKER_04My favorite hour of the week of all time begins right now. Number 10. Number 10. Ten episodes. It's hard to believe. Here we are, though, having a great time. How are you two? Good to see you on this Thursday.
SPEAKER_01Amazing.
SPEAKER_04You are amazing. You know that? I concur.
SPEAKER_03It is number 10, but it feels like we've been doing this together forever, doesn't it?
SPEAKER_01It does. Yes. Yes.
SPEAKER_04It certainly does, although this is the first time I think we've seen you with this background, Kobe. You're officially out. There's no uh there's now a different door back there. Um, or maybe there's not, or maybe this is the same, but a different yeah, you you always come at different angles. Well, I like to mix it up. Never mind.
SPEAKER_03Um, you've seen this background before many times. Not many times, a few times.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, you're just what you say is so interesting, Kobe. It's hard for Greg to stay to pay attention to the surroundings unless there's people there.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, especially when I'm low on my meds. But look, none of us have it tougher than this guy. Did you guys see this?
SPEAKER_00These are the heart-stopping moments. A grandfather was attacked by a bison at Yellowstone National Park. The dramatic video posted online by a professional photographer shows a bison which can weigh more than 1,500 pounds, charging after the 65-year-old, flipping him into the air. You see, the man and his grandchild stop to take photos of the bison. Seconds later, the massive mammal then charges, chasing the family around trees before the man is thrown multiple feet into the air, seriously injuring him.
SPEAKER_04That's a nice toss.
SPEAKER_01Respectable. I mean, the guy ran fast.
SPEAKER_04He ran really fast. But bisons are powerful. I never knew. Who knew?
unknownYeah.
SPEAKER_04We have a lot to get into today. Uh, we're gonna talk about uh lending tree with some very weird study. Uh starter homes, we'll get into condo lending. The time is coming up here. Uh, we are just days away from major changes. Uh, we'll say uh goodbye to Lindsey Graham, talk about how he may or may have not impacted housing. Trump accounts. I found another area of this administration that my very good friend, approaching best friend status, Kobe Hackalier, likes. Uh, you're welcome, Kobe. Uh, more signs of the conventional credit box tightening, although I'm not sure I agree. Another TCPA lawsuit hits the industry. And will uh the supply crisis get solved by Americans having less babies? There's less of that thing going on out there in the United States.
SPEAKER_01Fewer, thank you. It was a little grammatically, grammatically correct there.
SPEAKER_04Fewer. What did I say? Less.
SPEAKER_01Less, fewer.
SPEAKER_04Yeah. Did I get that from you, Kobe, or is that just my English? It's probably all right. Let's get into the first thing, lending tree. Uh, Aaron, uh, they say one in ten homes in the U.S. are vacant, uh, but when you dig behind the headlines, a little bit misleading.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, yeah. I mean, you know, this kind of reminds me a little bit of the story we talked about with the uh the Bitcoin mortgages, where there's a big headline, a big splash, right? 14.5 million vacant homes. It's a big splash. But when you read into it, the vast majority of these homes are are second homes, right, or being used for other purposes. Um, so but that's all kind of buried down below after they talk about why vacancy rates are high, places where vacancy rates are the highest. Kobe, I think you pulled that out. Where where are vacancy rates the highest?
SPEAKER_03Uh in Maine. Maine, 20.6%. Maine coming in top uh with Vermont to close second.
SPEAKER_04I love Maine. What I just got back from Maine. The air is so clean there, the lobster rolls are plentiful for those of like Maine lobsters. There's only one person I know that doesn't. Yeah. Uh, but the question is, what's wrong with Maine? What's going on there?
SPEAKER_01Well, if you look into the numbers, the reason it's 20% of vacant homes is because they're all seasonal homes that are only occupied part of the year. So the the headline where it looks like we have all these vacant homes that are available for use that aren't being used is complete bull. Um, but it's lending tree. And what does Lending Tree do? They are a lead gen company. And right here, off of their page, right next to this, you know, tantalizing headline is right there. You can slick it, you can view mortgage loan officers from up to five lenders in minutes. So they get you in with the hook, and then here you go, you can go dump your information in there on a lead funnel, right? And it's a big application, a big headline. It got picked up by Scotsman. And so I think this just goes back to the conversation we've had before of where we really need to like speak truth and we need to talk about what is real and get away from these big, bold, crazy headlines that actually don't mean anything because they're just trying to get clicks. And you can't just look at what a headline is telling you. You've got to take the time to dig deeper and actually see what's going on behind the story because this is a big nothing burger. Like what the stuff that is in the story means absolutely nothing. It was unhelpful.
SPEAKER_03I think there are some elements of the story that are interesting, although to Aaron's point, they don't jibe with the headline. The headline is is there to draw people into essentially a false narrative.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_03The reality is that the homeowner vacancy rate in this country right now is 1.1%. A healthy market is somewhere between seven and eight percent. And that homeowner actual vacancy rate, that means homes that are available for someone to purchase and live in full time, uh, has fallen precipitously over the last 10 years or 12 years, uh, in line with all the builders and laborers we put out of business during the great financial crisis. And so we're at a low point and we're about six or seven times below what a healthy vacancy rate really should be. Um and that's really the headline that should be at the top of this story. But instead, it's meant to draw people in and think, well, if there's this many vacant homes, there's got to be one affordable that I can put my uh my my hands around. Um, so you know, the the this number of 14.5 million comprises uh you know the seasonal homes, it comprises rentals too. I mean, rentals are included in this number. So completely misleading. There are at any one time right now, on average, about 800,000 actual homes for sale, uh, which is way below what we actually need in order for uh prices to come down a little bit to become more attainable for homeowners in this country. So um, you know, it just I think it always kind of uh raises our hackles a little bit when we see these kind of stories that are meant to intentionally mislead people, and and that's why you know I think we bring them to light and we'll continue to do so.
SPEAKER_04Where do they get this data from, Aaron? How do they do that? The Census Bureau.
SPEAKER_05They pulled it from the Census Bureau.
SPEAKER_04And how accurate is that?
SPEAKER_05I mean, who knows?
