RADIOAugust 26, 2025

What you MUST KNOW about Trump's computer chip stock deal

President Trump has announced a deal to buy a 10% stake in computer chip maker Intel. Is this a smart business move that will make the US government money to pay off its debt, or is it just another unconstitutional public-private partnership? Glenn and Stu discuss ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I would love to open -- openly embrace the -- you know, on the surface, there's a new deal with Intel.

And it sounds really smart. And it sounds like, yeah. That's the way we should do business.

It sounds capitalist. It sounds patriotic. But then, again, so did the Patriot Act.

So here's what's happening. Donald Trump is taking $8.9 billion. Money already set aside by the Chips Act. And instead of handing to Intel as a grant, he bought stock in Intel.

Now, that sounds really smart. Right? Sounds like what a businessman would do. Really smart. I'm not going to just give them the money, we'll invest. And that way, we get some profits, when they succeed. So we now own 10 percent of the company. Nonvoting shares. We got it at a discount, and we have $2 billion now worth of paper gains.

I love that! Right? It sounds really good. Why aren't we running this place more like a business? It's pro-capitalist, right? No more government giveaways. Taxpayers are investors. And we benefit when Intel rebounds. Okay. Any other things? Well, yeah. It's really important for national security. We're keeping chip manufacturing at home. We stabilize the economy, without running it. We reassure the markets, and attract other private investors. On paper. It's really good. It's clean. It's efficient. It's savvy.

Now, what is it that's bothering me? Well, it's not exactly the American system. In fact, it might be everything we're not supposed to do. You know, we were never -- government was never supposed to use our taxpayer dollars to be a shareholder in private enterprise.

But, again, we're doing all kinds of things that we've already gone there. Haven't we?

Hasn't the government picked winners and loses now forever?

Haven't they been wasting your money. I would rather extend them a grant. I would rather have it in stock. So if we win, we win. No. We all win. But that's actually the model of state capitalism in China. That's not the free market in the United States. Intel is vital. Absolutely vital. Chips are the lifeblood of anything that will happen for national security. And our economy.

But we cannot get into the habit of -- of -- we can't normalize it anyway.

Washington, DC, buying stock in struggling companies.

Because what's next. Ford? Boeing?

How about your grocery stores?

That's Mamdani, isn't it?

And once that door opens, government no longer just regulates the market. They own a piece of it, now.

What happens after we own a piece of that?

So in 2008, I had a big sponsor.

It was a sponsor that Premiere Radio networks had worked 20 years to get.

We finally landed them. And I had a good working relationship with them.

It was General Motors.

And then the government bailed them out. In 2008. And they promised it was temporary. And I said, great! Call me back, once you've paid them off. I don't -- I don't like this. The government should not be involved.

But they were not going to be involved.

But they were

The first thing they did. Was they cancelled the hydrogen car. Something they really believed right before the election. I know. Because I was talking to him about it all the time. And then after the election, Barack Obama cancels all hydrogen products. And GM was like, yeah, that stupid hydrogen thing. We're with them.

And the precedent was set. And I was out. I was out. I cancelled General Motors. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Business-wise, stupid. Ethically, the right thing to do. And ever since, whenever there's a crisis, that temptation is there. Why not just buy a slice of the company? Why not stabilize it? Make a little profit on it? And that's how you slip to capitalism to corporatism. You know, free markets backed by government winners and losers.

You do not want to go down this road. You know, when we are both the investor and the regulator, which one wins.

Come on!

Not a hard question to answer. Which one wins? Not the regulator. The investor wins. If the investor is also the regulator, look, if we do this, we will make a lot of money, you're going to make a lot of money. You'll have more money for all these projects you want. Okay. All right. Okay.

It's -- it's not -- the taxpayers aren't the one. The company -- the politicians, who really wins? What happens when an administration leans on its own company, for political purposes?

