Trump’s proposed tax reforms<\/a> and I guess the question I have first of all is you know what’s your reaction to his plan and what have you seen of it so far?<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>The plan as far as we can tell is pretty good, especially the big reduction of the corporate tax rate which would really improve American competitiveness. Lead to more investment and job creation here in the United States, the problem is we don’t have all the details and we also have reasons to wonder whether or not there is going to be the necessary follow up by the Trump administration. Are they going to come up with some savings on the spending side of the budget to make this tax cut more politically realistic? So a good announcement, a good first day but there’s still a long way to go.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>You think he’ll get his fifteen percent tax rate on corporations or do you think that’s going to get negotiated upward and if so where do you think it might end up is just the best guess?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Daniel Mitchell: <\/strong>I think at the end of the day we’re probably looking at a corporate tax rate of twenty percent if I’m optimistic. Twenty-five percent if I’m pessimistic but that clearly is it’s the dominant most important necessary part of Trump’s plan. We are so out of whack with the rest of the world, this is really the equivalent of shooting ourselves in the foot. So I hope that there’s a very, very serious effort to at least make sure that part of Trump’s plan gets enacted.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Well Dan, I’ve got a question for you here just with respect to the growth side, I mean obviously a big cut in taxes is intended to stimulate the economy. So what are some of the projections that are anticipated on that side of the equation?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Daniel Mitchell: <\/strong>If we have a big reduction in corporate tax rates and we also get rid of the death tax and make some of the other reforms that Trump was talking about. There’s no question the economy will grow faster you know maybe we’ll get back up to our historical average of three percent instead of being stuck at two percent, where we’ve been all during the Bush and Obama year. So that would be very good news, now will that mean the tax cut can pay for itself with the additional revenue probably not. I mean that’s… we’re still going to be talking about less revenue coming into government which is why I think it’s important that the Trump administration also get very serious about controlling spending ideally including entitlement reform.<\/p>\nMichael Eastham: <\/strong>Well that leads to a kind of a follow up question just as it relates to the debt, I mean if we’re still not revenue neutral so to speak then we’ve got a twenty trillion dollar debt that needs to be addressed and I feel like that’s kind of getting brushed to the side right now.<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>That I think is going to be the problem with Trump’s plan, we currently have five hundred billion dollar deficits and if we leave government on autopilot. That’s rising to more than a trillion dollars by the middle part of next decade and then you add a multi-trillion dollar tax cut on to that… Now I’m someone who thinks we don’t have a debt problem we have a spending problem, the debt is simply a symptom of the excessive spending. But the reality is if Trump wants his tax cut to go through especially his signature reduction of the corporate tax rate, he needs to be more aggressive on trying to say no to the special interests in Washington. He needs to be able to have the courage to tackle the entitlement programs and maybe he will I mean we are going to see some time in May, Trump unveil his full budget proposal. And hopefully, we’ll see a good commitment to getting control of [cross talk] 12:53.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>And hopefully he can get some… get his way with some of that and have success. So Dan can you please stick around a bit? We need to take a commercial break but we’re going to be right back. If you’re near or in retirement head over to the IncomeGeneration.com and download your special report written specifically for the needs of the Income Generation. Again those born before nineteen sixty-six. I’m David Scranton and you’ve been watching the Income Generation we’ll see you all next Sunday. Welcome back to the Income Generation, I’m David Scranton your host. I’m here today with Michael Eastham, our co-host and Dan Mitchell economist extraordinary, Dan thanks for sticking around.<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>Good to be here.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>You know let’s change topics for a little bit and talk about the financial markets, the stock market. You know the stock market loved Donald Trump and still does to a certain degree although things leveled out a little bit after the failed attempt at getting Obamacare repealed. What do you think about that? Do you think that that’s likely to continue or do you think that President Trump success is already priced into the market and if anything there could be more downside than upside?