SPEAKER_04I mean, yeah, I mean, is it as accurate as the dot plot and the BLS? Because it feels like it. I mean, I don't know what to believe at this point, right? Yeah, you know, you're you're led to believe by not just these headlines, by many others, that there's about a 10% vacancy in the United States. Is that the fact? Is it not the fact? And then when you look at the road to housing, um, there was no incentive for these people that have vacant homes that are second homes and investment properties to get off the sidelines and let go of those so that uh, you know, you can add to the inventory out there. Um, that's a whole nother issue. But I I would just like to know what the real number is. I I suspect we'll never know.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, and and the thing that that that I feel is important that we need to call things like this out is because it's headlines that like this that end up sticking. Take the 40-year average first-time home buyer headline from NAR. That number has been debunked multiple times by by multiple studies showing that the number is more like 33, 34. Um, well, that's not a great number either, and it's higher than historical. But 40 year, I was just in in several meetings in the last couple of days where that number was brought up, and that number has been debunked, but it's a big salacious headline, and so it keeps getting talked about. And so that's why we've got to continue to talk as much as we can when we have these headlines that that totally are not accurate.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, absolutely. Kobe, let's move on now to starter homes, our first-time buyers entitled, or do we have a cost-to-build problem? What's the answer?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, it's interesting. So the um there's been a lot of uh talk about this uh this story this week, and and I did a post around it talking about expectations versus reality. There's a narrative out there amongst the media that Gen Z and the millennials are are lazy, they're entitled, they think that everything should come to them, they don't want to work hard, and and I suspect it's a lot of what older generations in past decades have said about younger generations. The reality is that it it costs way more to buy a starter home today than it did in 1975, to the tune of 30 to 40x when you consider the cost, the soft costs of construction versus now versus then when it comes to inflation. Uh the NAHB put out some numbers. Uh California came in at $131,000 before a shovel hits the ground. Now a lot of people push back and say, well, the NAHB is is only sampling a few hundred of their builders, and those builders have an incentive to fight back and say it's too expensive to build starter homes. Um and the reality is that it's it's a combination of all of the above. It's it's it's the cost to build, um, and it's also the permitting and zoning that goes on in areas. And the AEI survey is interesting because they surveyed over 5,000 Americans, and 74% supported homes built near jobs and amenities, meaning they built them near transit areas like bus depots and train stations. They supported that. Then the number shrinks a little bit when they say, well, what if we built smaller homes in what are now unusable lots in your neighborhood? That number now goes down another 10% to 64%. Notice how as soon as it starts to come closer to home, that number shrinks. Now it comes down even further when they say, would you support small-scale infill in existing single-family neighborhoods? Now the number comes down to 58%. So still more than half support it. And so there seems to be a mandate for building more starter homes in this country and more affordable housing. Um, but there's also the caveat of many people answered, no, I don't support it because I just think builders would build too expensive homes to solve any first-time buyer uh issues. Um, and that, you know, I also don't want my neighborhood to change. So there is still the the NIMBY part. Now, the problem I have with this survey is it's one thing to ask people, would you support building more starter homes in your neighborhood or adjacent to your neighborhood or using lots that for multifamily that are unusable for single family right now? It's one thing for them to say yes on a uh on a survey because you know there's no real cost to that. It's just, you know, you're saying you support younger people moving in, great. But what happens when you're actually on the city council level, on the uh on the county level, on the state level? The reality is that people then vote differently when it comes to what they actually want to see in their neighborhood. So it's nice to have a survey like this. It it does show that theoretically there's support, but great. The reality is that's the problem with NIMBY, is that everybody does support it in a survey, but when it comes to where the actual homes are, they don't want them next door to them. They want them in the county over or the city over. And then you add to that. Yeah, I don't want to I don't think everybody supports NIMBY.
SPEAKER_04What's that? Everyone supports Yimbi, everyone supports Yimbi or NIMBY. I I think it's very much divided.
SPEAKER_03Well, I mean, every the the NIMBY is really what this survey is. This survey is people saying, Yes, I support this, but I don't want this in my backyard. Yeah, I mean, that's and that's what drives up the code.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, your pa your point is it's one thing to click a button, but if it doesn't mean anything to you, what's the point, right? If not, actually there's not actually action, action behind it. Correct.
SPEAKER_06Yes.
SPEAKER_03So so and I reject the notion that younger people are feel entitled and they only want homes with stainless steel packages and vaulted ceilings and whatever the other bells and whistles. We do have a problem that there aren't enough of these homes being built. They're too expensive to be built because of state and and local regulations. Um, and many municipalities don't really want these kind of homes in their area to begin with. So double problem for the younger generation of home buyers in our country to deal with. Um, and um, you know, I just uh I think the the further we push this narrative that younger homeowners feel entitled and want something that they actually can't afford, uh the the the further we make, the further out we are from actually solving the problem. So um, you know, we need to do better.
SPEAKER_04But isn't that Aaron? Isn't the problem gonna solve itself? We're seeing uh manufacturing slowing down, we're seeing the cost of materials going up, we're seeing uh uh builders giving houses away relative to where they were just a year or two ago. Isn't this just gonna work its way down to a lower price point? Or am I over am I overthinking it? I'm simplifying it. What am I doing here?
SPEAKER_01I think you're oversimplifying it because one, I think, I think that in some markets it's going to work itself down to a lower price point. I think it's you're already seeing that in some markets. The issue is when you're talking about about building, you know, you have you have to vote for the politicians that are going to create policies that are going to lower, lower cost of permitting, lower cost of zoning. And you have the NIMBY's that are mostly going to be in the boomer generation and their bigger voting voting block, quite honestly. So you're not going to see on a mass scale policies that will help enforce building um homes, starter homes, more affordable homes in their immediate areas. But as we do have an aging stock, as as you know, the boomers will eventually age out of housing, things like that, it's going to start to balance because we just aren't reproducing at a rate that is going to that that is meaningful. We are going to start to have a much larger supply. And I know I think we're going to talk about that a little bit later. Um, but that's not an overnight solution. And so in the meantime, what are we doing to help people who um, you know, young people get into homes? And and, you know, I really do struggle with that. Oh, they're just lazy, they just like their avocado toast. I mean, I I see day in and day out, you know, people who really bust their butt and they're struggling against an affordability situation where in many cities you have to earn in the six figures to be able to afford any kind of housing. And that's just not realistic. And so I think we need to kind of put away those overgeneralizations and truly look at ways that are going to cut bureaucracy and red tape so that when there is building, that that the costs are far less or far, was it far less or far fewer?
SPEAKER_04I'm not sure. There's a lot of crosswinds here because the stats from last month uh show that first-time home buyers, the the those numbers went up to I think 35%. I think it was two consecutive months. So, you know, are homes affordable? Are they not affordable? One thing is clear, there's not enough being done to pave the way in terms of uh accommodations for first-time buyers. There's there's the the G fees, the LLPAs, um, the the MIP. I mean, there's a lot that can be done uh out there that's not being done. And I I really would like to see some of that get done. And I'm, you know, I'm working on a post right now around homeowners insurance. There's there's something that came out earlier today about that continuing to rise, 20% of the mortgage payment in some places.
SPEAKER_01Yes.
SPEAKER_03Well, Greg, just to give you some context, first-time buyers no longer means necessarily younger people buying starter homes because that first-time buyer number is getting so. So that's yeah, so that's so that's uh, you know, that's number one. And then and then what we'll talk about later is also household formations, which you know Aaron alluded to as a as an upcoming segment. So we'll talk about that and the impact that that has on housing.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it's also misleading, though, the 35%, because that number would naturally go up with uh all of the um outside money going away. I mean, you have uh institutional investors trying to sell and rid themselves of homes right now, they're not trying to get in the market like they were before. So naturally, with them on the sidelines, that other number is gonna go up. So, like I said, there's a lot of crosswinds at play here. Um, let's uh let's pivot now. I got to get that word in there, you know, at least once as we're talking. You guys having fun so far?
