Will Our Economic Bubble Burst Before the Election?

Harry Dent, author of the new book The Sale of a Lifetime and editor of Economy and Markets, joined The Glenn Beck Program on Thursday to discuss the economic crisis facing America and what experts are calling an imminent crash of the stock market.

RELATED: Entrepreneur Patrick Byrne on Post-election Economy: We’re Careening Towards a Cliff

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• What's the artificial bubble that's about to burst?

• Is Glenn going to sell all of his stocks?

• What does Harry Dent recommend for investors?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Harry Dent, author of the new book The Sale of a Lifetime, editor of Economy and Markets at HarryDent.com.

Welcome, harry, how are you?

HARRY: Yeah, nice to be back, Glenn.

GLENN: In the 1980s, you kind of woke up to the stock market cycle. And you began to track this in a different way than everybody else. And you called the bubble of the '90s. You called the bubble of the early 2000s and 2008. And I've been following you for a while. And the one that is coming is gigantic. Would you agree?

HARRY: Yeah, it is. Because, you know, we have two natural bubbles with tech bubble and internet and then with the Baby Boomers peak and spending, which was into 2007, which like you said, we predicted 20 years before that happened, that we we'd have a greater boom than anybody thought. But then it would peak around 2007.

Of course, we've had quantitative easing ever since to try to ease the pain, and that still didn't work. But now we've got a third. And what I hate about it, totally artificial bubble that's all about printing free money. You know, $12 trillion of free money printed around the world.

And since zero interest rates were not low enough, now we've got to go negative in more and more countries. This is insanity to just force people to keep buying back their own stocks with companies or borrowing that little bit more or speculating more. Traders and stuff. And that's all we're growing on. So this is much more dangerous.

And I call this the third and final bubble. And when we peak into the '60s and early '70s, we had three higher highs in the market and three bigger crashes. And, of course, the last one, '73 to '74, was the big one. And that's what I'm seeing here, that 2017 to 2019, approximately, is going to be the time when we see a crash that's bigger and deeper than 2008 and '9. And it actually puts us into more of a depression than just a great recession.

When you grow debt, two and a halftimes GDP for 40 years, you're going to have a debt bubble. And that's going to cause financial asset bubbles and stocks and real estate commodities and everything else. And those bubbles are going to have to unwind. They have to, or you can't go forward in life. The economy can't move forward.

So we've been putting this off now for seven, eight years, which means, it's like a drug addict taking more and more to keep from coming down from the high. When you finally get hit and go to detox, it's not going to be pretty.

GLENN: But you know, a lot of people have taken this hit. Greece is probably the biggest. They've taken their hit.

Germany, they're still out of control. But they're still thinking that they're going to now bail-in. China spends more and more money. I mean, in your book, you talk about these ghost cities that are -- I mean, I was struck by this.

The Changsha City Sky Dream. You write: It was meant to become the world's tallest building at 2,749 feet, 202 stories, built in the shortest time. Imagine building a 202 story building. The Chinese wanted to build it in 90 days.

HARRY: Yeah.

GLENN: We built --

HARRY: It was the first prefab skyscraper. Oh, my gosh.

(chuckling)

GLENN: It's now a fishing hole. The whole thing was stopped and collapsed, and now they just -- the big hole in the ground where the foundation was. They've just filled it with water, and the locals are using it to raise fish.

But, anyway, there's another country completely out of control.

HARRY: You know, it's worse than that, Glenn. I mean, now the latest thing, Shenzhen, which is the most bubbly, large city there, they're now selling apartments, 66 square feet, the size of a decent closet, for $132,000, seven to ten times the income of the people in that city to get a closet to live in. I mean, if that's not a bubble, I don't know what is.

GLENN: So, Harry, the whole thing looks like it's coming down. Is there going to be any system that survives?

HARRY: Well, what happens at a time like this, this is when you can't listen to your stockbroker or even a good financial adviser. Because every -- you're going to have a big reset. We've had bubbles and everything, from this endless low and zero interest rates and endless stimulated economy and printing of money. And this is always going to happen, when this happens throughout history.