<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>I’ve always been cautious about over-interpreting what happens in financial markets, maybe the market was going up because just continuing artificially low-interest rates from the Federal Reserve. Now you would think the financial markets and the corporate sector would like the idea of lower corporate tax rates. So I don’t disagree with the notion that maybe there is some optimism in financial markets about lower taxes. But there’s lots of things that always happen in financial markets and I actually think the Trump people are making a mistake because what happens if there’s a big correction. It might have nothing to do with Trump and his policies but if he’s saying that the stock market’s a reflection of his good policies and there’s a correction. Guess what? That implies that that’s the fault of his policies so I’m always cautious about making any sweeping pronouncements.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>But looking at the G.D.P. growth rate of one point six or one point eight percent you know you think the market… if that’s all we were to get over the next few years and nothing more. You think the market should be at today’s levels? You think that makes sense or do you think at least a little bit of that’s priced in? A little bit of President Trump’s success?<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>Well I think two things are properly priced into the market one is the hope that there will be lower tax rates and other economic reforms to get the economy growing again. But also I worry that what’s priced into the markets as a bit of a bubble because of all the easy money policies from not only our Fed but from other Central Banks around the world. Now if I knew you know which was responsible for what? I’d probably be rich and I’d be on the beach in the Cayman Islands instead of sitting here talking to you guys right now. So you know don’t take my advice on investing.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Got you. So you’re looking at more from an economist standpoint which is your background, which makes a lot of sense. Economically, are things looking better now preliminarily for first quarter of the year from what we saw maybe third and fourth quarters of last year? You see things flat or do you see things really improving.<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>I try not to over-interpret monthly and quarterly data because you really have to get a trend line going and what I focus on is the long run and as we talked about in the last segment. You know we used to have strong three percent plus economic growth in this country and under both Bush and Obama we’ve been at two percent growth. And that’s really the number that should concern us, I don’t you know in any one quarter maybe you’ll get four percent growth, maybe you only get one percent growth, maybe you’ll get a recession. It’s the long run average from an economist perspective that really matters and if we want faster growth the only recipe that gives you faster growth, in the long run, is increasing the productivity, the efficiency of your economy. Getting more output from your capital and labor, I don’t want to use boring economic jargon…<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Sure.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Daniel Mitchell: <\/strong>But that’s ultimately what gives you more prosperity for American families and that’s why I think it’s critical that yes, let’s lower the corporate tax rate, let’s reduce some red tape and regulation in the economy. And Trump has been pretty good about those things but for heaven’s sake if he doesn’t get serious about government spending. I worry that any tax cuts we get won’t be very sustainable.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>In the minute or so we have left, I want to get to our topic today media bias. Is someone very involved in the media what advice do you have for people trying to get real information these days to help them make good financial decisions and to tune out all the hype.<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>Well, the first thing to realize is that a lot of the establishment media does lean left and you see that and the types of issues I work on. They always talk about the cost of a tax cut as if the money you earn belongs to the government. And if you get to keep more of it somehow that’s a cost to the economy no, it’s a savings to the economy. It’s a savings to you, so when I watched news stories sometimes and read you know what’s in the Washington Post and New York Times I want to pull my hair out because they have such a government-centric view of the economy. Not to mention since I just said government-centric you know look at their analysis of Keynesian economics, they really think that free lunch theory works. So they think, let’s take money out of the economies right pocket, put it in the economies left pocket and pretend we have more money. It didn’t work for Bush, it didn’t work for Obama, it didn’t work for Hoover, it didn’t work for Roosevelt, hasn’t worked for Japan. And yet the media, the establishment press so often treats Keynesian economics as if it was gold.