SPEAKER_06Loving it.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, and by the way, congrats on the launch of the Pulse. I think Aaron and I both watched it and we gave you our reviews on it. Congrats to you and Jen McGuinness.
SPEAKER_04I got two thumbs up from you guys. My my own Siskel and Ebert, and that's like an old man reference. Like anybody under the age of 50 does not understand what that means, but I do because I qualify. All right, let's uh thank you, bro. Appreciate you. You're approaching 50, right? You're not quite there yet. I got another 13 months, right? That's amazing. When is your birthday? Let's all put it in our outlook right now. September 5th. I'll be 49 this year. Oh my goodness, that's a big one, buddy. You ready? Are we gonna party in Vegas? What are we doing?
SPEAKER_05Yeah, yeah, you want to celebrate 49. We're going on a guys' trip. What are we doing? We're gonna call it the 49ers. The 49ers.
SPEAKER_04We've already uh we've already concluded that we're doing a guys trip, and Aaron is coming, by the way. Just so you know. Yeah, we're gonna have lots of things.
SPEAKER_01I would be so annoyed. I would I would literally die of FOMO if I could not go on that trip.
SPEAKER_04Well, you need to be there. You're you know that you're one of us. You're you're all of us.
SPEAKER_01I'm all of us.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, although you don't have a sweatshirt that you're wearing, so I'm a little pissed about that.
SPEAKER_01Well, all right I've not been provided with one, so be yourself.
SPEAKER_04Touche. All right. Uh Aaron, big change is coming to condo lending. Is the industry ready? Is there any way we can get a reprieve from Bill Poulty and the FHFA? It doesn't look like it. August 3rd, limited review gets retired. Established projects get pushed into full documentation review. Then on January 4th, the reserve funding floor jumps from 10% to 15% of the association's annual budget. Trade groups are all over the place asking for a break, a reprieve. I'm hearing we're not going to get one. Please tell us why not. And do you agree that we're likely not going to get a reprieve?
SPEAKER_01I absolutely believe we are not going to get a reprieve on this one. Um, you know, so so a little bit of background. These changes were kind of ushered in under the Trojan horse of easing insurance requirements earlier this year. So we allowed for actual cash value on insurance uh for roofs. And that was a huge change. That was a welcome change both on single family and on condos. We were all very excited about that change and aligned the requirements with the industry uh with the insurance industry. But along with these, they also implemented the changes to condos that had not only some changes to deductibles and things like that, H06 policies, but the two big ones are one getting rid of limited reviews. And when you get rid of limited review, that really means that you're now having to do a full review of the budget of the condo association, um, and then bumping up the floor um from 10 to 15 percent, like you said, on the reserves in January. And and FHFA, Fannie Freddie, you know, they believe, and I I believe they they hit their heart is in the right place. And I know what they're doing here because they see condos that have um that are not taking care of of repairs that are keeping HOA dues low. And instead, when big repairs come up, they assess these massive special assessments, you know, five, 10, 15, 20,000 per unit onto condo unit owners for these big repairs. But what I really think this is, is this is kind of punishing everyone for the sins of the few, because now when you take away your limited review, and again, another thing that they're saying with getting rid of limited and going to full review is with full review, you can now offer condo loans with only up to 3% down, but you could do that before, right? So, like some of their arguments don't make sense. Um, but I understand that there's they're just trying to make sure that condo developments that they're ensuring are are have financial stability. But you know, the limited review is going to create a ton more friction and a ton more costs. As a lender, it takes a lot more time, energy, effort, and expertise to be able to do a full review versus a limited review. So as a lender, this is putting considerable burden and strain on me. And also when you're looking at increasing the budget, that is now increasing HOA dues from for all unit owners. Um, by minimum, FHFA's number was $40 per unit per month. Um, and but really I think you're gonna create a warrantability spiral here where now you have developments that are no longer warrantable, they're sending borrowers to non-agency, non-QM loans. That's gonna push prices up, make things uh push um uh rates up, make it less affordable. You're gonna have uh an issue with with condo prices. You're already seeing condo prices collapse in many markets. I think it's gonna get worse. And so so I get where FHFA's head is at in this, um, but I think they could have done this in a more nuanced way instead of just the just punish everyone for it. Um and now I think we're still gonna see some serious unintended consequences in condo lending.
SPEAKER_03You know, they had years to figure out how to roll this out because this all traces back to the surfside collapse in 2021. Yeah, because the findings from that disaster, where 98 people died, were that it was an underfunded uh HOA that and necessary repairs were deferred because they didn't have the money, nor did was there a will to pass a special assessment to fix what were major problems in that building.
SPEAKER_06Yes.
SPEAKER_03That was over five years ago, five and a half years ago. And they had five years to figure out how to roll this out in not only a meaningful way, but also in a way that wouldn't disrupt the condo market, wouldn't create uh value uh craters for many condo associations. And we're talking about you know, millions of people that live in condos across this country. Uh it represents about 10% of our market, our housing market. Um, you know, did it have to be 10 to 15 percent on a certain date, or could it have been incremental changes over a few years as budget and Calendar years expire for condo associations. Could it have gone from a limited review to a semi-full review with a little bit of a few extra questions about budget and about deferred maintenance and about special assessments? This could have been rolled out much better because the intent behind it is to create safer environments and also more sustainable economic situations with condos. But the way that this was handled, where it just all of a sudden dropped, where full review in August and then 10 to 15% in January. The 10 to 15% in January is meaningless because condo budgets don't run January to January. I mean, I shouldn't say that. Some probably do, but most run on a calendar year that could start today and end July of next year. So the way that this was rolled out, you know, harmful to the industry, harmful to its consumers, harmful to the housing market. And it could have been done so much better because they had the time to do it and they had the political will to do it back in 2021 when this tragedy unfolded.
SPEAKER_01Correct. And if if you say like uh CHLA is uh there and a few other trade groups are asking for a delay, a year's delay in the implementation of this to try to work on that in the limited review. Maybe you maybe we can be more nuanced. You don't do it to 90, you do it to 80 or something like that. So they're asking for a year to look at this. And I think that's reasonable. The mortgage collaborative, same thing. We're asking for a delay because I don't think we're saying don't do this. I think we understand the, to your point, the reason. But give us a give us a delay and let us talk through this as an industry. Also, think about all those little HOAs out there. And are they getting Fannie Mae updates? There's still a lot of socialization out to a lot of these associations that need to be done as well.
SPEAKER_04Aaron, what could the ramifications be on the ground level for lenders?