You know what, I think you'll get rid of that hydrogen car. We love the hydrogen car. You know what, I think you'll get rid of that hydrogen car. We hate that hydrogen car. Boy, we hate it.

He -- Donald Trump looks at Intel losing $8.8 billion last year. Lays off 20,000 workers.

Choke hold of Taiwan, South Korea on semi conductors. He wants America protected.

He wants taxpayers to share the upside.

He doesn't want to just bear the cost. We should get the upside. All of those things are good, right?

It's really tempting. But is it what we're supposed to do. Is it the right thing?

I don't like it when Washington holds stock certificates. Not a good thing. It should be reforming taxes. Cutting red tape. Letting capital flow to strong ideas. Making sure national security is cured through policy, but not ownership of these things.

Are you comfortable if the United States just took over AI, or just took it over and said, we're just going to own 10 percent? Oh, they need another bailout. We're just going to own 20 percent. Oh, they need another bailout. Okay. We're going to own 40 percent of that. Do you think that that company wouldn't become beholden to the United States government? And who are they beholden to? The Defense Department? The Deep State? The president, or you?

I think you know the answer to that one. Stu, how do you work around this one. Because I love this idea. I love the fact that we're running things like a business. And if we're giving people loans, why not take a stake? Why not?

STU: Well, first of all, can we step back one little bit and just acknowledge that the original sin here, in the first place, was the Chips Act. The Chips Act was not a good bill in the first place.

And that's not the president -- the current president's fault.

But, you know, he has to live under that law.

And he's trying to improve it. But like, that was a disaster in the first place. And should not have been something that we did, certainly the way that we did it.

With buying into this. Look, I understand, it is better to have some of this money. That, by the way, we're just borrowing and printing anyway. Right?

These are taxpayer dollars that we don't really have. That we're spending on something. That it's good that potentially we have a return. I mean, this was the argument under TARP as well. Where we would go and do all of this. And take control of some of these banks and companies. And they would eventually pay us back. And many of them did, by the way. Many of them did pay us back.

GLENN: With interest. With interest.

STU: Yeah, exactly. And so why not?

Why didn't we do that? We have done it from time to time. Normally, it's been in extreme circumstances. Right? When there's an emergency going on. And I would acknowledge, and I think you were on this, as well, Glenn.

These were not things that we supported at the time. But they were things that the government did at the time. What they saw as a time of financial crisis. And reached in, and took ownership of a bunch of companies.

GLENN: I would say, we went further than not being for them.

STU: I would agree with that analysis.

GLENN: Very much against them.

STU: Very much against them.

The reason for that is: We don't want the government involved in -- you know, jumping into companies and micromanaging companies.

Now, they will say, voting rights.

They will say all sorts of things. We now have a situation where the president of the United States has an interesting interest in Intel's stock price. And like, I know that --

GLENN: Money does not talk, it screams. It's a bad idea. It's a bad idea.

Once the government becomes your partner in business. They're always your partner. Always.

STU: Uh-huh. And I understand where the president is coming from.

Because it -- at some level, it really is important to acknowledge, he's been put in this position to try to make the best out of a bad thing.

Now, I know, you know, the president does really care about the chips. And he does care about these industries, being here in the United States.

That is a -- something that is actually legitimately important. I'm not denying that.

GLENN: Right. He also cares about America doing well, financially. He's tired of America getting screwed. The taxpayers getting screwed every time.

STU: But on that point, because I get what he's saying there. It would be great. Like, we're up a couple billion dollars. Let's say we double our profit. Let's say we make 10 billion dollars off the deal. Nothing wrong with making $10 billion.

Let's acknowledge what this is, though. We have $37 trillion in debt. Making $10 billion does absolutely nothing to this. Nothing.

We're going to waste that -- like, we could just instead, be -- we could have someone actually look at the next spending bill we have. And just cut a few things around the corner, and easily save $10 billion.