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>You know it’s crazy Dan, we’re out of time for today but sometime we’ll have to have you come back to talk about how we went from having the liberal media to now having the overly conservative media. I’m not sure what happened with all that but Dan Mitchell, thank you very much for joining us today.<\/p>\nDaniel Mitchell: <\/strong>Thank you.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Now it’s time to hear from a good friend of the Income Generation and a man who’s been studying media bias for many, many years Dan Gainor. Dan Gainor is vice president of business and culture for the Media Research Center, the MRC. The MRC has been using scientific methodology to track and monitor bias in the media for thirty years, Dan is also a veteran writer and editor with more than two decades of experience in print and online media. He appears frequently on Fox Business Network and he writes for the Fox Forum. He’s also been with us before right here on the Income Generation, Dan welcome back.<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>It’s a pleasure to be back thank you.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Now you’ve been studying media bias for a long, long time and but it’s a subject that seems to be on everyone’s radar more and more these days. Has all this recent debate about the media and the First Amendment impacted you or your job?<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>Yeah, it’s made it a heck of a lot harder. Donald Trump ripped the bandage off, there’s no allusion now for anybody who’s got half a brain that the media are biased on pretty much every major issue of the day. And since he started his campaign and now that he’s president, they’ve been working aggressively and undoing absolutely everything he wants to do.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Well Dan, thanks so much for joining us and one of the questions that I have is as we talk about the kind of half-truths that people here in the media. The problem that I find a lot is that people make decisions based on half-truths without having the full spectrum of information, so how do we go about actually finding and getting that full base of information?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Dan Gainor: <\/strong>Well you have to have a broad-based media diet and it’s got to be very broad these days. To give you an example, we were tracking media coverage of Trump on the evening news shows since he took office and it’s eighty-nine percent negative. And what that means for investors is the two topics that he’s running on economic topics of nineteen (unclear 20:48) hundred minutes of coverage of Trump. Only eighteen minutes devoted to jobs, only ten minutes devoted to trade so you can’t just rely on if you watch evening news for these things. You’ve got to look at both liberal outlets like covering the pose conservative outlets, News Busters, Fox business. You’ve got to have a diverse diet.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>But Dan, you know the MRC began with the intent of primarily exposing the liberal bias in the media. But we now know that there really isn’t liberal bias, it’s the excessively conservative media. So is there a place for the MRC anymore now that we know the media is really excessively conservative?<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>Alright, what’s scary is that really is an argument that a lot of the people on the left put out that the media because they don’t put on the extreme wacknut crazies out there that the media are somehow conservative. Oh, well you didn’t have any communist on to discuss the budget. Well, it’s because the economist part of America… you could fit like in a small drawing room and they could play cards. There is a place for both liberal and conservative media, but there needs to be a place for neutral media and we increasingly don’t see that, that’s unfortunate.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>But it sounds like you’re saying that as most things in life. The truth lies somewhere in the middle, both extremes are kind of out of whack, very much out of whack. So what do you think the solution is?<\/p>\nDan Mitchell: <\/strong>Well the solution should be, the most obvious would be for them to put me out of my job. For regular journalists to do their own darn good work so that we don’t have to follow him around and say hey, you didn’t do this, hey, you didn’t do that. Hey, remember there are conservatives in America, thirty-five percent of the country is conservative only twenty-five percent is liberal. But something like eighty or ninety percent of the press comes from twenty-five percent that’s liberal.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Well it’s… I hate to see you out of a job Dan but it would probably be better for the country as a whole if they didn’t need somebody like you but I hope that doesn’t happen because you’re a buddy. But listen, Dan, can you stick around for a few minutes? We’ve got a lot more to talk about when we come back with more words of wisdom from my good friend Dan Gainor.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Miranda Khan: <\/strong>Welcome back to the Income Generation, I’m Miranda Khan. Now it’s time for your news max finance update, a recap of the stories that move the markets this week. President Trump’s administration presented its tax reform proposals.