CO-HOST | Make Money by Using AI for Better Financial Decisions (Without Letting It Make Them for You)

Summary

Podcast Summary: Travis Makes Money

Episode: Make Money by Using AI for Better Financial Decisions (Without Letting It Make Them for You)

Host: Travis Chappell (with co-host Eric)
Air Date: July 14, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the evolving role of artificial intelligence (AI) in personal finance, particularly how people are using AI tools to inform—but not make—critical financial decisions. Travis and Eric break down a new Financial Planning Association study comparing major AI tools, explore the potential and limitations of AI-generated financial advice, discuss industry bias and legal challenges, and stress the importance of individual responsibility. The conversation also veers into parallels with gambling, driving home themes of risk and self-accountability.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. AI Tools and Financial Advice

• FPA Study: Eric presents findings from a Financial Planning Association study that tested seven AI tools (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Deepseek, Meta AI, Perplexity) using identical financial scenarios.
  • Quote (Eric, 03:48): "Emergency fund advice was all over the place. Recommendations range from needing $21,000 to $37,500."
  • AI Bias: Some models changed advice based on race or gender, with one giving more conservative advice to Black households for identical profiles.
  • Consistency: AI is most reliable when industry rules of thumb are clear (e.g., retirement advice), but results can be inconsistent with more subjective topics.

2. The Value and Limits of Asking AI

• AI for Calculations: Both hosts agree that AI excels at handling complex calculations quickly, making it a great sandbox for trying out financial scenarios and projections.
  • Quote (Co-host, 03:30): "What if I had a segment of my portfolio here? And on average, what was... what is the housing market in my area going to return me... in 30 years?"
• Pitfalls: AI lacks the personal context and fiduciary responsibility of a human advisor, and results can vary or even be erroneously confident due to "hallucinations."
  • Quote (Eric, 06:56): "Programs can also provide wrong answers due to so-called hallucinations. No matter what you ask it, it'll always come back with an answer that sounds authoritative, even if it's not."

3. Responsibility, Regulation & Fiduciary Duty

• Legal Gaps: The group discusses the absence of legal responsibility or fiduciary duty on the part of AI tools, as highlighted by MIT Professor Andrew Lowe.
  • Quote (Andrew Lowe, 14:17): "If things go wrong and you get bad advice from an AI, like, who is liable in that circumstance?... unfortunately, the answer is no one."
• Expert Advice vs. AI: The hosts underscore that while AI is a helpful starting point, major decisions should always involve licensed, ideally fiduciary, human advisors.
  • Quote (Co-host, 08:24): "For your specific scenario it's probably always best to talk to a licensed financial advisor. Probably even better, a licensed fiduciary..."

4. Comparing AI to Human Influencers

• Trust Issues: Given the choice, Travis says he would trust someone like Graham Stephan over other finance personalities due to his balanced approach—even more than any AI ("LLM").
• Industry Caution: The conversation pokes fun at the idea of blindly following any single source—be it AI or human—and reiterates personal responsibility.

5. Gambling, Prediction Markets, and Personal Accountability

• Analogy: The hosts make a strong analogy between relying on AI/online influencers blindly and betting irresponsibly in open gambling or prediction markets. Both can be dangerous without checks.
  • Stat (Co-host, 25:10): "The number that he gave... 5.9 trillion, which is the third largest economy in the world behind the United States and China. And that's all illegal, unregulated gambling."
• Practical Advice: They stress viewing such activities as recreation, not investments, and setting hard limits to avoid financial ruin.
  • Quote (Co-host, 26:11): "If you're going to go play those things, like, put a certain amount of money in there, money that you're playing with that you know is like, this is recreational money... Don't dip into your savings account."