So everything has to reset. We even have a bond bubble. Normally, treasury bonds would be a safe place to go longer term. But they're going to have to at least correct it first from their own bubble, from central banks pushing down their yields to zero and negative, before they can grow again. And stocks have to come down. And real estate -- commodities have already crashed. I've been telling people for years, "When bubbles burst, it's not 20, 30, 40 percent. It is 70, 80, 90." And commodities have already collapsed, 70 to 80 percent, proving that when bubbles burst, they crash. They don't just go down slowly, and they don't just correct. And that's going to have to happen to everything else. So there's nowhere to hide. So the thing you do is you just get out.

I'm with HSBC. We said, hey, we're looking like we're going to break a key trend line up, which we did this morning. And the markets could be starting to crash again. And I never know exactly when it's going to happen. And the market never makes it easy. But it is going to be nasty. And one of the other things we've warned people, almost every bubble has had this happen, especially in stocks.

The first crash, even though the bubble is going to end up going down 80 percent on average, the first crash is going to be 40 to 45 percent in two to three months. And that happened in China last year. That happened in 1929. That happened in the tech bubble. It happened in the Nikkei bubble in Japan. And that's what we do in this book. We look at all major bubbles in history and say, "Look, these are not black swans when they crash. They build predictably over a period of time. They grow exponentially. But when they crash, they crash at least twice as fast. And half of that happens in the first two to three months." So you're an idiot if you don't get out a little early. If you want to wait until it's proven, you're going to be down 40 percent before you can react. That's not good investment strategy.

GLENN: So, Harry, I'm the average person, I don't have -- you know, I have a 401(k) or if I have a stockbroker. I barely even know his name.

HARRY: Right.

GLENN: And I go to the stockbroker, and they're going to say, "Look, keep it in. You know, this is long-term. You're going to lose money now, but you're not planning on pulling it out for another 20 years anyway. You leave it in."

HARRY: Yep. And that is why you cannot listen to these people now. Eighty percent of the time or more of that is right. But I tell people all the time, "When you see a major long-term generational spending wave peak, like in '29 or '68, and especially when you see a bubble like 1929 -- 1929 crash was 89 percent in stocks in less than three years, and it took 24 years to get back to even. If you had been a retiring person with a 401(k) plan back then, you would have been dead before you got back to even.

So that is not -- stocks don't always come back, not when you see a major bubble burst and/or when you see a long-term trend. Even in '68, that was not as much of a bubble boom.

But when the Bob Hope generation stopped spending, and when inflation and OPEC set in, it took 54 years to get back to even on that. Manhattan real estate, it crashed the most in the '30s. The greatest city in the world, supposedly, which people think can't go down.

Took into the mid-50s even longer than stocks to get back to even. So you have to get out of the way. And what we do in the book is we say, "Look, there's going to be different sectors over the, next, two, three, four, five years that are going to crash and bottom."

And, you know, we show models for bubbles to show, okay. You can know about how much downside there is. In real estate, it's more like 50 to 60 percent. In stocks, it's more like 70 to 80. In commodities, 80 to 90.

When you see that bubble get erased, then you can get back in long-term and listen to your financial adviser again.

But right now, they will tell you the wrong thing. I can guarantee you. They will just say, "It's all right. You're diversified."

Diversification didn't help in 2008 and '9. And it will help less now. And this is the final bubble crash. There's no way the fed can pull this stunt again if we go into a worst downturn. They're going to lose all credibility.

So you got to just get out of the way. And I'm just saying, look, we have four major indicators, which you mentioned a lot of them earlier, that all point down the same time into late 2000 (inaudible) -- we just got about a three-year period here of extreme danger, after that, you can feel better about stepping back in.

But, hey, what's it to miss three years of stock games when the stock market has, by the way, gone nowhere in the last couple of years, and commodities have only gone down?

So it's bubbled up so much that we think there's less than this. And Baron Rothschild always said, "The secret to my wealth was I always sold a little early."

GLENN: Harry, the -- you say that have cash on hand.

HARRY: Yes.

GLENN: I read a story yesterday that, you know, cash is crashing everywhere. And it's crashing because the central banks can't control it anymore. Our own central bank -- the Federal Reserve, has a white paper out, an internal white paper that was released that shows if this next recession hits, to make any impact, they believe they have to print $4 trillion in bailout stimulus money. And they said, "We're not even sure that would work." I mean, what happens to cash? Are you concerned about cash?

HARRY: I tell you, one of the things I show in the book is how all -- the total financial assets, loans, you know, mortgages, stocks, bonds, everything -- it's about $300 trillion, far beyond stretched any time in history. Can't even compare it.

