Paul Volcker recently passed away. He was the former head of the Federal Reserve. Jason Hartman looks back at Volckers biggest moments as the fed chair and what it meant for the United States.

Then Jason talks with Thomas Jones, former vice chairman and director of TIAA-CREF, former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Global Investment Management at Citigroup, and former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Citigroup Asset Management. He was also the former Vice Chairman of Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Jason and Thomas discuss Thomas entrance into real estate, why Thomas is so bullish on America long term, and what sets America apart from the rest of the world.

Investor 0:00
just invest. It’s still a great thing to do. I know it can be scary to a lot of people. Jason’s been doing this a long time. He’s got a lot of knowledge. We’re in an age of technology and everything’s at our fingertips. You can do a lot of homework on your own. But in the end, make sure you’re talking to professionals like Jason.

Announcer 0:18
Welcome to the creating wealth show with Jason Hartman. You’re about to learn a new slant on investing some exciting techniques and fresh new approaches to the world’s most historically proven asset class that will enable you to create more wealth and freedom than you ever thought possible. Jason is a genuine self made multi millionaire who’s actually been there and done it. He’s a successful investor, lender, developer and entrepreneur who’s owned properties in 11 states had hundreds of tenants and been involved in thousands of real estate transactions. This program will help you follow in Jason’s footsteps on the road to your financial independence day. You really can do it. And now here’s your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Jason Hartman 1:09
Hey, Hey, Hey, welcome to Episode 1343. And greetings from beautiful but chilly. Scottsdale, Arizona. Yes, I know some people think Arizona is hot all the time. Oh, no, it’s not. It gets very chilly here in the winter. So I left this beautiful Florida weather to come here but I bet it’ll be gorgeous in the daytime here but at night. Yeah, it’s cold out there. Okay, so we have got a great guest today, Thomas Jones, and he will be talking about his vast experience on Wall Street. And then as a venture capitalists now and about the economy and so forth. The Thought for the Day someone posted this on social media recently and I just thought I’d share it with you. It’s pretty good. This is pretty good. You know, there’s A lot of wisdom sometimes and a little short clip. Here it is. It says, Don’t forget to drink lots of water and get some sun. You’re basically a houseplant with complicated emotions. Good. Don’t forget to drink lots of water and get some sun. You’re basically a houseplant with complicated emotions.

Jason Hartman 2:28
That is true. That’s what we are as humans. Hey, so some bad news. A man that I have talked about many times on the show. The former Fed Chairman paul volcker has passed away. He was either 92 or 94 years old. So he lived a good long life. conflicting reports on his age. But you know, he was the guy that really, of all fed chairs. I’d say he was more of a purist, right. He was not a sellout. He was the one who who raised interest rates up to break the back of inflation. And that was a very risky move. And a lot of people criticized him for it. In fact, our in house economist, Thomas, when I posted this, he commented, and he said, wasn’t he responsible for like 5000 suicides? Because of the deep recession? He cause? Well, I don’t know. But he definitely caused a very deep recession by raising interest rates. But you know, think about it. You always have to ask yourself compared to what right the Jason Hartman question compared to what that is one question you have to ask. But the number two question is, what are the dogs that don’t bark in that situation? So say paul volcker hadn’t come along, say you would have never been fed chair or say He would have never acted the way he did in the face of that stagflation of the 70s, where you have an anemic economy with high inflation at the same time, in odd malady. And of course, as you know, I’ve talked about what came out of that during the terrible Jimmy Carter economy was the misery index, the misery index? That term was I’m pretty sure that term was Queen, then, you know, there were other miserable times in the economy throughout history, of course. But the misery index certainly gained popularity during the Carter era. Because things were so bad you had sort of the worst of both worlds. Usually, when you have this rampant inflation, you have an economy that is vibrant and moving and booming and lots of stuff is happening, because that creates the inflation where people have that wealth effect and they go out and spend the money, and that money is chasing a limited supply of goods and services. So of course, good old rule of economics supply and demand. When there’s a lot of supply of dollars chasing a limited supply of product, what do you think’s going to happen to those widgets out there? They’re going to raise the price of them. Right. And there you have inflation. So, Paul Volcker, I don’t know, I guess history will tell, but I think he was pretty gutsy. And I’m impressed with people who have guts, and chutzpah, you know, gotta have some hutzpah. Had he not come along, maybe we would have sunk in into this massive inflation all through the 80s. Maybe it would have lasted into the 90s. And there would have been, you know, inflationary economic collapse, like Hungary Zimbabwe y Mar Republic, Venezuela. History is littered with these terrible examples. So who knows? knows what would have happened if Paul Volcker didn’t come along and do what he did? You know, nobody really knows. We’ll see. But you know, inflation, one of the biggest drivers of mortgage rates peaked at 13% in 1980, and drove the average us rate of the 30 year fixed rate mortgage. Are you sitting down folks? In 1980? The average rate of the US 30 year fixed rate mortgage. drumroll please.