It -- the only way that this makes any impact. And this is what makes me nervous. Is if you do it at scale. If you start doing this, in every single company you can think of, that is having problems. Or is in an industry of interest to the United States of America. Then you start getting to a place to where the government is in bed with lots of businesses. And maybe you can make a financial impact. And if we accept this argument now, I'm afraid we accept it then too.

GLENN: But how do we already accept it -- when America embraced public/private partnerships. I haven't accepted that.

I don't -- I'm dead-set against public -- but isn't this a public/private partnership. This is what they were pushing.

STU: Well, this is the concern, right?

Who is cheering this on?

Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders put the -- he actually had this idea, as an amendment, in the Chips Act.

This was his proposal.

He's cheering it on right now. I -- that doesn't mean that every -- you know, everything a Democrat brings up is the wrong idea.

Maybe this was a good one.

You can make that argument.

GLENN: Is he a Democrat or a socialist?

STU: Socialist please. Socialist.

GLENN: So everything a socialist brings up. Probably is fine.

STU: Yeah. Again, it's a road, we should really, really be careful going down.

I would argue, we shouldn't go down it. At his lead to bad things. And it leads to bad things, by the way, when this president is long gone.

It's not just him.

You know, what -- I know we say this all the time. What are Democrats going to do, with this newfound ability to invest in companies?

And -- and, by the way, we should note, Intel doesn't need to accept this. Right? This is -- the Chips Act doesn't require them to sell part of the company. What's happening here is we're pressuring them into this.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: And, you know, I -- I understand the reasoning for that. You brought up really good arguments on this front. We're already suckered into giving these -- these companies money because of the Chips Act. Why not make the situation better?

And Intel is saying, well, they can make our lives miserable. In 25 different ways. Let's partner with them.

I get it on both sides.

That doesn't mean it should be a foundational part of our economy going forward. And, you know, if this is a one time thing. It probably won't be a big deal. If this is a precedent that goes on. It can be.

GLENN: It will be.

Once you start this. Once you start this.

And how long. My whole life, I said, I wish we had a businessman as the president. I wish we had somebody that would look at the country and look at everything. And go, how can we make money?
How can we save money? Let's run this a tighter ship. Well, he's doing that.

Although, we're spending more money.

And he's here. Here he's like, well, let's just offset.

Let's get -- yeah. And he might pick the winner. I don't know if he will or not. But he might -- but tell me the last president that we had, that ever said anything about industry, that you were like, oh, you know what, that was a really good stock tip. No! No!

STU: He would be the guy.

GLENN: Yeah. He would be the one, I think in my lifetime, for sure. Maybe the lifetime of the country.

TPUSA's Turning Point tour LIVE with Glenn Beck

In this poignant segment of Turning Point USA's American Comeback Tour live event, Glenn Beck honors the late Charlie Kirk by revealing his private plan to name Kirk as his successor in conservative media, emphasizing Kirk's unparalleled dedication and achievements. Blending themes of faith, history, and personal resilience, Beck shares life principles on forgiveness and truth while unveiling 'George AI,' a revolutionary tool for exploring American history through digitized artifacts and interactive conversations with Founding Fathers.

Israel and Hamas sign Trump's historic deal. Will it work?

Israel and Hamas have signed phase 1 of President Trump’s peace deal, paving the path for the release of all remaining hostages, hopefully in a few days. Glenn and Stu explain the significance of this historic deal and what it could mean moving forward.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh. Your initial thoughts here on the peace deal?

STU: It's an incredible opportunity. I think it is important to remind ourselves, that this -- these things typically do fall apart. That is essentially your expectation, any time anything like this happens. Part of this is going to be Hamas coming through on promises.

I have very little belief that they are typically able to do such things.

That being said. They probably also -- you know, one of the things -- a friend of mine pointed this out to me. We were going through all of this.

And he said, you know, one thing to think about it: This is, like, not the B team of Hamas. But the R team of Hamas. They've killed so many of the leadership.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

STU: These are people making decisions that were not at the top of this organization and had those ridiculous ideological beliefs that would lead you to October 7th. That's not to mean that Hamas, these people that are left are like, "Hey, you want to invite them over for Thanksgiving."