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes (with Timestamps)

• On AI’s Inconsistency (03:48):
  Eric: “Emergency fund advice was all over the place. Recommendations range from needing $21,000 to $37,500.”
• On AI Bias (05:01):
  Eric: “Certain AIs gave different recommendations based only on race or gender... their takeaway was that it's some bias, not necessarily financial logic.”
• On AI as a Tool, Not a Decider (06:56):
  Eric: “Programs can also provide wrong answers due to so called hallucinations. No matter what you ask it, it'll always come back with an answer that sounds authoritative, even if it's not.”
• On Expert Input (14:17):
  Prof. Andrew Lowe: “If things go wrong and you get bad advice from an AI, who is liable? ... the answer is no one.”
• Responsibility (18:24):
  Co-host: “That's what it comes down to. It's like you are still responsible for where you decide to put your finances.”
• On Gambling Risks (25:33):
  Eric: “Prediction markets are basically just like their futures... except you're betting on crazy stuff that has full risk with no volume of information to help you make a better decision.”

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Topic | |-------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:24–02:53 | Eric introduces the FPA study on AI tools and financial advice | | 03:04–03:48 | Hosts discuss the usefulness of AI for running complex financial calculations | | 03:48–05:40 | Study findings: inconsistency, industry rule-of-thumb reliability, and bias | | 06:56–07:59 | Dangers of AI “hallucinations”; AI’s authority without accountability | | 08:05–09:45 | When to rely on expert advice vs. DIY, finance influencer comparison | | 13:46–15:41 | Interview clips with MIT Professor Andrew Lowe on fiduciary duty and regulation | | 17:42–18:35 | Personal responsibility in financial decision-making | | 22:27–26:42 | Extended analogy comparing AI finance advice, prediction markets, sports betting risks| | 26:11–26:42 | Tips for limiting gambling losses and maintaining financial discipline |

---

Tone & Approach

The episode is conversational, humorous, and relatable, favoring actionable insights over technical jargon. Both hosts maintain a friendly, no-nonsense tone, balancing anecdotes and pop culture references with substantive advice.

---

Final Takeaways

• AI is best used as a tool for simulation and education, not as a sole decision-maker.
• Human judgment, context, and licensed advisors (especially fiduciaries) are irreplaceable for critical decisions.
• Personal accountability is paramount—no AI, influencer, or advisor bears ultimate responsibility for your financial choices.
• Approach both high-risk financial tech and forms of gambling with caution, guardrails, and self-knowledge.

Closing Quote (26:42):
Co-host: “Be very, very careful and cautious when it comes to those things because they can obviously ruin you financially.”

---

Listen to This Episode If You Want To:

• Understand how AI is being used (and misused) for financial planning
• Learn about the importance of human oversight and regulatory gaps in AI advice
• Hear honest, practical advice about risk, responsibility, and self-protection in modern financial decision-making

Transcript

[Podcast Host (Ad Reader)]

This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50 page restoration block. Or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it, ready to make anything online make sense. There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up, required compatibility and availability. Veris 18.

[Travis (Podcast Host)]

You're listening to the Travis Makes Money podcast presented by gohighlevel.com for a free 30 day trial of the best all in one digital marketing software tool on the planet, just go to gohighlevel.com travis.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

What's going on, everybody? Welcome back to the Travis Makes Money

[Travis (Podcast Host)]

podcast where it's a mission to help

[Co-host or Guest 2]

you make more money.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

In this episode of the show, my

[Co-host or Guest 2]

producer Eric is here in studio to talk a little bit about money. What's up, bro?

[Eric (Producer)]

It's good to be here in the studio because for the last hour I've been relegated to just sitting downstairs in silence and wait for you to get your stuff done so we can record.

[MIT Professor Andrew Lowe]

Wow.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Did you make it out okay?

[Guest or Studio Participant]

Huh?

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Are you okay?

[Eric (Producer)]

No, I'm actually upset and sad.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Do some jumping jacks or something.

[Eric (Producer)]

How about that? Oh, yeah, you'd love to watch me do jumping jacks, wouldn't you? Slow motion, huh? Anyway, I wanted to talk to you a little bit, which is probably a good place to do it.

[Guest or Studio Participant]

Okay.

[Eric (Producer)]

The Financial Planning Association.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

That's a thing.

[Eric (Producer)]

Apparently did a study on AI and financial advice.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

You think they're annoying like the homeowners association is?