Jason Hartman 6:31
18.6% as measured by Freddie Mac, yes, you could get a mortgage for 18.6%. But hey, that isn’t so bad when inflation is 13%. Right? Because think about it. What’s the spread between the two 5.6% is the spread between the rate of inflation and the rate of borrowing On a 30 year fixed rate mortgage. And also, today we look at that same Freddie Mac data, right? That shows a rate of under 4%. Now, I know don’t panic investors, all of you listening, you don’t get those super desirable rates. That’s what the owner occupants get your rates are still pretty great. I mean, you know, you might pay four and a half percent give or take, right. But, you know, pretty awesome rates for sure, even for investors. So Volcker, you know, he tackled inflation by tightening the monetary policy. And you saw rates go up. And this benchmark rate actually increased at one point to 20%. And other economists called this shock therapy for the economy. Of course, Carter lost his bid fortunately, for a second term in office. I mean, look, I think Carter was a good man. I just don’t think he was a good president. Okay. But think Carter, a good man for sure. And, you know, not was his Carter is still with us. But, you know, he’s definitely getting up there too. But yeah, you know, Volker, interesting guy and you know and and then we came into the long long era of Greenspan of Alan Greenspan after that, who was there for a long, long time and he was the complete opposite, you know, he was just flooded, flooded the money supply and, of course Ben Bernanke he, you know, he was dubbed helicopter Ben, because he probably regret saying this, I’m sure. He said, You know, if the economy got too stagnant if there was a recession, he would just go up in a helicopter and drop money on on the economy. So, you know, those are the opposite people, right. Those are the Keynesian philosophies, right. And the Keynesian philosophy john Maynard Keynes, that famous economist is prime the pump prime The pump in other words, inject money into the economy, have the government start some government spending programs, and that’ll jumpstart the economy. Right. That’s what the Keynesian thinking is, you know, that’s pretty much opposite of the Austrian School of Economics. So anyway, little rambling there. But without further ado, let’s get to our guest today, I think you’ll find this interview to be very interesting. If you have comments, questions or thoughts, go to Jason Hartman comm slash ask and let us know what they are. Check out some of our great properties while you’re there. Get yourself connected with one of our investment counselors. And you can always call us Yes, you can pick up the phone, we still have phones. Well, the world is moving away from the telephone. And I find that to be super annoying, by the way, because I think people were meant to talk. They were meant to talk. And that’s the best way to communicate. So you can always call us at one 800 Hartman One 800 Hartman and here is our guest for today Thomas Jones. It’s my pleasure to welcome Thomas W. Jones. He is the former vice chairman, President and CEO of Tia cref, the largest pension system in the country. Former Vice Chairman of travelers insurance, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Freddie Mac. I’m not done yet his resume continues. He’s former chairman and CEO of Smith Barney, asset management, former CEO of global investment management at Citigroup, former Treasurer at john Hancock insurance company, and a founder and senior partner of venture capital investment firm Tw j capital. He’s author of the new book from Willard straight to Wall Street, a memoir, Tom, welcome How you doing?