SPEAKER_01Well, for one, I think your lenders, especially ones who do a lot of volume. I know lenders in Austin and Chicago and other areas that a significant up to 50% of their business is in condo is in condo lending. And so now they're having to plan either through outsourcing or through their on their their staff to now absorb significant amounts more work and going in looking at the budget. Now, I will say to Fanny, Fannie and Freddie's credit, they are looking at increasing the amount of pre-approvals that they're doing of these units, but they won't release what that amount is. They won't release their targets. So we have no idea what that means in reality. Could that mean one more a month? We don't know. Um, and so for a lender, it's going to one be it's gonna, it could potentially take a lot more time. You potentially are gonna run into issues where you have fewer warrantable condos, where you're gonna have to now find outside agency sources for them. And it's definitely gonna take a lot longer for these to go. There's gonna be an adjustment period.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, for sure. There'll be an adjustment period at a time where uh that's the last thing we need right now. Um, Kobe, uh, this fine young man, 71 years old, gone way too soon. Senator Lindsey Graham uh died uh after a uh sudden heart ailment. Uh what should we remember Lindsey Graham for? War.
SPEAKER_03That's that's what you remember Lindsey Graham for. And first of all, if you had Lindsey Graham dying before Mitch McConnell in your senator pool, then you really did well this past week. Um who would have saw who would have seen that coming? I mean, Mitch McConnell's probably been dead for five years and no one's talking about it.
SPEAKER_04Well, at least he's well, at least he's sitting up now.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, well, you know, of course.
SPEAKER_01Or at least that's what the AI generator did.
SPEAKER_03Exactly. I think I think Logan Matashawi made that picture, the AI king.
SPEAKER_04He is the king. He's also the chart daddy. In case you weren't aware.
SPEAKER_03Uh, you know, Lindsey Graham will be remembered for war. You know, he he entered Congress in 1994 and uh later the Senate, but when he entered Congress in 1994, he was already talking about using American military might to uh to push back on the Iranian regime. That's 32 years ago. He's been he's been harping for this war. Um 2016, he had a failed bid for presidency, did terribly in the primaries, um, attacked Trump. I was actually at a dinner uh for a Republican renewable energy forum back in 2015 or 16, and he was he was given an award and he got up on stage and railed on Trump for about seven or eight minutes straight. Um and uh I think he said something like, Well, if you're crazy and dishonest, this is a good year for you. And uh, you know, and then as soon as Trump came into power, he immediately thought, well, now I'm gonna just back this whole Trump uh administration and I'm gonna get cozy with Trump and I'm gonna push my military might agenda. You know, the morning that he died was supposed to be his 64th appearance on Meet the Press, which I don't know if it that's a record or close to it, but that's a lot. And on almost every one of those episodes, he was talking about U.S. military might, and that goes back for decades, whether it was Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, no matter the conflict, he thought American military might should be involved. He finally got Trump, who was generally anti-war, ran on a platform of not entering into needless wars. And he finally convinced Trump in February of this year to attack Iran. Um and uh he affects housing because at that point we had hit a five-handle in mortgage rates. And that was the end of that, and and we haven't come close to it since. And you can thank Lindsey Graham for that uh almost entirely because he was the he was the push behind the quagmire that we're now in in the Strait of Hormuz and the surrounding areas. Um so he'll be known for he'll be known as uh the ultimate war hawk. Um, but uh 12 years in Congress, or you know, 12 years in Congress and about 30 and about another 22 in the Senate, um, and uh served his country in the Air Force as a uh judge advocate general for several years, and uh is now succeeded by his sister of all people in the Senate, which really tells you exactly how much experience is necessary to be a United States senator. You can just be the sibling of a senator, and that's enough. Um, so um, you know, as long as this Iran battle wages on, Lindsey Graham's legacy will live on.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, so it in his fingerprints are on the war for sure, and that has not been uh yeah, that has been bad for the housing market. Uh, would you know I don't think that we can hold him responsible for it? Obviously, he was uh an influence for sure, but he's a senator, he's not a president. And uh I think Netanyahu had a lot to do with what we're in the middle of right now, with uh with a narrative that uh should not have been believed. And here we are now uh deep into this, months and months, and potentially no end in sight. And that's not good for the for the business, but it's not it's not forget the business, right? It's not good for our country, it's not good for our economy in particular, and people are really struggling. It's just it's a really bad scene out there right now, and just pray that it will end soon. Aaron, any thoughts on on Lindsey Graham or do you want to switch to uh to Kobe's uh new favorite person?
SPEAKER_01Well, I you know, I will just say that Lindsey Graham is you don't get more establishment DC than Lindsey Graham. Um, I will say that Lindsey Graham um at least you know he got to see the war he's been advocating for so long before he died. Um, and I will say that he was an excellent advocate for the country he loved the most, and we can move on.
SPEAKER_04Whoa. Yikes. I like that. I like that. You might dropped on us. Uh that was a shabug. Yeah, Shibotch alone. Yeah, Baruch Ataunai. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01I just hope somebody is is is watching his ladybug farm.
SPEAKER_04Oh my goodness, you had to go there. That's a story. That's inside base, that's a story for another day. Uh, you know, Kobe, uh, you are being converted in front of our very eyes, I believe. Um, you know, every week I feel like I'm re-racking the past and and and cueing you up for the present. But we know that you've started to warm up uh ever so slightly to uh Kevin Walsh, you know, to be determined, but you certainly think a little bit more of him than you uh did uh day one, right? Fair to say. And Paulte, you gave Paulti, uh you gave him a nod uh on a but in fairness, I don't think more of Paulte than I did on day one. I just give him a. Yeah, well, listen, you're all in on him at this point. You can't take those chips out of the pot, buddy.
SPEAKER_05Right.
SPEAKER_04Uh, but you know, uh President Trump, um this is a good thing here. These are Trump accounts. And so if if you know I think that we can all in a bipartisan way look at this and go, okay, this is something that's good. It's good for financial literacy. It can bring people uh from the left over to the right, um, or at least to the middle to say that this is good. You know, this this is a great uh turning point for financial literacy in young people that gives them a reason to believe much earlier to have some skin in the game. Break this down for us, Kobe. What is this and why why do you support it?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, well, first of all, I'm going to applaud President Trump uh for getting this into the big beautiful bill. Um and uh I think uh it passed, what, July of last year, and this this went into implementation July of this year on our 250th anniversary. And the reason I want to give him as much kudos as I do is because this was an originally, this was originally a Democrat idea. This idea evolved from the left. Corey Booker. Cory Booker.
SPEAKER_04Uh yeah, yep. There's the zinger. That was sneaky. I like it.
SPEAKER_03The sneak attack. Corey Booker had this idea in 2014 and pressed it in his 2020 failed presidential run. Uh, of course, and I will give President Trump credit for this. Corey Booker's idea was to have this fully funded by the Treasury and managed by the Treasury, fully government uh controlled. Um, the current iteration of it, which I do support, is is privately run by Robin uh Robin Hood. Is that what the app is called? And and and these are actual um uh indexes that are publicly traded.
SPEAKER_04Michael Dell, I think, has put a ton of money into this.