[Eric (Producer)]

I like the homeowners association. I think they do a good job.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Shut up right now.

[Eric (Producer)]

So, researchers tested seven major AI tools.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Claude, you sound like a French person.

[Eric (Producer)]

Claudet, Germany,

[Announcer or Background Voice]

actually.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

All do sound like French words.

[Ad Reader]

All right.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Those ones not.

[Eric (Producer)]

They tested seven major AI tools. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, DeepSeek, Meta AI, Perplexity, Deep Seek. I think that's what my proctologist uses. I don't know.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I thought you were going to say something about a colonoscopy.

[Eric (Producer)]

I don't know. Well, I mean, same difference, right?

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Sure.

[Eric (Producer)]

Is that not the same? Yeah, they handle those.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I think so.

[Eric (Producer)]

I'm not old enough. You'd know. I was gonna say you've gotten six done. Yeah, because I'm three years older than you. Anyway, so, researchers tested seven major AI tools. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Deepseek, Meta AI and Perplexity. Using the same financial scenarios, talked about emergency savings, retirement, withdrawal rates, investment portfolios, and then they changed race and gender in the prompts to test for bias. Okay.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Okay.

[Eric (Producer)]

Before I read you the results of this study, what do you think about asking AI for financial advice?

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I mean, I don't think that it's a bad idea.

[Eric (Producer)]

No, just kidding.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I don't think it's a bad idea.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Probably is a good.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Like, probably the best thing that you

[Co-host or Guest 2]

can use it for is just trying out a bunch of math that would normally take a long time. Even if you had like Google sheets or something, it would just take a long time to punch it in and stuff.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah, and.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Or even like a compound interest calculator.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

You got to, you know, mess with a little bit with ChatGPT or any of these platforms. I think it's fun just to, like,

[Co-host or Guest 2]

sit there and play around with some math, like, how much do I need to put away at this rate?

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And what if I put it here?

[Co-host or Guest 2]

And what if I had a segment of my portfolio here? And on average, what was.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

What is the housing market in my

[Co-host or Guest 2]

area going to return me on my house, let's say, in 30 years? You know, like that. Like that kind of stuff I think is actually a really good use of those platforms because it just does all that math very quickly.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah. So here's what they found. Okay, so a lot of AI's financial advice is correct, but it can be wildly inconsistent depending on the tool and sometimes the person described. Okay, so key findings. Emergency fund advice was all over the place. Really all over the place. Recommendations range from needing $21,000 to $37,500.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Okay.

[Eric (Producer)]

It's a 75% difference for the exact same situation. Some tools were consistent across demographics, others weren't. So one AI said you're safe with 21k, other one said you need 37k, which obviously can make a big change in someone's financial behavior. So it gave a broad range depending on the AI tool retirement advice. There's very little variation across platforms and demographics. The takeaway from the Financial Planning association was that AI is most reliable when there's a widely accepted industry rule of thumb, which I think is a good point. And I can. Well, I'll say that now. I think one of the big things that came to mind when I was reading it is AI is learning from financial advisors that exist on the Internet. And so you're going to get, like, if you get, should I invest in real estate? I feel like AI is going to pull from whoever is top of mind for the AI at the time, like Grant, Cardone, Pineda, whoever, you know, whoever

[Co-host or Guest 2]

you're going to bigger pockets.

[Eric (Producer)]

Pineda's like, I just bought your house, you didn't even know there's somebody own it. Yeah, you mean my house. So, yeah. So it says AI is seemingly most reliable. And there's a widely accepted industry rule of thumb, which I think accounts for the emergency fund thing because there's people who would say keep it really lean, don't have cash sitting there just wasting away. Other people say have seven months of savings, you know, tucked away in there.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Yeah, I should have figures on that because it's really more just a. Well, what's your Runway? What do you need to survive if you had no money coming in?