Tom 10:52
Thank you, Jason. Thank you for inviting me.

Jason Hartman 10:55
I have a feeling you are located in either Boston or New York. I’m just guessing.

Tom 11:00
I’m actually between the two. I’m in the New York suburbs, North Side. I’m in actually southern New England, and I’m a former Bostonian.

Jason Hartman 11:08
Fantastic. Well, I was. I was just up there. I hosted my mastermind group on a New England and Canada cruise just week and a half ago. So we were we were just there in your area. So beautiful fall foliage this time of year. You’ve just got a storied career in an incredible resume. You’ve obviously done a lot. But what is particularly interesting that we were talking about off here is how you started investing with a conversation with your new bride on your honeymoon, about saving money to buy two units that you converted into 10 units right?

Tom 11:43
Well, that’s correct, Jason 25 years old, just marry honeymoon. I told my bride I had some ideas to share and said in a capitalist economy, we need to think about how to build some capital for investment. One way to do that is since both of us are working, maybe we could live on one salary, and save the other salary, so that we have some investment funds. Now that sounds easy to do, but it’s actually quite hard because it meant that we couldn’t do some of the things that our peers were doing in terms of vacations and, you know, nights out on the town and things like that. My Bride agreed. And within two years time, we had accumulated enough money to respond to an ad. That was in the Sunday boston globe, an ad from the Boston Redevelopment Authority for people to acquire and redevelop various residential properties around town that were in the possession of the Boston Redevelopment Authority. We bid on to abandon burned out brownstones in the south end of Boston. In 1976, right 1976 there were just two blocks from Copley Square in downtown Boston. Unbelievably, we were the only people in the entire city of Boston to bid on those buildings. Ultimately, we combined it into a 10 unit apartment building. We lived in one unit. And it you know, it big, frankly, became the foundation of our financial success over the years.

Jason Hartman 13:25
That’s fantastic story. And you know, real estate or really, income property particularly, has just always been such a winner for people. It’s really an incredible asset class. I absolutely love it. Now 1976 that was right at the time that Gerald Ford was moving out of office, Carter was moving into office in the 70s. There was a lot of talk about stagflation, the misery index. You know, of course, just a few years prior, we had Nixon resigned, what was going on in the economy at that time, that no one bid on these really well? Located properties, I mean, did you have to have a lot of faith and sort of be a contrarian, to be willing to buy the bid on and buy those properties during that time. 1976

Tom 14:11
was the early days for the renewal and rehabilitation of the south end in Boston, even though it was close to Copley Square and close to Back Bay. We already had an apartment in the south end. And so we knew what the potential of the community was, we understood the dynamics of the neighborhood. And so we thought that these buildings, which were relatively close to Copley Square, actually could be commercially viable and an attractive residential location, in fact, the place where we were willing to live ourselves. So I think it was that insight into the market that encouraged us gave us the the sense we could move forward. With a sense that we weren’t taking as much risk as perhaps others might have perceived.

Jason Hartman 15:05
Okay. And but those were residential properties, right? You there were two residential units, you converted into 10 residential units apartments, right, two

Tom 15:13
buildings, two brownstones that we converted into 10 apartment units in, we lived in one of the 10 units, and rented out the other nine, our building was cashflow positive within one year’s time. So we were essentially living rent free, you know, both having then return on our invested capital, as well as the tax advantages that come with owning, you know, commercial real estate, which at that time, you know, tax advantages that could be brought to one’s personal income tax return, right. So it really became the core of us just kind of leapfrogging forward economically.