SPEAKER_03The private clock is $6.25 billion.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, so that's amazing, man. That's amazing. Uh every U.S. citizen kid under 18 with a social security number qualifies. Babies born 2025 to 28 get a $1,000 federal seed. Already 6 million plus people have signed up out of 73 million eligible. So, I mean, we're almost at 10%.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, it's amazing. And the Michael Dell contribution, that six and a quarter million, that just shows that this is this is an investment in actual American infrastructure. That we want our children to have a better future. We want them buying homes. $10,000 of this can be uh contributed tax-free into uh the down payment. Now we know that that's not going to be a meaningful down payment, especially in 10 or 15 years from now. But um, if that account grows, that's meaningful income that that you'll get taxed ordinarily on and uh potentially used to buy a home. And and that's this is just a fantastic idea, a long time coming. A lot of other countries do this, a lot of socialist countries do this. And it's high time that we uh that we started investing in our children in a meaningful way. So, you know, yes, it was it was Corey Booker's idea, but it was Trump that made it happen. So I do give him credit for it.
SPEAKER_04We'll have to, Aaron, we're gonna have to fact check this on the next edition of No Surrender, okay?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, fact check, fact check.
SPEAKER_04Yeah. What do you think, Aaron? You're gonna you're gonna grab one of these when you uh when you have a baby one of these days?
SPEAKER_01It's a desert down there. There will be no child.
SPEAKER_04Okay, all right. I understand. Uh well, listen, um and we'll talk about what Aaron's doing to our population later on in the show. Yes, we will. It's your fault.
SPEAKER_01Um listen, you nobody wants any more of me running around. I'm just saying, I'm enough.
SPEAKER_04Uh yeah, we talked to Jan. We know this. We talked to your mom two episodes ago. Yes, clearly. She as she as she told us, you were the one the day before the house was to be sold. Uh, before you handed keys over to somebody else, you were throwing a party that was supposed to be three people that turned out to be 50 or more.
SPEAKER_01Okay, okay. No, that was actually like a 10-year difference. She failed to clean the roof or clean the ceiling for 10 years. So let's let's give Jan a fact check at here and we need to bring Jan back on because like there's some we got to clear some stuff up.
SPEAKER_04In fact, let's bring her back on right now. Jan, how are I'm just kidding. Um, Aaron, it doesn't stop at a $1,000 seed. I mean, uh up to $5,000 per year from families, um, up to $2,500 for year uh per year, tax-free from employers. So it's hard to really take a shot at this. Right. It's it it is progress. Um, it's a nice thing, regardless of who's behind it or who started it. The fact that it got done is good.
SPEAKER_01Well, and I think that's why it's a superior idea, is because it's being managed on the private side versus Cory Booker's original alleged idea. Um, but I I I I do agree. I I have zero criticism here.
SPEAKER_04I like it. Can we talk about uh a different box now? The credit box.
SPEAKER_01Yes.
SPEAKER_04Is that okay? All right. So uh is this is this box tightening?
SPEAKER_01This box is is getting tighter. Yes.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, that's amazing. That's amazing that uh you say that because I'm I'm I've done some research here, believe it or not. And I first I give you the floor. You you are the owner of this uh subject uh because I see things like 620 uh credit scores being lifted and uh loan limits getting raised and other accommodations. So why are we to believe that the credit box is tightening?
SPEAKER_01Right. So we talked about this a little bit last week, right? So uh AUS, uh this is now, I believe, the second time this year where they have they have tightened uh the the DU assessment and they they are reducing the number of loans that are going to receive an approve eligible. I think the condo discussion that we just had is another example. We there is definitely going to be significantly fewer condo loans done under Fannie Freddie rules once once these can pass. Um but to me the proof is in the pudding. And and so I think what you're seeing here is Optimal Blue just released their rate lock data. For the third month in a row, conventional loans were less than half of all locks. And if you could see over the prior last 12 months, they continued to lose market share. And so fewer people are going to conventional loans. Um, the thing that that's super interesting to me here is is looking at the non-conforming share. So look at that second line is is the the change from even just month to month and then year over year, the change in market share that non-conforming loans, so non-agency loans has taken. More and more loans are going here. And you know, I think this is something that the the that the markets they've been saying they've wanted since the great financial crisis, when everything immediately overnight went either all Fannie Freddie, FHA. We saw, we, you know, we kind of talked earlier this week on our prep call about the the FHA market share went overnight from like eight to ten percent up significantly as soon as the great financial crisis went through, right? So the the agency, the government-backed loan market took on a significant share of lending. And so now are we starting to see, you know, how many years past the the great financial crisis where private label money, non-agency money, is coming back into the market. And I think some of the changes that we're seeing on the Fannie Freddie side, tightening the the AUS approvals, things like that, it's starting to make its way through. Um, you know, so so so I'll I'll stop there. Uh I have some updates on on FHA delinquencies we could talk about, but I I think you I can see you're getting antsy in your pantsy over there.
SPEAKER_04I just uh yeah, that's another story. Did you watch Curb Your Enthusiasm? It's called Aaron, it's called hemorrhoids. Okay. Listen, you're young, but you know, thank you for making fun of me. I really appreciate it.
SPEAKER_01Um pleasure. It's what we do.
SPEAKER_04Kobe, is Kobe, isn't this a good thing that that we've got money coming? Yeah, no, not hemorrhoids, no, no, no. Um have you by the way, have you ever had one, Kobe?
SPEAKER_03I don't think so.
unknownReally?
SPEAKER_03You would know. Is that is that a gift I can I can expect to receive when I'm 50?
SPEAKER_04I don't believe it's transferable, but you've never had itchy burning down there.
SPEAKER_03No, no, I'm I'm very lucky for that. I uh but now it's a thing I'm gonna start worrying about. So thank you.
SPEAKER_04You must you you must use wipes. We're very we're very economically conscious in my house. It's all sandpaper, toilet paper. Yeah. So all right, Kobe, listen, uh money money coming into the market flowing in from other than agency is a good thing, right? We've been wanting uh private money back into the market. Do you see this any other way? Are you concerned? Is this a red flag moment?
SPEAKER_03Um it's a paradigm shift moment. And, you know, Aaron talked about uh conventional lending falling below the 50% line. That's the first time that's ever happened in history. The the GSCs have dominated lending for decades, and and that's never changed. And now they are suddenly not in that position for the first time ever. Um, non-QM expected to be up over 60% this year, year over year. We're seeing an overwhelming percentage. I think it's something like 65 or 70 percent of first-time buyers going the FHA route. That's a different discussion because of the MI that they're locked into forever. So, what happens to the MMI fund when the best of those bunch go and refinance into conventional, and those that can't because of the Titan credit box stay, and now the fund is full of riskier loans. So potential canary in the coal mine there. Um, you know what's interesting is that Fanny put out this removal of the 620 minimum last November. Then vantage score came about, and and so it seems to be, you know, following this executive order that Trump issued, allowing for expanded access to the credit markets and the housing market. And then slowly on the backside, quietly, in the dark, tightening, tightening the gears of on the on the back side. On the back side, on the backside, yeah, like a like a an agency hemorrho, tightening it so that people so that so that the the net is cast wider on the front end with 620 and below and advantage score, but that it's harder to actually get those people approved on the back end of the deal.