But I do think there's a possibility here that they're like, you know, maybe this life is not here for us.

GLENN: That would be nice if that were true. I don't know if that were true. But it would be really thyself.

STU: I don't know if that's true. I do think there may be a little bit lower ideological commitment, potentially. And also, the idea that some of these people might be able to make this deal and escape to another third country.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And live life there, in a different way.

GLENN: So the breaking news that just was announced, Israel, their parliament or their cabinet just met or approved phase one of the deal.

And Hamas has just come out and said, they accept phase one of the deal.

That means the hostages will be released either this weekend or Monday.

Any remaining hostage will be released.

STU: I mean, just that.

GLENN: Just that.

STU: If that occurs, it is a massive achievement.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: So far, it is already the greatest opportunity we've had.

And only possible because of his detection to this idea!

GLENN: And his deal-making.

Not just his vision.

But his ability to work all of the parties and find out what all the parties need.

And make it happen.

You know, we're not talking about peace between Gaza, you know, Hamas, and Israel.

We're talking about peace in the Middle East.

STU: Yeah. It's bigger. It's bigger than just Israel.

GLENN: I mean, it's Egypt and Saudi Arabia and -- and Jordan to some extent. And -- and Turkey. All of them getting together and saying, you know what! We'll rebuild Gaza. We want to make it into a very prosperous kind of area. I mean, think of places in Saudi Arabia that are so prosperous. That's the way Gaza could be. So they're all getting together and they're saying, "We will rebuild. We'll oversee. We will try to make everything -- you know, keep everything held."

They will put their money into it, which means they have a lot to lose if it goes awry. And they're all saying, "We can co-exist with Israel."

Three years ago, did you even think that was possible?

STU: Yeah. And, you know, look, there are a lot of places you can go and find non-stop criticism of Donald Trump. They will say terrible things he does, and everything he does is the worst thing ever.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Also, there are plenty of places you can go where you find that everything that he does is the greatest thing of all time.

I hope you realize that's not what we do here. And I -- on a -- I said this -- and you said this as well when we -- when this was unveiled.

Sometimes, you can get -- people are critical of the way Trump handles these situations.
Sometimes. And sometimes there's arguments on that.
Sometimes it's not the best approach.

You know, we were critical of him, for example, how he handled Canada. You know, probably cost Poilievre that election. And I think that's a really bad thing.

GLENN: I do on top.

STU: That being said, this is a great example of where his instincts work perfectly. This is all set up over a long period of foundational stuff from his first term. With the decision he made, to come out and just announce the agreement with Netanyahu. We agreed. We agreed to this peace deal.

Now, in theory, we have no position to agree between these two parties. But he came out and all of the focus had been, look at all the bad things Israel is doing. Look at how bad, they're so evil. They're so bad.

And he said, we agree with Israel. Now we just need Hamas.

And so the world's attention was like, what's Hamas going to say?

Finally, he was able to focus his attention to the appropriate place. To the party that is holding the hostages, to say, hey. How about asking if they want to a freaking cease-fire for once?

He was able to do that. In a way that I think only Donald Trump could achieve. Which leads to this, over a long foundation.

GLENN: And here's another thing.

You know, this guy has walked through wall after wall after wall of fire. Everybody calling him everything. Nazi, every day.

Here's a guy who, you know, in a time period where the whole world is like, the Jews control everything. Donald Trump is run by the Jews.

He not only kept his relationship with Israel solid and helped them, when he thought they were right. But when they were wrong, in his view, he chastised them.

He knew how to do it. And still hold their respect.

And gained the respect of places like Qatar. And say, so Qatar. When he chastised Benjamin Netanyahu and Benjamin Netanyahu had to I think apologize to some degree about what they did in Qatar.