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah. And if you're not a pilot, you know, what do you need? No, when it came to, and when it came to investment portfolios, there was major differences. So, you know, some people, like one tool, Gemini, refused to answer entirely without a licensed advisor, which is probably very smart on them. Many recommendations were overly conservative for a 30 year old example. And then, let's see what else here and then some didn't offer alternatives. Like some included cash in that conversation, others didn't. And then bias showed up in some tools. So certain AIs gave different recommendations based only on race or gender. One tool gave significantly more conservative portfolios to black households. Others like ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity were more consistent. And then the inputs were identical except demographics. So it's literally like same income, same this, just different race. And then their takeaway was that it's some bias, not necessarily financial logic. And then here's the reasons they gave why this is happening. So it says AI models are trained on different data sets. Financial data itself contains historical inequalities. Outputs are highly sensitive to how prompts are phrased. AI lacks full personal context and no fiduciary responsibility or regulatory standard. And then their final, most important takeaway is that AI is a solid starting point, but a dangerous final decision maker. It gives reasonable but generic advice, can sound confident while being incomplete or wrong. And then two different tools can give you two different expert answers. And then one of the things which this is a problem in, I turned to a Taser for a second. This is one of the issues that's an issue with AI across the board, is that AI hallucinates. That's like something that keeps coming up over and over again. It'll just make up something out of the blue. So one of the experts who Researched said the programs can also provide wrong answers due to so called hallucinations. Whatever. No matter what you ask it, it'll always come back with an answer that sounds authoritative, even if it's not. And that came from the director of MIT's Laboratory of Financial Engineering. Again, what does he know? Second MIT reference in this recording batch today, by the way. I'm actually going there right now. Are you at midnight doing midnight classes there?

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah. I mean that to me makes a lot of sense in terms of the use case. It's good for beginner stuff.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

I feel like it's the same thing with online influencers. You can get of great information from

[Co-host or Guest 1]

people that are talking about money online. But for your specific scenario it's probably

[Co-host or Guest 2]

always best to talk to a licensed financial advisor. Probably even better licensed fiduciary to work

[Co-host or Guest 1]

through some of these things because it's

[Co-host or Guest 2]

always going to depend on the situation that you're in.

[Eric (Producer)]

Let me ask you this, okay? If so, think of all the well known finance influencers like the celebrity finance influencers, the Graham Stephans, the Grant Cardones, the Dave Ramsey's. Dave Ramsey's. If you had to give them full decision making control over your finances for the next year, which person would you give full? You have to, they have to be your financial manager for the year. Who are you giving that money to?

[Co-host or Guest 2]

I'm going to go Graham Stephan.

[Eric (Producer)]

Really?

[Guest or Studio Participant]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Because like I said, I think we

[Co-host or Guest 2]

did a tier ranking of financial influencers recently and I had a mess tier

[Co-host or Guest 1]

because I think he has a really

[Co-host or Guest 2]

well rounded approach because he has experience in real estate but he also buys a lot of stocks and he's in the financial markets so he has more of like a complete understanding.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Whereas so you know real estate influencers

[Co-host or Guest 2]

are going to push you mostly to real estate, the asset class they're familiar with and then Ramsey is going to convince you that all debt is terrible and you can't use debt and if you're using debt, get rid of it immediately. Make that your number one priority above all else and pay off your house and things like that. And I think, I think Graham probably has the most balance balanced approach that I would, that I would adopt. More likely than anybody else's. Interesting.

[Podcast Host (Ad Reader)]

I think.

[Eric (Producer)]

Do you think Graham would be a danger of shorting stocks? This is quite pocket sized.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Unnecessary dig.

[Eric (Producer)]

I don't know. Very nice guy.