SPEAKER_04And so I mean you're drawing you're drawing a correlation that it's too soon to draw. I'm drawing a correlation.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, I'm drawing a correlation. That's the correlation. The correlation is that this is institutional managed risk, that this is the way they manage it versus a political mandate that says they want more expanded access to credit. They give the illusion of that on the front end publicly, but on the back end, they tighten it so that they can maintain their credibility. There's also another speculation, if you will, that some of this is balance sheet cleanup for when they privatize. So there's a number of factors at play here. I I think it's a combination, maybe, of all of the above, but I think certainly interesting topics to debate and discuss and to ponder uh as we see these things develop in tandem.
SPEAKER_04I think this is just normal market swinging evolution. Uh, we relied heavily on the government. Now we have uh we we have uh a vehicle in non-QM that speaks more to the moment, more to the gig economy, more to what came uh from the ashes of COVID. Uh so you know, if unless you can tell me something that uh intentionally has happened to lower that conforming number that's actually in the data today. Um, I just think that this is normal. Plus, we've got this the data that I read a little while ago that suggests uh that um first-time buyers are uh more heavily involved in the market right now. That could explain uh a bigger rise in FHA and VA, right? Um I don't know.
SPEAKER_03Well, it's it's the percentage of first-time buyers. It's not more first-time buyers, it's the percent more the higher percentage of first-time buyers are are deploying FHA.
SPEAKER_04Correct, because look at the I mean we're saying the same thing, aren't we? I mean, you're talking, you're aren't we saying the same thing?
SPEAKER_03Well, you're talking about first-time buyers as a percentage of the market. I'm talking about first-time buyers as a as a as a what what loan program are they opting for more than the other? And it's and it's overwhelming FHA right now.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, it is, but the the thing that I didn't mention is this. Oh, she said but but however, uh it's a lot of things.
SPEAKER_04But we have a we have a theme, a theme developing.
SPEAKER_01The thing I failed to mention is this is the first time non-conforming share took was higher than FHA share. And I do think that that is like it's it's that's something that we need to call out. Not only is it growing, it was bigger than FHA share last month. And Greg, you point you want something that's in the data, just take the low-hanging fruit there. Take second homes and investment properties and what Fanny has done with the LLPAs there, they've completely pushed those to the non-agency market. I can get way better pricing doing a PLS loan on non-owner or second um home than I can under on agency. And so that right there, I think, is is is data you're looking for on just one product type.
SPEAKER_03Aaron, Bill Dolly wants to know if we should be concerned about the significant increase in non-QM business. I I'm I personally am not, but what do you what do you think?
SPEAKER_01So I think it's something we have to monitor. I'm not concerned right now. We've kind of gone into the data. And by the way, Bill Dolly, big big thoughts. We love you, Bill. Um, he is also a big fot of uh fan of the show of basis points, my other, my others. I love him so much. Um, I don't think we need to be um Does he watch the pulse?
SPEAKER_03That's the question. That's the question. Does he watch the pulse? Bill needs to comments are open.
SPEAKER_01In the comments. Um, I don't think we should be alarmed right now, but I think just like anything, we need to be monitoring it, just like we're monitoring what's going on in the FHA book with those delinquencies, right? I think I think we have to learn from the lessons of the past and and watch very closely. But there's the the book of business today is very different than what it was in 2002, 2000 you know, three, four. And so not alarmed, but we need to monitor.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, we definitely need to be very aware of what's going on, Bill, especially if the if the DSCR population decreases, that's a really good thing because it's it hinges on on uh on rental income, which is flat you know at best right now in most places and probably trending down if we have some kind of a recession. So uh it's gonna be hard for people to make their payments at that point. But you know, as I went over, I think last week at NFM, my company, we're starting to see an increase in loans that are backed by like valid bank statements and assets and things like that. It's up, I think, to 15% now and growing. That's sticky, right? That's really tangible. Um, and so if we can continue to do that, then there's no reason this market can't continue.
SPEAKER_01Well, right now, bank statement loans are performing worse than DSC. CR loans.
SPEAKER_04Interesting, Greg. Yeah, but is it but but how but there's so fewer of them being done? So I'd have to I'd I'd there's not less of them being done. No, no, I'm going fewer. I need to know uh what those numbers are. You see, you throw people throw these stats out. I mean, it's like not people. Well, that's you look so you look so offended. You look so offended, but but how many bank statement loans, how many bank statement loans have there been?
SPEAKER_01I don't have the numbers on that, but I believe I went through the difference of delinquency like two shows ago.
SPEAKER_04I would like you to bring that to the next no surrender, okay?
SPEAKER_01If we make a note with my little red marker.
SPEAKER_04All right. I'm although I might be standing next no surrender because I'm obviously doing a lot of squirming and uh you know what's going on.
SPEAKER_01I'll send you a little little donut pillow.
SPEAKER_04What's interesting is my wife, as many people know, is a gastroenterologist, so she deals with these kinds of issues, and she's no help. She will not help me no matter what. Yeah, she's like, I'm not your doctor, you know, I'm your wife. Leave me alone. It's very interesting. That could be for another reason, though. She could just be tired of me. Um, TCPA lawsuit hits the industry. Is this a noise or a signal? I'll tell you what, this right here, um, Aaron, is concerning for uh another reason to me, but let's let's get into this to the TCPA and and what we need to look at as far as uh this new formation.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. So so somebody who clued me in on this like two years ago was our our our boy KP. We all love KP.
SPEAKER_04I love KP. What's up, KP?
SPEAKER_01Love KP.
SPEAKER_04KP's in Italy right now. He's he's a legend.
SPEAKER_01He he is a legend and and clearly taking better vacations than me, um, as he deserves.
SPEAKER_04So he's with he's with four kids, so not really. Yeah, you wouldn't want to be on that vacation.
SPEAKER_01Oh, yeah. No, I'm out on that. Thanks. Um, he kind of raised the alarm on TCPA a couple years ago, but the reason I thought that it was interesting to talk about on the show that we saw yet another TPCA lawsuit drop yesterday, class action lawsuit, was not the who the parties were, but that we have now had two dozen TCPA class action lawsuits since January this year. And what we're seeing is uh since the defanging of the CFPB, we're seeing a significant increase in these class action lawsuits, and not even in TCPA. Look at the Optimal Blue class action lawsuit, right? We're seeing it, we're seeing all kinds of class actions hitting um hitting our our industry. I think there was one over compensation, LO compensation. And so we've seen these CFPB enforcement attorneys leave the CFPB and go into private practice for plaintiff's attorneys. And what you see here on your screen is just the most recent one. So these three former CFPB enforcement heads, um, I believe they start they joined another law firm earlier this year, but just announced this week that they joined the they created their own law firm. And it's litigation firm focused on high impact cases in the public market. And so I think this is something that lenders and owners and CEOs need to have on their radar that our industry right now is being absolutely peppered with these class action lawsuits, and it is not going to end all these CFPB attorneys, enforcement attorneys seeing where CFPB is not is not enforcing the way that they were. Um, they've got us in their in their radar, and we need to we need to make sure that we're prepared for it.