That's when the Middle East went, wait a minute.

He's not being controlled by the Jews! You know what I mean?

That should be a really big wake-up call to everybody who thinks that Donald Trump is just being controlled by the Jews.

No. No. No. He's not.

He does what he thinks is right. And he'll chastise both sides.

And he will support either side. When they're right, to get to a deal. That's good for everybody.

This deal could be amazing.

I don't have any -- and it's not because of this deal.

I happen to -- I read the end of the book. So I know how this ends.

This will not -- you know, this is not --

STU: You skipped ahead?

GLENN: I skipped ahead. I skipped ahead.

STU: Don't ruin anything.

Don't -- no spoiler alerts.

GLENN: I won't. No spoiler alerts.

Let's just say, this might last for a week. It might last for a thousand years. I don't know.

But we will be in this situation again. We all know that. We all know that. But let's take and celebrate peace while we can.

And the hostage is coming back. That is massive. Massive.

And due to Donald Trump.

Today, if you don't like Donald Trump, fine. Fine.

But how do you take this one apart?

Honestly, how do you not claim this is a massive victory, for the whole world?

STU: Well, I can tell you, that a lot of people on the left are rooting for it to collapse, which is a shockingly revealing moment. I mean --

GLENN: Wait. What?

STU: They are -- you know, they're not going to be out there like, we hope this collapse is.

But you know they hope it collapses.

They don't want to give Trump credit for it.

And they would rather have this continue. They would rather have this war go on.

Than admit that the reason it's ending is because Donald Trump was able to negotiate this deal.

That is central!

GLENN: I think anybody who has played politics with the Palestinian, you know, all that stuff. And all the stuff on the streets. That -- that has been a very effective tool for them. And so I would agree.

And they don't want that tool to be taken away.

STU: You think the Hamas wing of the party wants this? You think Rashida Tlaib is all thrilled about Donald Trump's efforts here. They will hear about Ilhan Omar -- how wonderful --

GLENN: Those are extremists.

STU: I mean that. This is a very revealing dividing line on the left. Right?

If there is anything that is ever going to happen, that Donald Trump can be given credit for. That you think this could be clear. John Fetterman. Fetterman has obviously pretty good on this issue. But Fetterman came out, gave a statement that should be basic. Basic. Like, hey, this is good. And I really hope it works. Donald Trump did a good job on this.

That's the type of stuff that should be obvious for everyone to be able to --

GLENN: That's what "Tip" O'Neill would have done. "Tip" O'Neill and Ronald Reagan, they got together. They disagreed. They fought hard, but they had dinner.

Yeah. Because "Tip" O'Neill could say, that was good. That was good. What he did was just good for all of us.

STU: That worked well. Good. I'm glad that happened. You should be glad that happened. We should all be rooting for the success here.

Even if what the -- you know, like, I rooted -- again, I have all sorts of criticisms the way Barack Obama dealt with the Middle East.

Yeah. Plenty of them. And we went over them over and over and over again.

And plenty of issues with specifically the way he went after Osama bin Laden. But on the day that it happened, really happy about.

Very happy that we were able to do it.

Now, look, it's our military that does it. They can say all this stuff too. They can say, oh, well, the real reason is. Blah, blah, blah.

But we can still be happy, that this occurred. And you can still be excited and give credit where credit is due.

GLENN: This is a win for all humankind. For humanity!

For life!

Stopping Hamas from torturing. You know, torturing kidnap victims.

Stopping the bloodshed that was happening because of the war on both sides.

That is a win. Having the possibility of a stable Middle East, at least for a while. That's a win!

That's a win all the way around. Everyone should be happy. I don't care if you like the president or not.

Everyone should be happy that mankind, put one on the chalkboard for all of mankind today.

This is a huge -- never seen -- this is on the good side. Never seen this one before. Didn't see this one coming.

I mean, we should all be able to say, wow!

And thank you. Because he's the -- I really, truly believe, when it comes to negotiating things like this, there is nobody better.