Jason Hartman 15:54
Sure, sure. When I asked you about the economy a moment ago, I was kind of talking about the broader Economy 1976 I know you mentioned the specific area there in Boston, of course, but what was the feeling the economy back then just kind of paint the picture for our listeners. So they’ll understand how you might have been thinking like, was this a risky investment? Were you nervous? Doing that first, that first deal? Or, you know, was everything going through the roof? And, you know, you’d be crazy to miss out? Right? You know, it’s, well, it was definitely, it was

Tom 16:27
definitely a sober era. You know, we had just gotten past the resignation of President Nixon in the Watergate impeachment proceedings. Jimmy Carter, had just been elected. And this was before the Ronald Reagan era, you know, kind of the sunshine and America era, America was just coming out of, you know, still in the midst actually in the period of pretty high inflation. But you know, my sense regardless of the short term, economic cycles up and down, I had a pretty deep conviction that steady savings and investment every year invested in long term growth assets, such as us equity, and real estate equity, that that pays off over time. And when you have a dip in the economy, such as we were experiencing in the mid 1970s, it’s in fact a buy in opportunity. And that’s especially true, Jason, when you’re young. I mean, we were in our 20s. And so, basically, I had no fear with regards to, if I can get in at an attractive price, you know, will this asset eventually perform, I could not predict that it would be a successful investment in a two year or three year or four year timeframe. But I was highly confident that as a long term asset, getting in at a low price of acquiring the property from the boss, we have Elephant authority that that would be successful over the long term.

Jason Hartman 18:04
Yeah, I agree. And I totally agree with you. I purchased my first rental property when I was 20 years old. So it’s a great asset class. Talk to us about how Wall Street was back then. What year did you start your your career on Wall Street?

Tom 18:19
Well, I got started in public accounting in the 1970s. Then I was at john Hancock insurance company in the 1980s, where I rose to senior vice president and treasurer. And in 1989, became the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ti a cref, the pension company and became the president of ti a cref. In 1993. So at john Hancock, really was my first day to day working exposure, Visa v. Wall Street in the 1980s.

Jason Hartman 18:57
Yeah, yeah. How has it changed? Just over the years, you know, I know you hear this storied stuff about Wall Street about how they used to have these kind of like white shoe firms they called them and how it just used to be a more maybe a more ethical industry is today. You know, there been a lot of scandals on Wall Street and the great recession and such, just would love to have your sort of historical commentary on how it’s been over the years.

Tom 19:24
Well, one of the big changes and when you refer to two white shoe firms, you know, many of the investment banks in that era, and brokerage firms were partnerships. And as partnerships, that meant that the owners, the partners had their own capital on the line. So there was, I would say, a greater degree of caution with regards to no their investment disciplines their lines of business, because losses went directly into the capital account. of the partners that owned the firm. Yeah. Well,

Jason Hartman 20:04
that’s that’s it. That’s, that’s great. And you know, I just finished interesting you bring this up I just finished a couple of weeks ago in the scene, Nicholas labs book skin in the game. Yes. And about that’s the problem with the world today, isn’t it? There’s this disconnect between the principles, and the decisions they make. They’re going to get their big bonuses no matter what. Right?

Tom 20:28
Yeah, just Well, it’s highly unlikely, Jason that the financial crisis of 2008 to 2012 or so would have happened. If there had been more skin in the game by people that owned the firms. You know, unfortunately, we had evolved to a situation where too many players on Wall Street, could grab the golden ring so to speak, get bonuses of $10 million dollars or more by one year of good performance right and not suffer any long term console. fences, if those assets or investment strategies then turned sour, and that I think did encourage behaviors that would not have occurred under a partnership structure

Jason Hartman 21:12
as any of this been fixed coming out of the Great Recession, you know, any of the reforms, are they going to work or are we just kind of in the same position? We’re, you know, we got Dodd Frank, we, it’s amazing to most people that are outsiders, not insiders, that we had the great recession. Nobody went to jail. I mean, Dennis Kozlowski, I guess, did, but I think that was even before the Great Recession. But yeah, anyway, you know, what are what are your thoughts?