SPEAKER_03Not only in their radar, but this is a this is a business strategy. And I wonder I have I have a quote here from Peter Schneider, he's an attorney. He filed one of the 2026 cases and he explained why the private litigation has become the primary enforcement mechanism. Now, listen to this quote. Said maybe they're only sued one time for 50,000 calls, and maybe they make more money off those 50,000 illegal calls than they have to pay out in a lawsuit. So, what he's saying is that this is standard business procedure for these banks that they're happy to settle because they're making more money on the illegal activity than they are on the payout anyway. So why not sue them and move on to the next thing? Uh, I mean, that's a business strategy right there. And so 24, I think we're I think we're at the tip of the iceberg of how many we're going to see, especially as more and more lenders start to deploy AI voice and the rules around them develop, somebody's gonna get caught up. Um, you know, and and and Aaron, um I I don't know if you mentioned the one-to-one consent rule that went into effect January of 2025. Um, you know, I know we talked about that at some point, where you know, you you can no longer rely on somebody filling out one form that then gives consent to money to many. It must be one-to-one. Um, and a lot of lenders seem to be getting tripped up there. Um, you know, so so this has far-reaching implications in terms of uh the number of ways you can get tripped up now versus two, three years ago. Now we have the the trigger leads rule in effect that that has some uh implications as well. And you've got all these attorneys now who have figured out that, you know, just just pay me and move on to the next thing because it's worth your time anyway. And and if lenders figure out that math too, then we'll continue to see more of these. And um, you know, in an era of of shrinking margins and companies struggling to stay afloat, um, this one's a curious one to me that lenders are still taking these kind of chances. Yeah.
SPEAKER_04Well, I can tell you, I've had I have had dealings with the TCPA before because we used to do press ones and uh and things like that back when we were more direct to consumer when I had my my company, and there are people that sit around lying in wake for these calls to be made, and they don't they don't stop. They don't uh you know they have the opportunity to opt out even and they won't opt out, they'll just screenshot and they'll go after you. So they're there are these scumbags out there um that actually they do this for a living. They go and they and they hope their phone rings. Um and so you know it's it's it's a little bit of both, but you know, in this instance, uh the plaintiff by the name of Chris Arnett filed a lawsuit against catalyst mortgage, claiming that the lender sent him at least three unsolicited messages in 2024, really, trying to sell him uh mortgage products despite having his phone number registered on the national DNC. So we're talking about years ago, and he's asking for uh uh monetary damages, which could be tripled, treble damages, 1,500 per violation. So the guy's looking for you know, quick math 14 grand or so, whatever.
SPEAKER_03Um and uh they bought that they bought that number, they bought his information from a trigger lead list, by the way.
SPEAKER_04That's is that facts?
SPEAKER_03Yeah.
SPEAKER_04You guys ever heard of this? The Fed's new brain trust? You thought I skipped this, didn't you? And you know what? You're right, I did, but I'm bringing it back home. We're gonna talk about the uh new task force, which is being led by my main man, Kevin Warsh, who is going to be a dove. Okay, he's not gonna be a hawk. Um, I because I lost the piece of paper, I can't tell who's going first. So I'm just gonna be quiet and let one of you speak up.
SPEAKER_01I'll take it. I love it. I love it. Uh, this is the one that I've been super, super excited about all week, honestly. So, why I think this is important for us as an industry is because this is the first time the Fed has gone outside of the institution to review its policies, its practices, its procedures. And so, to me, who he picked to lead these task forces, we should really be looking at that, looking at their prior history to try to get a signal for where we think they're going to go with this. And so, number one, to level set each task force has three co-leaders from outside of the Fed, um, but they will be supported by internal Fed employees just from a research standpoint, a data standpoint. Um, and at the end of the day, though, it's ultimately up to the FOMC to make any changes. So these guys are gonna come, they're gonna make recommendations, but they're not necessarily going to be implementing them. The FOMC still has to implement these changes, agree to them, and implement. So there's still a long way to go from there to here. But there's three task forces that I feel like we should really be focusing on personally. One is data. So the data task force has Raj Chetty, Doug McMillan, Kevin Murphy. So Raj and Kevin are two economists who have worked on building big data models in very, very short order from different public sets. So I believe Raj Chetty did put together some amazing COVID-era, um, pretty real-time data sets. And so, and then Doug McMillan was the former Walmart CEO. So he's used to looking at data, making decisions based on what consumer uh sentiment is, consumer behavior, consumer activities. So I think that these three are going to be a phenomenal task force that are used to looking at various forms of data and how to produce conclusions from that data or results from that data in very short order. The second one that I find very interesting is balance sheet policy, because I think that this is really going to impact our markets, right? How the Fed handles their balance sheet impacts us significantly. And if you look at the people that are on this, on this palette, this uh task force that are leading it, you have people that have been at various degrees openly critical of QE. Um, and so you I think you are going to see, um, I think you're going to see potential issues with run or suggestions for runoff. And I think that that you are not going to see um suggestions that are uh favorable to adding liquidity to the market, to the fed, to the Fed supporting liquidity to the market, maybe kind of coming back to pre-QE policies, right? So I think that's something the market's going to signal. And the third one is the productivity in jobs. You have three AI people on this. You have Mark Andreessen, you have Charles Jones, and you have Asha Sharma. So you have Netscape and a big VC into AI companies. You have somebody who's with Anthropic, and you have the Microsoft ABP, Xbox CEO, who, by the way, just laid off a bunch of people because of AI. And so I think this is one that that, you know, the the Fed is really looking at where are we getting productivity gains and how is AI and data centers, how is that driving our economy? Um, and so to me, this is the one I'm a little concerned, not concerned, but I'm I'm questioning because you have three guys that are really big AI guys. And so, you know, what is this, what what are their conclusions going to come come out of? And is there anybody that's going to be there to be that counterpoint and be that kind of skeptic to to um to what their viewpoint of AI is?
SPEAKER_03Kobe. Yeah, the uh the inflation frameworks group, that's also interesting to me, just uh, you know, reviewing whether the 2% average targeting approach is correct and and what that potentially means for interest rates. Um, you know, uh to Aaron's point, it's an outside group of people. I this looks like the starting lineup of Argentina versus England yesterday. But uh, you know, I I think it's a good thing to have these folks, even though a lot of them are, you know, ivory tower intellectuals that, you know, perhaps are you know necessary to this process, but I don't necessarily trust what the outcomes are going to be. But um to Walsh's credit, he he's trying to move the needle on on what the Fed is doing. And I hey, I wrote a post this morning about Kevin Walsh and how I'm warming to him. And and it was essentially around three things. One, I I've come to embrace the no forward guidance position that he's taken. And the reason for that is this task force. If we start to have more meaningful and clear data in the market because the reporting is better, we don't need as much forward guidance from the Fed. And the Fed can act even more independently and let the data speak for itself. So I think that's a good thing. And then the third is what he said at his press conference when he was testifying in front of the Senate this week. I thought he did a great job there. I thought he was genuine. And I also thought he gave us a dose of reality that was not really meant, just like, you know, Poulte, everything Poulty said is meant to impress his boss. Wars said something about um, you know, did we perhaps have too much QE going on during the pandemic? And we allowed one generation of home buyers to benefit versus the next generation. And I've written about the 2022 vintage of buyers and beyond. Warsh's statement was too many extreme measures creates imbalance in the market. And so to, you know, you I know you you you said, could we see him as a dove? That's not exactly the most dovish statement, but what it seems to me more is a moderate statement and a dose of reality, and somebody who's critically thinking, and that gives him credibility because he's not simply saying something that he thinks his boss wants to hear. So to me, for those three reasons, I'm warming to the guy. And um, I I I think he's taken on his job with with uh with a level of attentionality and and seriousness, and I'm hoping to see more of that from it. But it's not game time. I'm keeping an open mind.