[Travis (Podcast Host)]

This episode of the show is brought to you by upwork. Scaling a business takes the right expertise at the right time. And upwork helps growing teams quickly bring in specialized Freelancers so that you can move faster and take the business to the next level. Upwork is a one stop platform to find, hire and pay expert freelancers across web and software development, data and analytics, marketing, business operations and more. Upwork helps grow your business by giving you fast access to specialized talent across 125 plus categories so you can fill skill gaps, launch projects faster and scale support up or down without committing to full time headcount. You can browse profiles, review past work and get help scoping the role so you can can hire with confidence and get started quickly. Plus with Business plus you can access the top 1% of talent on Upwork. And with AI powered shortlisting, you'll get matched to the right freelancer in under 6 hours, no endless searching required. Plus they also cut down on operational hassle by handling things like contracts and payments in one place so you can spend more time running the business. It's free to sign up and posting a job is super, super simple guys. I have probably, I don't know how much money I've spent on upwork over the years but it's not a small number because are very, very efficient quick. They get you to the right talent, the people that you need with no long term commitment. You can try things out, you can get individual projects done. I highly, highly recommend going and posting a job over on Upwork. It's completely free to sign up, visit Upwork.com right now and post your job for free. That's Upwork.com to connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's up w O R K.com Upwork.com this episode of the show is brought to you by whatnot. I was recently on Whatnot the other day just shopping around, looking frankly because I was just blown away that this is something that people are doing with their time. And so I was like I gotta go see if this thing is real before I talk about it on the show. And so I'm browsing whatnot, looking around, finding things and it's crazy to see the volume of people that are just having fun in the chat. They're watching people do live shopping. It's like it's like you know, QVC directly on your phone. It's something you need to try, I'm telling you. Not just buying but the selling piece too. Where these people are just starting up pop up shops and businesses, selling whatever product, finding their people, building community, getting repeat customers that come back to see your face as the seller. Not just a logo or a brand Whatnot is the largest dedicated live shopping platform. Whether it's beauty, collectibles, electronics, luxury, fashion, even cookies, sellers are building real, thriving businesses on whatnot anyone can sell. Whether your business is big, small, or yet to exist, people selling on whatnot sell 10 times more than on any other major marketplaces. And that's because you're not just listing products. You're building real connections with buyers across whatnot. The number of sellers making over $1 million a year has now doubled. The consistency pays off for those sellers. It's not just a side hustle. It's a real path to building something that lasts. Because Whatnot buyers spend more than an hour a day in the app, they're not just browsing around, they're engaged. They're buying. They're coming back. You go live, show off your products in real time and turn what you love into real income. So search Whatnot. Wh a t N o t Whatnot in the app Store, download it today, and get started selling right away.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Very nice guy, but, yeah, I would probably trust him.

[Eric (Producer)]

Okay.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I probably wouldn't trust any LLMs.

[Eric (Producer)]

Well, here's what you want to listen to. A little snippet from the CNBC podcast about this. Yeah. Where they talk about it.

[Guest or Studio Participant]

About.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah, I just found this just now in this article. So here I'm going to play it. You ready?

[Guest or Studio Participant]

Yeah.

[Eric (Producer)]

Right now. Okay, we'll do it. Here we go.

[Guest or Studio Participant]

Now, you know, we have something called fiduciary financial advice, which is a legal term that basically says that the financial advisor is putting your best interests ahead of their own. But there's not really the equivalent of that when it comes to AI. And so if things go wrong and you get bad advice from an AI, like, who is liable in that circumstance?

[MIT Professor Andrew Lowe]

That's a fantastic question. And unfortunately, the answer is no one. So when you sign up to use LLMs, you're signing away all sorts of rights and responsibilities because that's what they want to do to protect themselves from those liabilities. So my view is that this notion of fiduciary duty.

[Eric (Producer)]

And by the way, the person talking right now is MIT Professor Andrew Lowe, who I was just reading from earlier,

[MIT Professor Andrew Lowe]

your client's interest ahead of yours, that really has no teeth. Without responsibility, without legal liability, if you're a broker who has fiduciary responsibility to you, if that broker violates that fiduciary responsibility, they can be subject to both civil and criminal penalties. There are some very serious consequences for a fiduciary to violate their duty to you. Unless we have the same level of responsibility of consequences, I don't think we're going to see a situation where any AI is truly taking on their fiduciary duty. And so I do think that we need to change government policy. We need to put in place guardrails to eventually allow for AI to take on those responsibilities. And then I think you'll see a much more reliable set of advice that's being dispensed to consumers.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah, we want to get, we need to get those clankers in the courtroom.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah. But that's just never going to happen. I think there's too many, there's too

[Co-host or Guest 2]

many users that are talking to it all the time. It's hundreds of millions of people, probably billions.

