WHEN INVESTING BECOMES A LIFESTYLE YOU WEAR IT!

NEW MERCH ALERT - WEALTHY RED - Limited Quantities - Grab Yours Today! CLICK HERE

THE WHITE HOUSE OF CARDS…

Welp…it seems like the economic shoes keep dropping. 

First, it was last week’s weak demand in the 20-year treasury bond auction in Japan, which created a domino effect carrying over to a weak 20-year treasury auction in the U.S, which had a negative impact on equities. 

Then, the headlines hit—that a panel of three judges at the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan blocked most of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, ruling that he exceeded his legal authority by imposing global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The news broke on May 28th, ironically the same evening Nvidia was set to announce their earnings. 

This not only took the impact from what was an incredible quarter of resilience, considering the recent 5.5-billion-dollar China charge, which turned out to be smaller by a billion at 4.5 billion—but it ripped the scab off of an already infected tariff sore causing a fresh wave of uncertainties to engulf the markets. The Trump administration in response, immediately appealed the decision and sought an emergency stay from higher courts.

A federal appeals court temporarily reinstated Trump’s tariffs a day after a trade court ruled that it exceeded the authorities granted to the president.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington temporarily blocked the lower court’s decision on Thursday, but provided no reasoning for the decision, only giving the plaintiffs until June 5th to respond and the government to respond by June 9th.

The stay will last at least until mid-June, but the full appeals process could take several months before a final decision is reached. Whether this act was politically motivated or not it had the earmarks of dissension and the stench of hardline politics.

Blocking the tariffs in the middle of the negotiations was like clotheslining the president as he was about to cross the finish line. Again, making the U.S look less unified and weak posing the international question…where is the sense of urgency if none of the extreme reciprocal tariffs will stick?

The biggest benefit of the extreme tariffs was the sense of urgency and the pressure it put on countries to make a deal. The gold is hidden in the obliteration of all non-tariff barriers as it will open up international boarders to American products. 

Meanwhile, Jamie Diamond was on his bull horn once again, sounding the debt crises and deficit alarm at the Reagan National Economic Forum. The alarm was centered around the bond market cracking with debt to GDP being around 124% and the deficit approaching 7% up from 6.4% in 2024.

He agrees with the importance of a strong military and an even stronger military and economic alliance.

He stated that America is spending money at a wasteful rate like a drunken sailor with the exception that a sailor is spending his own money, America is spending the taxpayers money. 

Speaking of taxpayers, he also stated that we need to fix our school systems and healthcare so we could compete at a higher level. 

But more importantly, he stressed the pressures that ordinary citizens are dealing with in terms of cost, and repeatedly warned that if the bond market cracks, combined with a slowing consumer—if we go into a recession the deficits could shoot up to 10%.

The personal consumption expenditure report pointed to an already slowing consumer. And if the tax cut bill gets through the Senate, it could do more harm than good in terms of raising debt levels on an already tapped out economy. 

What we need is growth that increases GDP and a fiscal restraint on spending to shrink the deficits. Until then, the White House is literally playing with fire in a house of cards. 

WHEN INVESTING BECOMES A LIFESTYLE YOU WEAR IT!

NEW MERCH ALERT - BILL GATES BLACK - Limited Quantities - Grab Yours Today! CLICK HERE

SHOULD MARRIAGE BE A BUSINESS DECISION?…

Question…has America become too much of a microwave society to recognize the benefits of marriage? Americans are getting married at a rate of 5.8 per 1000 down from 8.2 per 1000.

Although approximately 2.16 million Americans are getting married a year, the rate of people that are getting married is down 41% overall. And shockingly, the rate of divorce dropped from 4.0 per 1000—2.3 to 2.5 per 1000, down 42.5% to 37.5%.

The numbers are very telling in two ways. First, the significance of marriage is losing its purpose, and secondly, people are realizing that it’s too expensive to be single. 

Especially, during trying economic times or economic downturns. If people looked at the economics of two incomes in a marriage as opposed to the economics on the solo income of a single person, perhaps marriage would make more dollars and sense. 

Now obviously, the economics of being married shouldn’t be the first consideration, but when you look at the cost to live, what people deem to be a happy and successful life, in the words of ‘Rob Base’—these days—it takes two incomes to make everything go right.

The average cost for a functioning household is 73,000 a year, which makes being single more of a financial situation in a society where money dominates the social standard. With this being the case, besides love, should we be thinking of marriage as a business or financial decision? 

Is love a prerequisite or should a great credit score and investment plan be the standard? 

Many societies, especially in colonial America and earlier—marriage functioned as a contract between families to secure wealth, property, alliances, and social status—making it more of a business contract than a love-based relationship.

I subscribe to the thought process that we are stronger together. But having two incomes doesn’t make a household if there isn’t a joint consensus. Which also speaks to the onboarding interview. Just as chemistry and compatibility is an expectation, knowing that finances contribute to 20% to 40% of all divorces—it’s probably a great idea to marry financially right as well with a shared vision for a prosperous future. 

The average age at first marriage in the United States as of 2024-2025 is approximately 30.2 years for men and 28.6 to 29.2 years for women. For historical context, in the 1860s the average marrying age for men was 26 and 22 for women.  In the 1950s, the average marrying age was about 23 for men and 20 for women. 

If we were to look at the finances of a 31-year-old man and a 28 year old female, the average income of this age group is between  $61,058.40 and $66,904.53, which creates a $127,963 household.

When you calculate the take home pay for a married couple filing jointly with a combined income of $128,000 in 2025, their federal taxable income after the standard deduction ($29,200 for 2025) would be about $98,800. This puts them mostly in the 12% and 22% tax brackets.

A rough estimate for federal taxes owed would be about $13,000 to $15,000, depending on deductions and credits. This means their approximate take home pay (after federal tax, before other deductions like Social Security, Medicare, or state tax) would be around $113,000 to $115,000 per year.

Now, if they lived in a state like New York—Social Security & Medicare:

• Social security would amount to approximately $7,936 (6.2%).

• Medicare would total approximately $1,856 (1.45%).

• Total FICA $9,792.00

New York State Tax:

• Standard deduction: $16,050

• NY taxable income: $111,950

• Tax: About $5,600

Estimated Take-Home Pay: $128,000

• $13,000 (federal)

• $9,792 (FICA)

• $5,600 (NY state)

Total = ~$99,600 per year

This breaks down to $8,300 of monthly household incomes.

Now, taking the average household expenses of $73,000 a year and dividing by 12 (6083.33) will give you $2216.67 of net free cash flow.

Your household’s free cash flow is the source of your wealth. 

Let’s say you sacrificed and invested all free cashflow for 25 years in an index that mimicked the S&P 500.

At the ages of 53 and 56, your liquid net worth would be $3,195,134.41.

For a single person earning 66k a year, the take home pay would be approximately $4,173 monthly, so unless they live at home with their parents or a significant other or friends you can go broke being single. 

Not to mention the cash outlay involved in the great chase and the smoke and mirrors of courting. 

Marriage may not be a business, but I am happy it’s my business. 

WHEN INVESTING BECOMES A LIFESTYLE YOU WEAR IT!

NEW MERCH ALERT - BUY THE DIP NAVY - Limited Quantities - Grab Yours Today! CLICK HERE

Quick Links…

Bombs Away…

Keep Your Eye On The Bond Market…

Thank you for reading, we appreciate your feedback—sharing is caring.

Kevin Davis Founder of Investment Dojo and Author of The C.R.E.A.M. Report