I mean, that's what he does for a living.

And he knows it. He knows how to read people. He knows how to it.

And this is evidence of it.

STU: And he will do things that are so out of the norm. That it resets everybody's thinking. You know, I mentioned --

GLENN: If he wouldn't have done that. If he wouldn't have done that, we wouldn't have all the Middle East signing on to a peace deal.

STU: I respect. What would they have done in a situation like Trump was with Netanyahu?

Their advisers would have said, "Look, this is great. You guys are together on this. Let's go to Hamas. We'll talk to them. We will see if we can get something done. We don't want to ruin it by announcing it publicly. There are times, where that tactic cannot work. But it worked really well here."

He forced them to basically say, "No, we don't want a cease-fire," or, "Okay. We'll go along with this."

And, by the way, you go down this list, there's a lot of stuff -- this is Hamas never, ever having control of this region ever again is built into this agreement. Now they've only talked about -- they're only on phase one here. So we don't know that we get all of this stuff. But like, there's a lot here that really improves the lives of Israelis, of --

GLENN: Palestinians.

STU: Arab Israelis in the region. You know, Palestinians. Other Arabs in the region.

GLENN: Saudi Arabia. Everybody.

STU: Yeah. Not to mention, just globally.

Right? This is a positive.

GLENN: Look what this does.

That's Turkey. So that separates Turkey from Syria, which is right in bed with -- with Iran.

I mean, think about how this box is. If you have the entire Middle East, now operating with Israel, and saying, we have a right to exist. Think about what that means, for this block, now to Iran. Iran doesn't mind being a pariah.

But now, everyone is officially saying, aisled do business with them.

STU: We will choose business over these guys.

That's a big statement in that world.

GLENN: That's a big deal. Big deal.

Big investors buying gold: What does this mean for your dollar?

Gold has reached a record high price of over $4,000 an ounce. So, what does that mean for your dollar? Financial expert Carol Roth joins Glenn to explain why this news is so concerning and why many big investors have started to buy gold.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, Carol Roth, welcome to the program. How are you?

CAROL: I'm doing great, Glenn! I'm actually celebrating my 26th wedding anniversary today, so it's a blessed day.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Congratulations! Congratulations! It's weird. I'm coming up on my 26th on January.

CAROL: Oh, fabulous. Fabulous. It's a good amount of time to be married, yes.

GLENN: It is. It is. So, Carol. Let's talk about the price of gold hitting --

CAROL: It's over 4,000.

GLENN: Which is nuts. And I don't think people really understand. I don't think the average -- this is my guess, and I want you to correct me. I don't think the average person is buying gold. I think this gold-buying is happening from sovereign funds and central banks, mainly. Also, Asian markets. I don't think Americans really understand what $4,000 an ounce means. Can you explain it?

CAROL: Absolutely. I think the world both, investors and central banks are catching up to the things that you and I have been talking about for years. So, you know, we're ahead. We warned everyone. And now this is a little bit of catch-up. Interestingly, you know, as you noted, the average American is very behind in terms of what gold means.

When you look at Chinese households. When you look at Indian household. There are estimates that each one of those country's households owns up to 30,000 tons of gold at this point. Which to put that in context, the US government owns 8,133 times.

GLENN: So the Indian households, all of them combined, 27,000 tons.

CAROL: Right.

GLENN: What we say we have, is he 8100. Wow!

CAROL: So the households in China and India are really ahead of the curve. When you look at data for the US, it's a little bit hard to get good data. But from what I've seen, the estimates are only about ten to 11 percent of US households at all, have exposure to gold.

Now, I know that your audience is very sophisticated and is ahead of the curve. And I would imagine blows through that number. But just shows how sort of unprepared US households are in general.

GLENN: When you're looking at Indian and Chinese households that own gold. Does that include all the gold jewelry?