<\/p>\nSteven Mnuchin: <\/strong>Under the Trump plan we will have a massive tax cut for businesses and massive tax reform in simplification.<\/p>\nMiranda Khan: <\/strong>The proposal would reduce the individual tax brackets from seven to three, it would cut the business tax rate to fifteen percent and it doubles the standard deduction for individuals. Today marks the beginning of National Small Business Week a time to recognize entrepreneurs and small business owners and in honor of it, the head of the Small Business Administration will award outstanding business owners from around the country and DC. The Trump administration slapped a twenty percent tariff on Canadian lumber entering the U.S. The president also attacked our northern neighbor on Twitter for making business for Wisconsin and dairy farmers very difficult. Canadian lumber imports were valued at more than five billion dollars in two thousand and sixteen. ESPN shredded some staff again, this time it will cut about one hundred positions most of whom are on-air talent. The sports network blames rising T.V. programming costs and a reduced subscription base for the layoffs. The company has about eight thousand employees worldwide. And the NASDAQ hit the six thousand mark for the first time ever on Tuesday, thanks to strong corporate earnings and the president’s promise of a major tax reform. For much more on these stories please visit Newsmax.com\/finance, I’m Miranda Khan Iran now let’s get back to the Income Generation with David Scranton.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
David Scranton: <\/strong>Thanks Miranda, now that you are all up to date let’s welcome back Dan Gainer of the Media Research Center. Dan, you know we talk about the financial stuff all the time and how the media bias can hurt people financially. But let’s pivot away from that for a second and let’s talk about other areas where you believe you know non-financial areas. Where you believe that the biased media can actually hurt the consumer.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Dan Gainor: <\/strong>Well one of the things that you have to understand when we talk about media, we don’t just mean news. I guess the first thing that people need to understand is…that means entertainment is a big player these days, a movie comes out that attacks an industry. A movie comes out that critiques either a business or can make it look good, so you look at the big oil spill in the Gulf a few years back and that was devastating to BP. But then you get the movie coming out, if the movie had been more adversarial about B.P. then you got to worry about that as a sort of P.R and investor standpoint. And you’ve also got to worry about these crazy documentaries that come out all the time, you saw one from the… There’s a new one coming out from Josh Fox who did a couple about fracking and now he’s got want to about the North Dakota oil pipeline. Dapple and that’s of course very anti-industry and so these are the kind of things that are going to hurt or hurt a company. SeaWorld can be harmed by that, it was other companies like that.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Well Dan, I totally get that but I want to… I do want to focus a little bit on the financial side so from your perspective what are some of the financial risks or the problems that you see as a result of the media bias.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
David Scranton: <\/strong>You mean to consumers and investors.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Absolutely.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nDaniel<\/strong> Mitchell: <\/strong>Yeah well I take a… the big issues of the day that really can move not just one stock but the stock market are you know the change in Obama Care and now we just saw it just come out is Trump’s new tax plan. A lot of what Trump wants to do with taxes is frankly in my opinion already baked into the market, it’s part of the reason why the market’s been doing so well. But if it doesn’t happen if a Democrats on the hill, if the media who oppose tax cuts, if they’re able to stop it. Well if it’s already baked in the market there’s only one direction the market would go from that. That’s where media bias could truly have a sweeping impact and you got to demand that they cover both sides of this. When you look at just Morning Joe today, they had a segment on where they had somebody talking about the tax cuts and he was assuming that this massive tax cut is going to have zero baseline modification on growth. So growth, he’s projecting taxes based on two percent growth that we had for the eight years of Obama but if you bring back a trillion dollars and then you do a big tax cut. Pretty much most conservative economist would say that’s going to boost revenue.<\/p>\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Now, what do you think about what it does to Congress and how they vote? You know think about it if their constituents are getting flooded with this media and it’s changing their minds at certain things do you think it affects their respective congressmen? How they actually vote on certain issues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Dan Gainor: <\/strong>Absolutely. That’s a great point because a lot of people don’t realize that the people who work for you on Capitol Hill, their staff and the Congressmen themselves. They watch all these left-wing programs, they’ll watch Morning Joe and so they’ll… somebody is going to vote on this in Congress and believe that this is… you have no impact on growth. And so what… this is why media bias is so important to investors because it could really hurt the bottom line not just for one company but genuinely drag down the whole market. Because the media are in a national tantrum about Trump way.