SPEAKER_04It's not game time, it's not game time. These are just reps. So I think we I think we're ultimately right now just waiting to see when the moment comes when he makes a hawk-like move and the president is in there, whatever discussions they had in the Oval Office that end up not coming to light, how will the president behave when that happens? And how will that impact?
SPEAKER_05And how will he behave?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, yeah, and how will he behave? Exactly. Um there's also some revisionist history in here. You know, I I pick on pal a lot for being, you know, too late. I do agree. You know, he was he was uh uh too late and he did give too much, but it's if we if we all go back to the COVID moments where a lot of us thought the world was coming to an end, it seemed appropriate to uh to to overshoot than to undershoot. And that's really what he did, right? Nobody knew it was unprecedented, no one had ever seen anything like it before. And so my point is if something like that happens again, God forbid, you know, with this guy in there and with these people on the task force and uh you know, hawks everywhere, they'll point back to this the moment that we've got the history on where we didn't need the QE that we that last injection, and they'll stand firm. And what could the repercussions be if it's even worse? Think about that for a minute. It's a horrible thing to think about.
SPEAKER_01I mean, I'm not sure how you couldn't have thought injecting three trillion of liquidity into the economy overnight was was not gonna end the way it did, but okay.
SPEAKER_03Well, I mean injecting or injecting Clorox.
SPEAKER_04Oh, come on. I mean, had had it had it been five million people five million Americans dying, or ten million Americans dying, or twenty million Americans dying, right? I mean, you nobody had any idea then. So, you know, people were losing jobs at record paces, restaurants are closed, you know, whatever.
SPEAKER_01Um, but we've just gone from one emergency to another to the fact we're just constantly in a state of emergency and we never pull back from it, and it's just more and more and more and more. So, like maybe cooler heads, better data, all of that it will will help us operate better.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, but but but but COVID, you didn't have any data. That's my point.
SPEAKER_01You pretty quickly had some data as to how the virus was performing.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it wasn't performing well in those windows where those decisions were being made. I'm I'm just saying, like I I pick on Pal a lot, but if I was in his shoes, I have to be honest, I might have done the same thing. And so the concern is if something like that happens again with this guy and this team behind him, will he go back and say, Well, this is you know, we you you had a handout then and we gave it to you, and look how it's completely screwed the economy. For five, we're still uncovering ourselves, we're still buried in all those mistakes. That's all. Yeah, I think it's an interesting thing to think about.
SPEAKER_01It feels like you're putting your your hat in the ring for for next time the chair comes up. Is that are you do we want do we want a chairman chair?
SPEAKER_03He just can't sit in one.
SPEAKER_04That's that's it. Yeah, I get chairman stand. Have you have the uh have have you guys had fun today? This has been great. Yes, I love fun today. Yes, did you think I was gonna skip past the task force? You did, you thought that I was not gonna talk about it.
SPEAKER_01Listen, Greg, I have ultimate faith in you. Um, and I I knew I knew it was gonna happen, but I'm super excited because once we're done, I'm about to go hit up Tim Rude. He just released some new deal on his uh Daily Dose called The Recall. So it lets you like test your knowledge on all of the stories that you got to see. And this is honestly like how people all the time are like, Aaron, how are you like, how do you pay attention to all this stuff? And honestly, like Tim Rude is part of the reason. And so now he just created the recall that he's he just released. So I'm gonna go take that test and see if I if I remembered anything on the the stories that Daily Dose told me this morning.
SPEAKER_04One of the smartest guys out there.
SPEAKER_01Bust, love him.
SPEAKER_04He's an inside the beltway guy. He even has time for me. We've had coffee a couple times, he's a delightful man.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I've I already I made plans to see him next time I'm up there.
SPEAKER_04Well, thanks a lot, considering I'm up here too.
SPEAKER_01I already told you I was gonna hang out with you too. Weirdo?
SPEAKER_04No, I don't think so. You're making that up. Uh Kobe, I apologize for not uh taking a good visual of your of your backdrop here. I will not I will try not to make that mistake again. It's okay. Um I love that you're moosed on my face, though. You're you're it's hard not to be, let's be honest. You're in the process of moving, right? Is that over with?
SPEAKER_03That's uh no, it will be this weekend. I'll be uh I'll be a new resident of uh Reno, Nevada, as of Sunday, officially, uh, which I'm very excited about. Um, you know, and uh Geordi gets to start a new fantastic school, which is the impetus behind the move. Um, so I pick her up from camp on on uh next Tuesday and drive her to her new home. And uh it's some some some cool, exciting stuff happening, and I've got some cool surprises for her too. And so um I think the next show you'll uh you'll we'll be will be live from my new place in Reno, Nevada.
SPEAKER_04Well, I'm gonna just say that it's the old the same old spot at that point, right? Yeah, you'll have no idea. Yeah, I can't I can't get it right. And and Aaron, you're you've been in North Carolina now for two months?
SPEAKER_01Been there for two months. I'm in Houston today, but I will next week I will be back in North Carolina.
SPEAKER_04How's it going in Carolina?
SPEAKER_01I love it there. It's just everything about it is amazing. It's beautiful. I've got my family, it's fun. Like I love it.
SPEAKER_04I hear it's pretty stylish there.
SPEAKER_01Uh-oh. I mean, sure.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, yeah, that's all. Yeah. People have good styles. No, no. Who doesn't like North Carolina styles?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, you go, you got it.
SPEAKER_01I don't. I don't. I don't okay.
SPEAKER_04Well, this has been great. I hate saying goodbye because I look forward to this so much, but we have we have to now. I'm not gonna cry though. I am I am gonna go uh run to my proctologist, though. I hope everybody's had an amazing time listening to this. Kobe Hackalier, Aaron D. And of course, Nyung. Hold on a second. Hold on, hold on, hold on.
SPEAKER_01Where's the queen? Where's the queen?
SPEAKER_04What do you got? Where's the queen? Let's go.
SPEAKER_01Boy, there she is.
SPEAKER_04There she is.
SPEAKER_01She's our favorite, the most amazing producer ever.
SPEAKER_04Whoa. She just jumps right off. All right, that's it. That's a wrap. We'll see you next week, everyone. Take care. Bye bye.
SPEAKER_02No surrender on the show. We go to the toe. What fails? What fails? Who gets the most hot milk?