That's $300 trillion. And in a time like the 1930s when these bubbles de-leverage. I'm talking about a minimum $120 trillion in financial assets, disappearing and not coming back for a long time.

So I would say, if the central banks want to offset the next downturn, they're going to have to print 100 trillion or more worldwide. I don't think they can get away with that.

So 4 trillion would not be enough. They don't know what they're talking about.

GLENN: I know.

EVAN: But they're just trying to slide by and keep the bubble going until they retire from office, like Bernanke or, you know, Obama now and any other president. Everybody just wants to push this thing down the road until the next administration or fed chairman comes in. Because somebody is going to have to take the consequences. You don't get something for nothing. If there's nothing I've learned in life, that's the number one lesson: You don't get something for nothing. And we've had the biggest for nothing economy for decades, but particularly since the financial crisis in 2008 and '9, when we've been living on printed money. You can't solve a debt crisis by creating more debt and printing more money. Because that's how you got there in the first place, printing money through debt. This is crazy.

GLENN: Harry, do you believe that you can trust the banks to keep your money in?

HARRY: No. Because they lend money out. And they've got -- I mean, Deutsche Bank is down 92 percent since its peak in 2007, and continuing to go down because they've got $55 trillion in derivative exposures. You know, four times or whatever -- six times the GDP of Germany or whatever. And bad loans in Italy and bad loans in Germany, bad loans with frackers in the United States.

You know, Italian and German banks and more and more banks have bad loans. And when those loans go bad, they only have 10 percent capital, which Deutsche Bank only has 3 percent because they've been battered. And you start losing money on loans. And all of a sudden, oops, you don't have the money to give depositors back because they lend against your deposits. And they're your deposits, not yours. They don't just raise capital and lend out money.

That's what a normal financial institution should do. They pledge ten percent of our deposits. And then like in the Depression, when those loans go bad, they're like, "Well, you know, we said we had your deposits, but we actually don't. We lost it. We lent it out, 10:1 to your reserves, in deposits, and we never -- and we didn't get it back." So you can't. You have to have your money in a brokerage account. I prefer to be with an independent firm that only does transactions. There's not invest in investment banking or speculate in the markets or lend money from mortgages online or anything. And you just have your money in your own name. They cannot lend against an account in your own name. They can lend against your checking or savings account.

GLENN: Okay. Harry, I've got literally ten seconds. I need a yes or a no on this. Do you think this bubble is going to happen fast enough to affect the election?

HARRY: Possibly, because we just made a big break today. So we could be down 10 percent in a matter of weeks. And, yes, a down market helps the outsider like Trump, and it hurts the insider like Clinton. We've said that for a long time.

GLENN: It could.

Okay. My grandfather -- my grandfather lived through the Depression, and he always said the people who made money during the Depression were the people that had money during the Depression that got their money out.

HARRY: Exactly.

GLENN: That's the premise of Harry's book, The Sale of a Lifetime. Everywhere now. The Sale of a Lifetime. Harry, always good to have you on. Thank you so much for the warning today.

HARRY: Okay. Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet.

Featured Image: Screenshot of Harry Dent from The Glenn Beck Program

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?

Who will be Kamala Harris' VP pick?

JIM WATSON / Contributor, Chris duMond / Stringer, Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Over the weekend, President Joe Biden officially dropped out of the 2024 presidential election and put forward his endorsement behind his Vice President Kamala Harris.

Glenn recently predicted that Biden would step down due to the mountain of pressure within his party to do so. But now that we are here we are faced with an all-new line of questions, like, who will be the candidate on the Democratic ticket? Who will be their pick for vice president?

As of now, the answer to the first question seems to be Kamala Harris, who received the support of the president and several prominent democrats. It's still too early to call for certain, and Glenn doesn't think it's likely, but assuming Kamala becomes the Democrat nominee, who will her VP pick be? There are endless possible options, but there are a 5 big names that could prove beneficial to Harris' campaign:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

Bill Pugliano / Stringer | Getty Images

Governor Newsom has spiked in popularity within his party since his taking office in 2019 due to his scathing criticisms of President Trump and other Republicans. Newsom has been a popular contender as a possible Biden replacement, and a future presidential bid seems likely.

