I was lucky enough to have lunch yesterday with the chief market strategist for a major Wall Street bank. In addition to being an experienced and intelligent observer of the financial markets and economy, he is also a great guy.

Our conversation was a great opportunity to compare two views of the world: Wall Street vs. Main Street.

To follow up on my recent posts, there’s another question I’d like to ask the person (or committee) that decided to outsource Tufts University’s early education program: Are you proud of this decision? Did you go home and announce to your own family what you had done? If the answer is no, what does that say about the quality of the decision?

This is also an important question to ask yourself in an investment context.

I’ve been thinking about Tufts University's decision to outsource its early education program, and why I feel so strongly about it. It’s not that I’m directly affected—Jackson will be finishing up there this summer before the transition. And it’s not that I’d necessarily disagree with the decision if I knew all the facts.

Besides the impact on people I like and respect, the thing that bothers me is that the decision makers seem to have focused on the wrong issues. Whenever you focus on the wrong things, any decision you make—however justified in terms of those wrong things—will turn out wrong.

My wife and I have been incredibly fortunate over the past three years to have our son, Jackson, enrolled in a Tufts University-sponsored day care/kindergarten program. The faculty, the curriculum, and the entire experience have been outstanding, and Jackson has benefited noticeably. Tufts students also benefit from the opportunity to volunteer and mentor the children.

I host a call for advisors’ clients every quarter, and one of the most interesting parts is the questions I get from participants beforehand. They’re invariably cogent, thoughtful, and helpful in defining what I should be talking about—and what I may be missing in my own view of the world.

A question that’s come up in preparation for my call tomorrow concerns inflation—is it coming? If so, when, and how bad will it be?

Although the headline employment numbers look strong, some say that the underlying reality is actually a lot worse, with few full-time jobs and many discouraged workers. According to the skeptics, it’s a Potemkin recovery, dependent on the fact that many people have simply dropped out of the labor force.

I’ve written quite a bit recently about oil production and its benefits for the U.S. economy. A related topic I’ve been asked about, but haven’t addressed here, is where oil prices might be going.

This week is the start of earnings season, when companies report their financial results for the previous quarter. After a difficult first quarter, many are looking to Q2 earnings to answer an important question: will things be as good as expected in the second half of the year? 

The release of the Federal Reserve’s June meeting minutes was a case of no news is good news.

Even after the weak first quarter, the Fed believes the economy is continuing to recover, and that the risks are now pretty much equally balanced between faster and slower growth. The discussion seems to have shifted from whether the recovery is valid to how quickly it’s moving—and the burden of proof is slowly shifting from those who want the Fed to back off to those who want it to keep stimulating.

Over the past several weeks, I’ve written a couple of times about the U.S. oil industry—specifically, how it’s becoming increasingly supportive of continued economic growth.

Following up on yesterday’s post, I want to take a more detailed look at the U.S. oil renaissance, and what it might mean for the country going forward.