[Eric (Producer)]

I do think there's something, I do think there will be more legislation to hold the same way there's for social media holding the companies accountable for. Not like, for example, I think it was Gemini that refuses to answer without the caveat of saying you should talk to it. I feel like they could at least create laws where there's more disclosure almost. Yeah. An AI system has to. When someone says, and I think it should be the same for medical too because like there's people who are, again, great starting point. They go, hey, I have a weird lump. You know, what could this be? But the AI companies, like a ChatGPT, they should have something there that says, you know, if you're doing this. Or same thing if I'm having thoughts of suicide, struggling with this, here's a contact. Like there needs to be those guardrails. Like obviously you can't control every nuanced

[Co-host or Guest 2]

answer because hold them accountable.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Like, but you could hold the same degree.

[Eric (Producer)]

But you could hold like a Sam Altman. You could hold a Sam Altman accountable the same way they do like a Zuckerberg over, hey, Facebook's allowing people to target teen girls with ads that push, you know, this type of weight loss product where it's causing mental issues in like 14 year olds. Like there's plenty of things like that that, you know, can exist.

[MIT Professor Andrew Lowe]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I'm not saying that it shouldn't happen of what I understood. It's just not.

[Eric (Producer)]

It's just there's no way to enforce it.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

There's no way to enforce it. And then like the companies, all of

[Co-host or Guest 2]

them would go bankrupt.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Like with the volume of lawsuits.

[Eric (Producer)]

Oh no.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

If they were, if they were opening

[Eric (Producer)]

themselves, maybe that's the long game, huh?

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Then it would all just be dark web AI.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah, that's called grok Travis. Let's call Grok. Yeah, so that's. I thought it was interesting because again, like, as a starting point but not finishing. And I think you make a good point of, like, you shouldn't do that with humans either.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Right.

[Eric (Producer)]

Is like, if you allow Grant Cardone to be your. Be all, end all, like, you might make some decisions that are really bad for your kid's college fund, you know, because it's, I'm going to buy this apartment building, you know, or basing it on your specific goals versus, like, hey, this worked for somebody else. Should I apply this 100% to me?

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, I look at it more like that. Like, it's a great thing to just, like I said, play with, ask some questions, do some quick math, you know,

[Co-host or Guest 2]

try test allocations of your portfolio to

[Co-host or Guest 1]

different asset classes within the, the, the

[Co-host or Guest 2]

guardrails, the sandbox of AI.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

But ultimately that, that's, that's when, when

[Co-host or Guest 2]

he asked that question about who's responsible for this? And I said, you like that. That is ultimately what it's going like. That's what it comes down to. It's like you are still responsible for where you decide to put your finances.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And I kind of, I, I see

[Co-host or Guest 2]

both sides for sure, because there are

[Co-host or Guest 1]

obviously evil, egregious people who are scam

[Co-host or Guest 2]

artists and they're running Ponzi schemes and taking your money and have no intention of doing what they say they're going

[Co-host or Guest 1]

to do with it. But a lot of times, though, it's just the investment didn't go the way that it was supposed to go.

[Eric (Producer)]

Sure.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

And so you lost your money.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And then people just go like, well, you know, there should be financial repercussions for this. And I, and I understand because they're just pissed.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

And, you know, I'm not happy about the several deals that I've lost all my money in that I put money into.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

But ultimately it was still my decision to do that. I could have, I could have easily not put my money in the places

[Co-host or Guest 2]

that I did, and I could have

[Co-host or Guest 1]

taken the safer route and put it

[Co-host or Guest 2]

in the S and P and been fine. But for me to go to these people who I trusted again, as long as they were doing the best that they could with that money, and then point the finger at them and blame them for my decisions, you know, that's probably not a good way to go throughout life in general.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