His widespread recognition may be a boon to Kamala's ticket, but the California governor comes with a dark side. Newsom was famously nearly recalled as Governor in 2021, hanging on to his office by a narrow margin. He also faced criticism for his hypocrisy during the COVID lockdowns, attending large gatherings while the rest of his state was locked inside. There's also the issue that both Newsom and Kamala are from California, meaning that if they were to appear on the same ticket, that ticket would lack geographical balance and would potentially lead to a Constitutional issue that would force the duo to forfeit all 54 of the states' Electoral College votes.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro

Tom Williams / Contributor | Getty Images

Another prominent Democrat Governor, Josh Shapiro has also been floated as a potential VP pick. Governor Shapiro has become a viable pick due to his well-received performance as Pennslyvania's Governor. The governor has good support within the swing state due to his handling of the I-95 bridge collapse, the train derailment in East Palestine, which had effects on his state, and the assassination attempt on the former president last week. Shapiro would bring much-needed support from the swing state if he was put on the ticket.

That being said, Shapiro has little time to build nationwide name recognition before the DNC in August and the November election. This would be Shapiro's debut on the national stage, and he would find himself in the most unforgiving situation possible.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg

FREDERIC J. BROWN / Contributor | Getty Images

Former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and opponent of Biden during the 2020 Democratic primaries, "Mayor Pete's" name recognition might be what Kamala needs on her presidential ticket. Buttigieg rose to popularity during the 2020 election due to his youth and status as "openly gay." Buttigieg has served as the Secretary of Transportation during the Biden administration for the past four years and has formally endorsed Harris.

Nevertheless, Buttigieg has some dark spots on his resume. The East Palestine train derailment disaster has besmirched his reputation as Secretary of Transportation. And while his youth may work in his favor when compared to the other elderly members of our federal government, it also means Buttigieg lacks the experience and prestige that other politicians enjoy.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Noam Galai / Stringer | Getty Images

Yet another governor of a crucial swing state, Whitmer was elected in 2018, two years after President Trump was elected, helping secure the state for the Democrats. Whitmer is known for her strong opposition to Trump, both during his presidency and his reelection campaign. Whitmer serves as co-chair for the Biden-Harris campaign and as vice chairperson of the DNC, which gives her influence over the Democratic party, something that would come in handy as a Vice President. Gov. Whitmer also established the Fight Like Hell PAC, which is dedicated to helping Democrats get elected and to stopping Trump by any means.

On the other hand, in a statement following Biden's resignation from the election, Governor Whitmer stated that her role “will remain the same.” It is also worth noting that if she were to be chosen as Kamala's VP, that would make their ticket all-female, which may foster some "woke points," but is politically risky.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear

Lexington Herald-Leader / Contributor | Getty Images

Andy Bashear has seemingly beaten the odds twice, having been elected and reelected as the Governor of Kentucky, despite the deep-red nature of the state. Beshear, who has moderate tendencies, would be a boon to the Harris campaign as he has a track record of reaching rural, typically conservative regions where Democrats tend to struggle. He is also known for his propensity to talk about his Christian faith and willingness to work with Republicans, which are traits that might help win over moderates.

But, like Gov. Shapiro, Bashear has very little time to whip up national support and recognition. He also is unlikely to be very much help for the Harris campaign in winning over important swing states.

Five times Glenn had J.D. Vance on his show and where he stands on key issues

CHANDAN KHANNAMANDEL NGAN / Contributor | Getty Images

We finally have an answer to the long-awaited question of who Trump will pick for his running mate, and it's none other than Ohio Senator and friend of the show, J.D. Vance. At the RNC in Milwaukee, Trump officially accepted the party's nomination as the Republican candidate and announced J.D. Vance as his running mate.

Glenn has had Senator Vance on the show several times to discuss everything from DEI to the Southern Border. If you are looking to familiarize yourself with the next potential Vice President, look no further, here are five conversations Glenn had with Trump's VP pick:

Why Biden Won't Stop "Racist" Government DEI Programs, But Trump Would

How Trump’s Trials Could HELP Him in the 2024 Election

Could THIS new Senate bill DOOM a Trump presidency?

MIDTERM UPDATE: What Republicans must do to WIN BACK the Senate

'Greatest risk of a terrorist attack in 20 years': Senator SLAMS 'atrocious' Biden move