CAROL: Yes. Yes. That's actually, particularly in India. One of their preferred ways of procuring gold. Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. So gold has -- gold has shot up over $4,000 in record times. I mean, breathtaking time. What is causing that?

CAROL: Okay. So there are a confluence of factors, and I think the two most important factors, which, of course, are linked. Are what Wall Street is now calling the debt debasement trade. Which they're just caught up. And gave it a cute name.

And changing the global financial order. And they're very much linked.

GLENN: Yeah. Tell me, what is it? The debt debasement? What is that?

CAROL: They're doing the debt debasement trade, which is just basically what you and I have been talking about, which is our unsustainable fiscal position.

GLENN: All right.

CAROL: And what all of the money printing that we've seen over the past 17 years, what that has done to our purchasing power, and how that's going to catch up to us.

So as a reminder, our debt to GDP is at emerging market crisis levels. We were at 120 police levels of GDP.

We're running deficits equivalent to a war-time level. Or recession level, while we still have growth.

Which is crazy. We have interesting interest rate -- or interest payments that are outpacing defense spending.

So everyone is now finally catching on to the fact that this is an unsustainable financial position.

And it is going to be very difficult to get out of. Without there being some sort of additional debasement of our currency. Which is a fancy way of saying, a diminishment of your purchasing power.

What's really crazy. There's a chart that's been going around, and they did kind of a comparison of different asset classes. Price in US dollars, price in gold.

So if I look from the end of September 2018, out seven years, and you look at the top 100 NASDAQ nonfinancial companies. It's called the NDX. In US dollar terms, that is up 236 percent. So you think you're super rich, right?

But in gold terms, solid money that doesn't -- you know, that doesn't have its value debased. It's only up 4.7 percent.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CAROL: Yeah. Of course. The S&P 500 up 133 percent over that period in dollar terms. It's down 27.6 percent in gold terms.

And what's called the Case-Shiller Home Price Index, which is the value of homes, the way that's measured. Dollar terms, 60 percent. Oh, houses. So expensive In gold terms, it's down 50 percent.

In fact, right now, it takes less gold in terms of ounces, to buy the median single-family house, than it has in decades and decades and decades.

So it goes to show, that even though we see these dollars. They're buying less and less. And now, you and I were talking about this forever.

But now Wall Street is catching on. Oh, that's not a great thing. And so in terms of preserving the hard-earned capital, we need something that is that -- that hedge. That mutual hedge that is going to retain its value.

And that's why more investors, institutional investors. Funny enough, a lot of millennials, more than anyone starting to really get in to gold.

GLENN: You know why? Because millennials have not been trained their whole life. Trust the system!

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: And they see it clearly. And they look at it, and they're like, well, this doesn't make any sense at all. And they're going to spend this.

And they will wreck the dollar and everything else. They just see it without being trained over and over and over again. Like, trust the system. They don't trust the system.

And once you realize, the system is rigged in a million different ways. And the system is not telling you the truth.

I mean, that is amazing. When you look at the stock market. And you say, it's actually down, when you compare it in US dollars. To gold!

What's happening -- let me explain this to the audience. What all that means is: Gold is only going up in dollars. It's staying -- it's staying stable. But it's costing you more because of inflation. The dollars are buying less! So it looks like you're paying more, but you're really not. It looks like the stock market is going up, but it's really not! It's what it costs to get in with dollars. If you're going in with gold. You'll actually see that if it was all done in gold, the stock market is down. The price of housing is town.

It's the dollar. It takes more dollars to buy, than it does with gold, which holds its value.

That is -- if people could understand that one thing, that changes all the conversations of, the government has to do something to make housing more affordable. No, they don't. They have to stabilize the dollar. They have to stop spending so much money.

CAROL: Yeah, I mean, if you think of the three definitions of money, it is a medium of exchange. You know, how you helped to exchange goods.

It's a unit of account, which we say, things are priced in dollars, and it's supposed to be a store value. The unit of account, that you just talked about. My friend Steve Forbes has a great analogy, and he talks about other measurements.