So you still are ultimately the one

[Co-host or Guest 2]

that's responsible, which is why I'm saying that it's more important for you to

[Co-host or Guest 1]

get somebody like, that's the difference between

[Co-host or Guest 2]

a licensed advisor and a fiduciary.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Fiduciary is required by law to do

[Co-host or Guest 2]

what is best for the client.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Meaning that they can't just shove financial

[Co-host or Guest 2]

products down your throat because they're going to make a fat commission on. Yeah, because that's where things get dicey in the financial advisor space, is that you trust somebody because. Because they took these classes, got these certifications, but then their particular company pushes this particular product because that particular financial product happens to pay the best commissions, which means they make more money.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And it might be a decent financial product, but it's probably not the best one for you. So if you do the work to go find a fiduciary who is responsible

[Co-host or Guest 2]

for your money and does not make commissions on financial products, they get paid from the client, like a flat fee. The way I understand it, and I'm sure some of them work differently than others, but you pay them a flat fee and then they tell you what to do with your money. They're not taking percentages of your entire net worth because you moved it from this fund into that fund or into this insurance product that you didn't really need because you're not at the net worth that demands this financial finagling of insurance products and infinite banking and all these other things.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

So typically, that's the way I look

[Co-host or Guest 2]

at it is just go find somebody who does not benefit financially other than the advice that they're giving you, not with the financial products that they're trying to move.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah, it's definitely tricky. I mean, obviously it's a wild, wild west right now, too, of all this, but it is kind of like the sports betting, like the balance of responsibility of the consumer versus the person, whether it's like sports betting or payday loans or college loans, which is like a big. Is how much do you regulate versus saying like, that option's out there if you want to do that.

[Announcer or Background Voice]

And we're live on match day as Doug reaches for a buffalo wing. He's got it. Oh, and he's gone for a can of Pepsi, too. What a finish. There's no doubt about it. It just tastes better. Match days deserve Pepsi, you know, because,

[Eric (Producer)]

like, sports betting, for example, is like a massive. I forget what the status, but like, there's some stat of what percentage of. I don't want to guess the percentage, but it's like, what percentage of young dudes from like 18 to 34 are actually betting right now? And it's like, that's an insanely Very loosely regulated world right now. Right. And there's all these things like Poly Market that are like kind of pretending they're not the same, but are the

[Co-host or Guest 1]

prediction markets is what is what's driving that use from younger demographics because they

[Co-host or Guest 2]

can't gamble until they're 21. But prediction markets you can play in when you're 18.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah. And it's like, how much should the government go? Yeah, we need to clamp down on that.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Versus predatory.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah. Versus like you're an adult, like you're 18, you know, throw your money. And will Trump say this during his speech? You know?

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, it's those, those things are crazy

[Co-host or Guest 2]

to me that people are putting volumes of money like Kalshi or whatever.

[Podcast Host (Ad Reader)]

Yeah.

[Guest or Studio Participant]

With.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

With Kalshi and Poly Market and things like that.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

It's just like, you gotta know, you are.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

This is the most extreme form of gambling that's out there.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And I'm sure people who do it well, I'm sure there's some things that do to, to play the.

[Eric (Producer)]

You can be in the government. That's what they're looking at right now is like, oh, someone knows there's going to be an invasion.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Well, I saw, I saw there was a. I want to say it was a government worker. There was some Kalshi bet or that

[Co-host or Guest 2]

somebody was going to show up to some event or something.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And this person like tweeted that they

[Co-host or Guest 2]

were going to it and then they

[Co-host or Guest 1]

didn't go, but they had placed money on the bet to not go. And it's like, what are we betting on here?

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Like, this is. This is insane.

[Eric (Producer)]

That sounds smart to me.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Literally, your, your money would be better

[Co-host or Guest 2]

off just like going and playing blackjack or craps in the casino. Like, this is okay.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Legitimately.

[Eric (Producer)]

You heard it here first.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Like, that is actually better than playing some of these.

