I’ve watched for years as the Federal Reserve’s easy-money policies distorted nearly every corner of our economy, but the real tragedy is how it quietly dismantled the foundation of American industry. David Stockman laid out the numbers in his recent essay, and they’re hard to ignore: despite nearly $6 trillion in freshly printed money since 2008, U.S. manufacturing output is still below where it was 18 years ago. Think about that—almost two decades of “stimulus,” yet less real production.

I’ve been following the growing connection between BlackRock and the World Economic Forum with concern. When the world’s largest asset manager begins shaping the rules that govern global markets, investors need to pay attention. This isn’t a conspiracy — it’s concentration of power. In an era of inflation, over-valued assets, and policy-driven markets, understanding who controls the flow of capital may be just as important as understanding where it flows.

The air is thick with anticipation. Stock markets, particularly in certain sectors, have soared to dizzying heights, and asset prices across the board feel untethered from reality. The question is no longer "if" things are highly valued, but whether we are standing in the middle of a colossal economic bubble, where valuations are stretching beyond the scope of fundamental value.

An economic bubble forms when asset prices rise rapidly, driven by speculation and market excitement (often called "irrational exuberance"), rather than by the asset's intrinsic worth, which is based on its ability to generate future cash flows or profits. Let's break down some of the sectors where this disconnect appears most pronounced.

Governments throughout history have been haunted by the same temptation — the belief that they can create prosperity without production, growth without savings, and benefits without costs. George F. Smith captures this notion in his recent essay, “Government’s Eternal Longing for a Free Lunch.” His message is both timeless and timely: whenever policymakers convince themselves that they can suspend economic gravity, it’s ordinary citizens who eventually pay the bill.

We like to think markets price things fairly. But the sharper you look, the more you realize that price is not the same as value—and confusing the two can be costly. The article “Price Doesn’t Reflect Value, and We’re Paying a Steep Price for Confusing the Two” argues that across consumer goods, business models, and macro systems, the deceptive gap between what we pay and what we get is growing wide. We can use that lens to see a telling portrait of today’s investment markets.

Our current financial system did not appear overnight. It is the product of more than 150 years of political choices, institutional experiments, and economic crises. David Stockman’s recent essay, How We Got Here, traces that history with an unmistakable conclusion: America’s banking system has shifted from a relatively disciplined model to one dominated by central bank activism, debt monetization, and speculation.

As investors and citizens, we should understand how these changes unfolded—and what they mean for today’s economy.

This post makes a clear and urgent case that the U.S. stock market is in a highly precarious state. It argues that market valuations are stretched to unsustainable levels, and that this overvaluation, coupled with recent warnings from prominent financial figures like Jamie Dimon, points to a serious risk of a sharp downturn.

Here's a breakdown of the key points:

• Extreme Overvaluation: The post uses several key metrics—like the Buffett Indicator and Cyclically Adjusted P/E (CAPE)—to show that U.S. equities are priced at least twice as high as their underlying fundamental value. This isn't just a subjective feeling; it's backed by historical data.

• Dimon's Warning as a Catalyst: The post highlights Jamie Dimon's concerns about a "weakening" U.S. economy. It argues that while this is a cautious signal on its own, it becomes an alarming warning when viewed against the backdrop of inflated valuations. A weakening economy could be the spark that ignites a market correction, as there's no "cushion" of fair valuations to absorb any negative news.

• A Chorus of Concerns: The post isn't just about Dimon. It brings in other key voices and data points that support the same narrative of growing risk:

  • Mark Zandi's warning of a "labor recession" and the potential for job losses to trigger a broader economic downturn.

  • Lloyd Blankfein's focus on hidden leverage in private credit markets, which could amplify a crisis.

  • Rising stagflation risks, with sticky inflation and increasing jobless claims.

  • The return of short-selling hedge funds, suggesting that institutional investors are actively preparing for a market decline.

  • Warnings from firms like Goldman Sachs about the sustainability of the AI-driven market boom.

In recent weeks, headline after headline has reminded investors just how big a gap there is between what markets expect and what is actually grounded in hard fundamentals. One stark example comes from the Oracle / OpenAI story — and it lays bare a troubling trend: stock valuations increasingly rely more on faith (or fantasy) than on performance.

We truly are living in historic times—times when the very nature of money is shifting before our eyes. As David Stockman writes in “Free Market Money: The Antidote,” “money has become entirely a matter of digital ledger entries and a derivative of private credit.” The traditional role of the Federal Reserve, rooted in supplying elastic currency against real commercial receivables, has been dismantled. Stockman argues, “The American economy no longer needs a central bank to print ‘money’ in either paper or digital form… The free market can both make the credit and price it.” This is more than theory—it’s a turning point in how our financial system operates.