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>You know I joked about it before, but how do we go from being having excessively liberal media to some actually looking you straight in the face and saying we have an excessively conservative media. You know what leg do they stand on when saying that the media’s excessively conservative do you know because I don’t see it.<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>Their key argument is that a lot of these companies are big mega Corp’s. Comcast and ABC Disney and such like that so they look and say well all those companies are arrogantly conservative and it’s one hundred percent wrong. Those companies are inherently liberal you look at what has happened to the Disney legacy and has been dragged through the muck. To the point where even liberals complain about what happens when they go down to the Disney World. And then you look at the movies and T.V. shows that they produce and across the board have been bought into an agenda that it’s not proof free market. It’s a left-wing agenda, look at ESPN, look at… they just had mega layoffs, one hundred top people, we’re talking about mostly on air talent. And that’s because ESPN in part at least has gone and become very political and viewers don’t like it.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Dan in the forty-five seconds or so we have left can you tell our Income Generation members how they can get the truth these days.\u00a0 But, of course, watching our show the Income Generation.<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>That would have been my first choice. I would say they really do need to modify their diet a little bit if you’re… if they’re liberal they need to read. Watch and read some outlets they would not monitor. Monitor CMBC, watch Fox Business, read News Max, read News Busters. And if you only read conservative outlets take a look at the Huffington Post, understand what the other side is saying. Because if you don’t then you don’t understand what the next attack is going to be on your money.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>You sound like the FDA, eat all the food groups and you’ll be fine so I guess you’re right too much of one thing is never good. So Dan, thanks so much Dan Gainor for joining us on the show today, we really appreciate it.<\/p>\nDan Gainor: <\/strong>Thank you it’s always a pleasure.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>In the few seconds I have left, I’d like to introduce today’s advisor roundtable, first I’d like to welcome back my good friend Mike Eastham. Who in addition to being an author has over twenty-five years of professional experience under his belt in the financial industry? He’s a highly sought after retirement planning expert and the founder and president of Fellowship Financial Group in Altamont Springs, Florida. My other guest Eddie Gabor is co-owner of Key Advisors group in Luis Delaware. Eddie began his career in financial planning in nineteen nighty-eight focusing on retirement and estate planning strategies and specializing in money management. And last but certainly not least we have Scott McLean joining us today, Scott is owner of McLean tax advisory group in Waretown, New Jersey. Scott has been helping retirees and people approaching retirement build sound financial strategies for nearly thirty-five years. He also runs a nonprofit agency that educates veterans on the benefits that they could have. Welcome, Scott, Eddie, and Michael<\/p>\nEddie Ghabour: <\/strong>Good to be here.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Now we have to take a quick break but stay with us. But when we come back we’ll have more from our advisor’s roundtable, we’ll right back. If you’re near or in retirement head over to the IncomeGeneration.com and download your special report written specifically for the needs of the Income Generation. Again those born before nineteen sixty-six. I’m David Scranton and you’ve been watching the Income Generation, we’ll see you all next Sunday. Welcome back to the Income Generation and Scott, Michael and Eddie thanks for sticking around.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Great to be here.<\/p>\nEddie Ghabour: <\/strong>Thank you.<\/p>\nScott: <\/strong>Thanks.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>You know what’s interesting, we’re talking about how our clients and everyday investors actually get caught up in the media hype and how they could be misled. But you know the same is true with us, you know we watch the same media we probably watch more financial media than even our clients because we have to. So I guess my first question that I’d like to hear you talk about individually is you know how do you gather your own research and information on behalf of clients? And how do you make sure that you as advisors aren’t biased by the media, whether it be overly liberal media or overly conservative media?