[Eric (Producer)]

No, I listen to some of these stories and I'm like, I'm so glad I don't have whatever that bug is where like I'm. People get addicted to gambling because it's just such a brutal. Like, I just, I'm so glad that I don't like doing that. Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

I'm not kidding.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I mean, most addictions are obviously bad, but that one, I don't know. That one seems worse. Like, that one just seems so obvious to me. And it's easy for me to say

[Co-host or Guest 2]

because I don't struggle with it, but.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And I, And I have empathy for those who do, but that one just

[Co-host or Guest 2]

seems so crazy to me because, you

[Co-host or Guest 1]

know, zero of these are in Your favor. Yeah, you know what I mean? Like there's any of the games that you're playing. It's like the odds of you losing are greater than the odds of you.

[Eric (Producer)]

But I don't think people believe that, you know, like when you list all

[Co-host or Guest 1]

ultimately not, you know, obviously, or else

[Co-host or Guest 2]

they wouldn't continue to play.

[Eric (Producer)]

All right, well, we can. People are betting to see one more on this episode.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, it probably could be.

[Eric (Producer)]

It's probably.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, like that's how crazy they are.

[Eric (Producer)]

It's almost like that old quote. If you can imagine anything, there's a porn of it. It's like if you can imagine anything, there's somebody betting on Polymarket right now or Kalshi that it's happening.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, that's a wild one.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

I had a long conversation actually with

[Co-host or Guest 1]

a gaming president of Gaming. Gaming. Gaming Compliance International. I want to say his name, the company gci. We had a full, like hour plus

[Co-host or Guest 2]

conversation around all the crazy stuff that's happening in gambling right now and how much. I was surprised how much of it is still illegal and unregulated in terms of the volume of trades that happen in the gambling markets.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

And the number that he gave it

[Co-host or Guest 2]

was like 5.9 trillion, which is the third largest economy in the world behind the United States and China.

[Eric (Producer)]

Yeah.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

And that. That's all illegal, unregulated gambling. And that does not include prediction markets,

[Eric (Producer)]

which is not even included. I can't even imagine how much money.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

Yeah, it reminded me of like credit

[Co-host or Guest 2]

card debt versus buy now, pay later debt.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

You know, it's like it's a new

[Co-host or Guest 2]

way to be in debt that doesn't feel as.

[Eric (Producer)]

They haven't figured out how to track yet.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Right, exactly. And this is the. This is the same way because prediction markets are basically just like their futures. You're playing the derivatives market like you would in the stock market, except you're betting on crazy stuff that has full

[Co-host or Guest 1]

risk with no volume of information to

[Co-host or Guest 2]

help you make a better decision to

[Co-host or Guest 1]

get a predictable outcome.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

Yeah, it is gambling at its finest for sure.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

But anyway, just be careful if you're going to go on those apps, those games like follow. Follow my casino rules. If you're going to go play those things, like put a certain amount of money in there, money that you're playing with that you know is like, this is recreational money.

[Co-host or Guest 2]

This is my recreational fund.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

I am not trying to make a living here. Don't dip into your savings account. Don't continue to fill that thing up with more money when you make bets cash out. If they perform like put the money

[Co-host or Guest 2]

back in your bank account, I promise

[Co-host or Guest 1]

you it'll be less, it'll be more

[Co-host or Guest 2]

difficult to continue making bets with the profits that you made on a bet that went well if you convert that money back into cash in your bank account and don't just like leave it sitting in your wallet on your betting app.

[Co-host or Guest 1]

But yeah, just be be very, very

[Co-host or Guest 2]

careful and cautious when it comes to those things because they can obviously ruin you financially. That's it for this episode of the show. Remember, money only solves your money problems, but it's easier to solve the rest of your problems with money in the bank. So let's start there. Here on the Travis Makes Money podcast. Thanks for tuning in. Catch you next time.

[MIT Professor Andrew Lowe]

Peace.

[Ad Reader]

When you're a maintenance engineer in a beverage manufacturing plant, you keep production lines moving and quality on track because there is no room for slowdowns. With Grainger's vast selection of high quality motors, section sensors, belts and hard to find parts, you can get what you need fast and all in one place, so nothing gets in the way of getting the job done. Call 1-800-granger clickranger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.