We live in an era where the headlines themselves serve as warnings. The war in Ukraine shows no sign of resolution, with devastating human and economic consequences spreading far beyond its borders. At the same time, the conflict in Gaza has created destruction and despair that weighs heavily on global stability. These crises remind us that the world remains a dangerous place, one where geopolitical shocks can ripple suddenly through markets.

Most people know Larry Fink as the CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager with over $9 trillion under management. What many don’t realize is that Fink is more than a powerful Wall Street executive—he is co-chair of the World Economic Forum (WEF), one of the most influential yet unelected organizations in the world. That role places him at the center of an agenda that should deeply concern investors, retirees, and citizens alike.

America’s “independent” Federal Reserve loves to act like it’s the grown-up in the room, keeping the economy steady. In reality, it’s more like a stage magician—printing money out of thin air and sprinkling it over Wall Street. The result? Out-of-this-world market valuations that look impressive on paper but have no foundation in reality. Let’s call them what they are: fake wealth. And fake wealth never lasts.

In every market cycle, there’s a moment when optimism peaks, valuations stretch beyond reason, and investors begin to believe that “this time is different.” We’re living in that moment now.

Over the last decade, stock prices have been propelled upward not just by innovation or productivity, but by an unprecedented flood of cheap money, aggressive speculation, and central bank intervention. While these forces have supported markets, they’ve also created dangerous distortions. And when distortions unwind, they tend to do so violently.

A friend recently shared this lament about stopping by his neighborhood Dairy Queen for a banana split. He had looked forward to the visit because, when he was a kid, a banana split was the ultimate summer treat — a big glass boat filled with vanilla, chocolate and strawberry ice‑cream scoops, a fresh banana, fruity syrups, whipped cream and the obligatory cherries on top. It was indulgent but inexpensive, just a quarter at the lunch counter or ice‑cream parlor.

In 1950s Woolworth’s stores, a regular banana split cost 25 cents and some parlors sold the same treat for 10 cents in 1904. Even in 1963, a banana split at Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlour cost 75 cents and did not cross the $2 mark until 1979.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the difficult crossroads our country finds itself at. There’s no denying the numbers are mind‑blowing: debt spiraling upward, obligations growing faster than we can pay, and the consequences of that becoming increasingly visible.  

I’ve been following the housing market closely, and what’s crystal clear is that simply pushing interest rates down—even to rock‑bottom levels—won’t solve the affordability crisis. Just recently, the 10‑year Treasury yield jumped above 4.49%, reacting sharply to a fresh spike in CPI inflation—marking its highest climb in five months. That’s bad news for anyone hoping for a dramatic drop in mortgage rates.

After all, 30‑year mortgage rates track the 10‑year yield. Historically, we've seen borrowings near 3% in mid‑2021 balloon past 7% by late 2023—and they've stayed stubbornly above 6% since. Those double‑figure home prices combine with higher borrowing costs to push housing out of reach for many.

In recent remarks that should concern anyone keeping a close watch on inflation and economic policy, Raphael Bostic, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, issued a clear warning: the impact of tariffs could be far more persistent than previously thought. While tariffs have often been seen as temporary policy tools with discrete, short-term inflationary effects, Bostic's message points to a more drawn-out and insidious process—one that could further complicate the Federal Reserve's already delicate balancing act.

Government projections point to massive future deficits, soaring interest expenses, and an ever-growing debt burden. The numbers are publicly available, but few are paying attention to the implications. With demand for government debt uncertain and political leaders showing no appetite for fiscal restraint, policymakers will likely respond the only way they can—by suppressing real interest rates and allowing the currency to weaken.

This tactic creates a short-term boost. Lower rates make borrowing cheaper, stimulating economic activity and pushing up asset prices. A weaker currency helps exports and makes foreign debt easier to repay in nominal terms. At first glance, these may seem like policy victories.

In the early 20th century, the Russian Empire fell—not only because of war or revolution, but because of misplaced trust. At the center of this collapse was a mystic named Grigori Rasputin, whose influence over the royal family grew quietly, dangerously, and fatally.

He wasn’t elected. He wasn’t trained. He wasn’t even well understood. But he was believed.

He promised healing to the Tsar’s gravely ill son. He delivered calm when the empire trembled. And he gave the illusion of control in a world spinning out of it. Rasputin became indispensable—not because he was effective, but because he made people feel safe.

The Federal Reserve has sent ripples through the financial world with its latest projections, signaling a tougher road ahead for the U.S. economy. According to a recent report from Breitbart News, Fed officials now anticipate higher interest rates and persistent inflation in 2025, a stark shift from earlier expectations. Here’s a breakdown of what this means and why it matters.