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Eddie Ghabour: <\/strong>So I always tell my clients you know you have to take what you hear or read with a grain of salt because the media is looking for maximum ratings and so it’s never as good as they say it is. And it’s never as bad as they say it is in the media so our job as their wealth advisor is to try to sift through the noise and always go back to the underlying fundamentals. That really drive the markets, drive interest rates versus some special news report because the market went down or up really big in one day. Because one day or one week does not indicative of where the markets are actually going, so we have to be able to ignore the noise and focus strictly on the fundamentals. <\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>So that’s what you do? You…in your practice you feel like you just kind of… you watch it, you see it, you listen to it but then you kind of crowd out all the news and focus on the basics.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Eddie Ghabour: <\/strong>Absolutely, because it’s very easy to get caught up in the emotions of what the media is reporting. But at the end of the day again they’re trying to sell ads and increase their ratings.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>Scott, how would you answer that? How do you keep yourself from absorbing all the media hype one way or another so that you can make good unbiased recommendations for your loyal clientele of thirty-five years<\/p>\nScott Mclean: <\/strong>Dave that’s a great question. I think people don’t really understand you’ve got to listen to both sides, you really have to have two ears and one mouth. It’s easier to over talking and go to one slant, I think of my only… my close friend of mine who actually went through a terrible divorce and when he went through a terrible divorce. He got his children for two days a week and his ex-wife got them for five days a week, the reason I tell you that is because his ex-wife was blasting him for years on end. Which actually designed and destroy the relationship with a wonderful father, this is media bias. It’s kind of hard, how do you take it and he just said well you got to listen to both sides and really, really understood the facts of the matter, not just one side or the other.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>Absolutely. Absolutely, good advice. Michael, how do you do that in your own practice?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Yeah Dave, you know part of the question that I always help people to sort through is asking you know when it comes to your strategy are you investing for the right reason? And I want to make sure that the strategy supports the goals that people have because we focus on retirees, listen the majority of what we’re doing is not so much growth oriented. So we’re not trying to buy low, sell high we’re trying to invest for income, so it’s a little bit easier from our perspective. Once we can help people understand that the real question they need to answer is how much income do I need? It allows us to sift through the noise a little bit easier.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>So it’s important to think you know what are my needs? What are my goals? I don’t want to invest in a way that conflicts with my goals, I want to invest in a way that’s in line with my goals.<\/p>\nMichael Eastham: <\/strong>That’s correct.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Which is common sense advice, but now Michael when you look at someone’s portfolio a member of the Income Generation especially somebody age fifty and over. You know how can you tell the extent to which that person has already been biased by the media? Or maybe how their current financial advisor has been biased by the media when you look at their portfolio?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Well, it’s actually pretty easy to decipher Dave, when you look at a strategy for a retiree or a pre-retiree then it’s easy to see if they’re invested for growth. If they’re invested in mutual funds and individual common stocks generally those things are designed for growth. But they… if they should be invested for income well that’s one of the simple ways to help identify whether or not they’re being influenced by the mainstream media because that’s what they propagate.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>So you’re saying if a member of the Income Generation, right? Our loyal viewer’s then if they’re investing for growth, not income then that alone is a sign in your mind that…<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Michael Eastham: <\/strong>Absolutely.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>There’s been some bias whether it’s bias on their part or bias on their advisors part. Sure, Eddie how would you answer that question? How can you tell when looking at someone’s portfolio whether they’ve suffered from the media bias, been victim to it or whether their advisor has?