Tom 21:39
Well, I think there’s been reasonable improvement with regards to the capital levels that have to be held by the firm’s that engage in businesses on Wall Street, and there are limitations on things such as proprietary trading by the major banks, particularly in those institutions. Or that could spill over into businesses that are backstopped by the US government, you know, such as consumer deposits that are held in banks and guaranteed by the US government. And I think there’s also been pressure with regards to bonuses having to be geared towards longer periods of performance, that there’s a clawback two or three or four or five years down the road, if it turns out that a bonus that was paid was not justified as the subsequent performance determined. So there have been improvements. I don’t think it’s as healthy as would have been the partnership environment. But you know, the counter argument is that our financial institutions are able to concentrate pools of capital now at a scale that might not have been possible until a partnership structure right. So they can support larger investments and Larger companies in the broader economy,

Jason Hartman 23:02
right. But in the aggregate, let’s assume that there could be the same amount of capital formation. It would just be spread amongst more companies or really more partnerships, if you will, rather than having these giant behemoth that are, hey, I’m going to use it too big to fail.

Tom 23:22
And and that’s pretty legitimate comment, Jason. And in fact, the most disappointing aspect of the reforms since the crisis is that if anything, our capital markets have become more concentrated, and fewer giant institutions which we know will have to be supported by the government if they’re at risk of failure. So that’s pretty fair point. Yeah,

Jason Hartman 23:46
gosh, I don’t know. Every time they make a new regulation. They basically just put up barriers to new entrants coming into the field. All the established players goldman sachs and all the rest They can afford to comply with these regulations. The startup can’t do it. It’s just funny to me that you have such a startup culture in, say, Silicon Valley. And listen, I have my own complaints about Silicon Valley and tech tyranny, for sure. But, you know, the point is, there’s a robust startup culture, because there aren’t many regulations, at least not yet. Maybe that’s going to change. We got Facebook, in front of Congress all the time, and probably rightfully so. But on Wall Street, the regulatory environment is so burdensome, that, you know, would seem like on the face of it, well, that’s to protect the consumers, right? To keep everything fair and square. But the reality in practice is that you can have a lot of innovation. You just got a few big players when you have big regulations. Right?

Tom 24:50
Well, you’re correct. Again, the intent was to protect the consumer. But one of the impacts unintended or not, yeah, right, is that regulation does become a bad barrier to competition. And you know, one of the most vivid examples of this, it’s easier to understand outside of financial services that one of the breakthroughs of the firms like Uber and Lyft, was that they took this approach. They had enough capital, that they could, in effect, just break the law, going into business, a regulated business such as taxi, the taxi business, the Taxi and Limousine.

Jason Hartman 25:30
Where Where’s your medallion? Right

Tom 25:32
now? Where’s DOMA down? Yeah, right. And you know, New York had a regulated number of medallions shirting since the depression. And those medallions were worth a million dollars and more because there was a pretty predictable earnings stream from that scarce asset being out on the streets and Uber. They just broke the rules, kind of with an attitude of sue me. And they had the resources. Yeah, you know, unlike most startups, they had enough Really big capital backing them, that they had the resource like the financial market, fight the bureaucracies and get enough traction that they could then call on their customers to attack the politicians, right regulators as doing things that were anti competitive.

Jason Hartman 26:19
Okay, so here’s the question, Is that good or bad? In your eyes? I think it’s good. But what do you think?

Tom 26:26
Well, I think it’s good to have breakthroughs like that, like Uber and Lyft. I think it’s bad, frankly, I feel sorry. using that same example, I feel sorry for the small businessmen who were trapped who were caught owning medallions, right with lovers of debt that they could no longer sustain.