You know, imagine that your clock, you know, one day, at 12 o'clock, you know, means midnight. And another day, 3 o'clock means midnight. Or 6 inches to measure a curtain one day. And then the same measurement is like a foot, a different day.

You can't have -- a consistent measurement if the unit of account continues to change. And that's what we've been seeing here with the dollar. And unfortunately, it has not been to our favor.

Which means, that when you work really hard to earn something and it's valued in a dollar, that over time, that -- that work that you put out, your productivity is worth less and less.

And so what gold is meant to do. It's meant to be Capitol preservation. It's not a risk asset. It's not meant to take on risk. And maybe go up a ton. And maybe go down a ton. It's really meant to be a counterbalance to what you have earned. So that you can preserve your purchasing power.

GLENN: You know, I've been saying this for a long time. That you put your money. And I have money in the stock market. You put the money in the stock market.

If things really go awry, go ahead. You're going to cash out for an awful lot of money. But those dollars. It will be paid back to you in dollars.

Those dollars will be worth less, even though there's more of them stacked up, than that ounce of gold, or, you know, that 10 ounces of gold, or whatever you had!

The stock market is paid in dollars. And so as the inflation goes up.

But gold keeps its value!

Keeps its value and hold it steady.

So, yeah. You will be paying more in dollars if you try to sell your gold. But that will continue to increase while stock markets will go down. Am I right?

CAROL: It's a counterbalance. So if things were to shift, and for some reason, you know, things were to change with the dollars, which we would need a lot of different catalysts. Then your gold goes down. It's a counterbalance, which is why it's important to have that diversification in your portfolio. And to have the gold hedge.

What's interesting, Glenn. Just the history, we're talking about millennials.

You know, they went through the great recession. Financial crisis.

They're kind of keyed into this. But if you think about when we came out of the '70s with this crazy inflation. We came out of the gold standard. It used to be very commonplace for a financial adviser to sit down and say, okay.

We've been through this. And so you should be putting, you know, five to 10 percent of your portfolio in gold. As the stock market took off in dollars. And became this big thing.

And they started seeking fees. That went away. Financial advisers, who don't get paid sometimes at all, when you allocate to gold. Stop recommending it.

GLENN: Yep.

CAROL: And now we're seeing a shift back, now we're seeing, you know, oh, yes. You should have some. Some of the big names out there saying, even more.

GLENN: Ray Dalio just came out and said, 15 percent.

CAROL: Yes, we've seen big names like that, anywhere from ten to 20.

And when they surveyed high net worth investors, which are $250,000 in assets or more, they're averaging right now, 21 percent of their holdings in gold.

So it's a very big flip in recent years, on how this is being viewed bit people who have accumulated those dollars and are worried about them.

GLENN: Okay. So let me just summarize here before we move on. On to some other questions.

That is exactly what my grandfather who lived through the great depression said. What are the people with big large amounts of money doing?

I want to do that. And if I did do that. I would be better off in the great depression.

You just heard it, 20 percent or more, right?

From big dollars.

They're investing in gold. 20 percent!

You should -- you should have some!

CAROL: And it's interesting. Some of the portfolios we're seeing is coming from not only the equity peace, but from the fixed-income peace, which is pretty interesting too.

GLENN: Amazing.

Unmasking Antifa: The Dark Truth Behind Its Well-Funded Network | Glenn TV | Ep 461

The cities of Portland and Chicago are turning into war zones. Federal agents have been ambushed, police have been ordered to stand down, and mayors are defying the Constitution. It’s insurrection in plain sight. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to uncover the hidden support and funding networks propping up Antifa. Glenn debunks the myth that Antifa is decentralized and leaderless, tracing connections from Soros to Tides and other shadowy nonprofits. Plus, independent journalist Nick Sortor joins from outside an ICE facility in Portland, where he was wrongfully arrested by police following attacks by Antifa members.