<\/p>\nEddie Ghabour: <\/strong>You know many times we’ll see… I refer to them as cookie cutter type portfolios where you know they may have a basket of funds and you know a higher bias towards equities or bonds. Whatever it may be but it seems pretty cookie cutter, a question that I asked many individuals before we take them on as a client is what is your risk management strategy? Because until you know that answer you don’t know how to properly design your portfolio and I will tell you nine times out of ten when I ask someone that question. I get this blank stare back at me because risk management has not been a focal point of the discussion they had in their meetings and that’s really the biggest thing that we try to discuss with our clients. Because they\u2019re at a stage in their life where the upside of the market does not help them as much as the downside will hurt them.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>Hurts them, sure. And everybody wants to hear what they want to hear. Is they want to hear all the great stories about the double-digit returns historically, but you’re right you’ve got to have that downside protection strategy. So we have to a quick break now stay with us Eddie, Scott and Michael will be right back. Welcome back to the Income Generation now let’s jump right back into it. We’ve got Michael Eastham and Eddie Ghabour, unfortunately, you know we lost Scott technology’s great when it works. And it really stinks when it doesn’t work but we hope to have him back again soon, you know but what I’d really like to talk about now Michael is you know how do you tell clients that they could avoid media bias and stay informed? I mean it’s so pervasive, it’s all around us what do you tell them to do?<\/p>\nMichael Eastham: <\/strong>Well you know we talked about it off the air and many times in the past Dave helping people to understand that trusting their gut instincts a lot of time is actually a good thing. Unfortunately, we’re so inundated by information in the mainstream media, you have to dissect it, you have to be able to break it down and sort the wheat from the chaff if you will. And so that’s one of the things that we end up talking with folks about and helping them to make good determinations about what’s the appropriate strategy for them.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>You know we get people you know it’s funny who… we’ve all heard of people who died or almost died because they blindly trusted a doctor’s opinion even though their gut instinct said something different. And I always like to tell people you know what are your gut instinct? Your gut instincts are really your cumulative life knowledge and life experience for the fifty-five, sixty, seventy years that you’ve been on Earth. So sometimes you have to trust that, Eddie, what do you do when people ask you that question? What do you tell them when they say you know how can I block out the media bias? And how can I tell you know when it’s reality versus when it’s just hype?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Eddie Ghabour: <\/strong>You know our job as their advisors are really continuously educate them and teach them the value of being disciplined. That’s the hardest thing as an investor do is to be disciplined, many times the client knows the answer themselves they’re just looking for someone to reinforce that. So it ultimately comes down to what they’re trying to accomplish. So if their goal is to protect assets then they should not chase equities when equities are hitting all-time highs and that’s what the media is talking about. But it is a challenge because as a human being it’s hard to get the emotions out of making investment decisions and that’s our job is to keep the emotions out. And again stick to the fundamentals and more importantly really what the clients trying to accomplish and what’s most important to them.<\/p>\nDavid Scranton: <\/strong>So how do you tell people to keep that sense of detachment from their money so they don’t get pulled into the hype?<\/p>\nMichael Eastham: <\/strong>Well, I think one of the points Eddie, made was right on cue I mean educating people is probably the best way. I find that there are several points in our strategies that we need to reiterate, we need to continue to go over with clients so that they can take that emotional aspect<\/a> out of it and think it logically. And continue to move forward in their retirement goals.<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>David Scranton: <\/strong>That’s great, that’s great. Michael, Eddie stay with us we’ll be right back we have one more segment and we’d love to have more words of wisdom from the two of you for our Income Generation members. You stay with us also, we’ll be right back with more from Eddie and Michael. Guys thanks for sticking around for the last bit of our show. Eddie, you know what do you think is the biggest fear today in the media when you see your clients coming back with clipped out news articles or regurgitating something they heard on television? What’s the biggest fear?<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>Eddie Ghabour: <\/strong>My biggest fear is the media’s going to get them to chase stocks and take more risk than they’ve ever been comfortable taking. Because it’s easy to get caught up in the hype when you hear the stock markets hitting all-time highs. So that’s the biggest fear I have for my clients and for your viewers truthfully, if you’re retired taking too much risk could be very detrimental to your abilities stay successful in retirement.<\/p>\n