Jason Hartman 26:49
I agree with you there. So the way to have this kind of, you know, creative destruction, if you will, is to let it play out more slowly. So that People can make adjustments in the markets. You know, I don’t know much about the medallion business, but I heard that most of those medallions were owned by big Russian oligarchs, you know, or, you know, kind of have a mafia vibe to them. I could be wrong about that. And

Tom 27:13
that’s true at scale. That’s true at scale. So you make it, you know, you differentiate between those who own medallions in mass versus the small immigrant business, right one cabbie of the small businessman, you negotiate a buyout, ie if the industry is going to change, there has to be kind of a buyout of this embedded value, interesting stuff. And it’s amazing to me that Uber and Lyft still haven’t made any money. I just believe that with their scale, I don’t know how you cannot make money but whatever. We’ll see. We’ll see me you know, lift says they’re going to be profitable next year. So so we’ll see. So you’re a VC now a venture capitalist Now, why did you walk away from all of this other stuff to become a VC? Well, in the autumn of my years of my career, I understood that number one, it would be better for my physical health to get out of the wall street grind. I understood it would be better for my mental health to get away from the wall street grind. And frankly, you know, there’s a lot about running big companies and big businesses, that just isn’t fun. I mean, you talk about the regulatory issues. There’s also enormous amounts of administration, personnel management, that it’s just not fun. It’s not the fun part of the business. Right? My sense is that what has always set America apart, made our economy very special. There’s this creative energy that we have in our entrepreneurial class. And it’s just so enjoyable to be around these people that are excited about new ideas. Yeah, you know, their excitement about building new businesses. I mean, joyful. It’s just joyfully damn round. People like that.

Jason Hartman 28:59
It’s Really exciting. You know, I, Tom, I’ll tell you, I have few addictions, but one of them is hanging out with entrepreneurs. I just really, I really, every time I come back from a mastermind meeting or something, I’m just so revved up. It’s really inspiring, you know, to know that these are the people that really are changing the world, not always for the better, but they’re definitely making an impact on it. I mean, it’s it’s truly incredible, but it’s not government. It’s actual people that, you know, most of us know, that are really moving the needle. It’s pretty incredible people with a passion. It’s America’s secret sauce, and it’s something we should treasure. Yeah, I couldn’t agree with you more. You know, every time I go to Europe, and I was born in Europe, by the way, it just feels like it’s encumbered by bureaucracy and old ideas. And I don’t know it’s just not an abundant way to think like in the US is just a much more abundant type of thinking.

Tom 29:59
Jason The perfect example of how regulation and bureaucracy hamper economic growth because they create such barriers to new businesses and many of the European countries.

Jason Hartman 30:13
Yeah, it’s it’s really amazing. You see that the business startup rate in even Germany, right, which would be considered, you know, by far the, the great economy of Europe, right? It’s abysmal compared to the States. It’s just there’s just like nothing going on. And these places, comparatively speaking, has

Tom 30:30
this great tear of what they call middle stat, these middle sized companies which are integrated into the industrial side of Germany’s economy in particular, but very slow on the startup side, though, they are trying to remedy that. And there is a vibrant startup scene in Berlin in particular,

Jason Hartman 30:51
right? I agree. Berlin is like the Austin of Germany, I’d say or the Silicon Valley. Yeah. Very interesting. Are there any questions? I didn’t ask you and Anything you just want to share? I mean, you’ve just got such a tremendous background, you know, maybe anything from Freddie Mac or the mortgage market that we could learn or whatever you want to share. Well, you could ask me why I wrote a book. Yeah. Okay. Why’d you write a book and tell us about Willard straight to Wall Street?

Tom 31:17
Well, you know, my picture is on the cover of my book. And it’s a picture. It was a Pulitzer Prize winning photograph that was on the cover of Newsweek magazine and 1969 of me exiting Willard straight Hall, which is the Student Union Building at Cornell University, and carrying a rifle. I have a butcher knife in my belt. I have a war club hanging from my side.

Jason Hartman 31:46
I just have this you are a radical, right?

Tom 31:48
Oh boy. I just had this look of anger and determination on my face. So a lot of you know, my book is basically two stories one is just my personal Story, personal grit and perseverance, overcoming adversity. You know, one of the first in the wave of black Americans going into corporate America, rising to the top there. So there’s that story. But I also wanted to tell my story as a microcosm of the enormous racial progress that America has made in the last 50 years. I had that gun and I was that look at anger because I was one of those who felt that what had happened in America was treatment of African Americans for 350 years, was going to end in our generation, my generation that had to end and my time my lifetime. I didn’t expect to live very long. I just had to end and I was prepared to fight about it. And America, you know, this is this is just a wonderful country America, it faced a metaphorical crossroads in the 1960s one for to the left, which meant trying to live up to the founding ideals and create of this country, which meant inclusion and efforts towards racial equality, social equality, the right for would have met, oppression and suppression of people like myself and others who were involved in the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Fortunately, America chose the left fork. And that has led to progress in this country, which frankly could not have been imagined 50 years ago, if you had described America today, people 50 years ago, they would have said, That’s not possible. This country could not change that much. And Jason, I wrote my book, in part because our country does not give itself credit for how much we’ve accomplished.

Jason Hartman 33:54
That’s really interesting. You here and, of course, the media. It’s always sensationalism, right? Because that’s what sells. And that’s what gets attention. But you see a lot of people on TV, hear them on the news, whatever, you know, complaining, the minority side complaining that, you know, oh, America is terrible. It’s so oppressive. And I just keep thinking compared to what I know, it’s not perfect, but, but just show me, you know, I know then whip out a couple Scandinavian countries probably is a comparison. But, you know, by and large with a broad population of planet Earth. The US is a pretty darn awesome place. Yeah, in terms of, you know, minority rights and social mobility. I mean, are these people justified in their in their grievances, or should they be more grateful? Where do you

Tom 34:51
know I sympathize with movements like Black Lives Matters when they complain about these incidents of police violence against unarmed Black men and

Jason Hartman 35:00
yeah, that’s really high ground here.

Tom 35:03
But even there I say even though that complaint is legitimate, the truth is such incidents happen 50 times more frequently 50 years ago, and 100 times more frequently 100 years ago, right. So even though it is bad that it’s happening even occasionally now,

Jason Hartman 35:20
it’s not happening that much.

Tom 35:21
The fact is that the reduced incidents represents enormous progress in our country. And with human nature being what it is, we’re never going to be completely free of incidents like that. We’re never going to be completely free of, you know, some forms of racism. We’re never going to be completely free of some forms of hatred. But we should give ourselves credit to me. It’s like, when you raise a child, you cannot do it successfully. If you always harp on the negative then right or what the child does, it’s never good enough. Well, you should have done better. I hope Do better now. You’ve got to give encouragement,

Jason Hartman 36:02
you got to look for the good,

Tom 36:04
see the good. And we need to do that same thing and our social discourse in America, we need to recognize and praise the good, even as we acknowledge that which still needs to be improved. And so that was one of my motivations for writing my book. I hope America can hear that message.

Jason Hartman 36:24
Yeah, I think that’s a very fair statement. very balanced. Please give out your website. Of course, the book is available in all the usual places, if you want to share a website or unwilling to Wall Street is where you can find it on Facebook. Great, good stuff. Well, Tom, thank you so much for joining us and sharing your incredible story. We really appreciate it.

Tom 36:44
Thank you for having me, Jason. I enjoyed chatting with you.

Jason Hartman 36:49
Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you don’t miss any episodes, be sure to check out the show’s specific website and our general website Hartman for Appropriate disclaimers and Terms of Service. Remember that guest opinions are their own. And if you require specific legal or tax advice, or advice and any other specialized area, please consult an appropriate professional. And we also very much appreciate you reviewing the show. Please go to iTunes or Stitcher Radio or whatever platform you’re using and write a review for the show we would very much appreciate that. And be sure to make it official and subscribe so you do not miss any episodes. We look forward to seeing you on the next episode.