In a striking alignment, President Donald Trump, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and tech billionaire Elon Musk have united in advocating for the elimination of the U.S. debt ceiling, a statutory cap on federal borrowing that has long been a lightning rod for fiscal debates.

This unexpected coalition—bridging a conservative Republican, a progressive Democrat, and a libertarian-leaning entrepreneur—has sparked intense discussion about the debt ceiling’s role, its economic risks, and the prospects for bipartisan reform.

In a world saturated with spin, the government’s latest economic report is another reminder that the truth often lies between the lines. The U.S. Commerce Department just released its second estimate for first-quarter GDP growth—and it’s not the glowing recovery story Wall Street would like you to believe. Real GDP growth was revised up slightly to a sluggish 1.3%, while inflation-adjusted consumer spending actually declined. Let’s be clear: this isn’t growth. It’s stagnation dressed up with decimal points.

Stockman scrutinizes the GOP's "One Big Beautiful Bill," which aims to extend the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). He argues that this extension would primarily benefit the top 5% of earners, who already contribute 61% of federal income tax revenues, while adding approximately $5 trillion to the national debt. He challenges the notion that these tax cuts will stimulate sufficient economic growth to offset their cost, labeling the "grow your way out" strategy as a flawed and historically unproven theory.

Inflation is a term that often sparks heated debates, conjuring images of rising prices, shrinking savings, and economic uncertainty. In a thought-provoking article titled "Inflation: The Real Story" from Armstrong Economics, Martin Armstrong dives into the complexities of inflation, challenging mainstream narratives and shedding light on its deeper causes and consequences. This blog post explores the key insights from the article, breaking down its core arguments and offering a fresh perspective on an issue that affects us all.

As someone who’s never bought into the hype surrounding renewable energy, I’ve been closely watching the drama unfold around the offshore wind program in the Northeast, particularly the Empire Wind project off New York and New Jersey. When President Trump halted this and other wind projects on his first day back in office in January 2025, I was cautiously optimistic. Finally, I thought, a move to prioritize proven, reliable energy sources like oil, gas, and nuclear over costly windmills that might never deliver on their promises.

But then came the news in May 2025 that Trump reauthorized Empire Wind, and I’m left scratching my head, frustrated by what feels like a step backward. Here’s why I think the government should stick to supporting energy that works—and why this windmill saga has me concerned.

Over the years I’ve warned—perhaps too many times for some ears—about the parade of financial excesses eroding America’s economic foundations. But every so often a new analysis lands that crystallizes the danger so starkly it demands fresh attention.

David Stockman’s latest essay, “The Trumpified GOP’s Great Big Ugly Debt Bomb,” does exactly that, laying bare how today’s political theater is super-charging a fiscal trajectory already headed for the cliff.LewRockwell

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is often heralded as the gold standard for economic data in the United States, providing critical insights into employment, inflation, and economic health. But recent revelations, such as those highlighted in a May 2025 article from Armstrong Economics titled "BLS Data Revised – Payrolls Declined Under Biden," cast a long shadow over the agency’s credibility.

According to the article, revised BLS data revealed a significant contraction in private sector payrolls under the Biden administration, with a staggering decline of 598,000 nonfarm payroll positions from March 2023 to March 2024. This revision, which contradicts earlier rosy reports, raises a critical question: Can we trust the BLS to tell the real economic story? A look back at the agency’s history and methods suggests that this is far from the first time its numbers have been called into question.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, the government changed how it calculates the Consumer Price Index (CPI). These changes were marketed as improvements—introducing “hedonic adjustments,” substitution models, and geometric weighting. But Williams argues that these tweaks distort reality. Instead of showing what it actually costs to maintain a constant standard of living, the CPI now shows how consumers might adapt to higher costs (i.e., buying hamburger instead of steak).

In other words, the inflation index no longer measures inflation as a rise in the cost of living—it measures a shift in survival strategies.

A powerful quote from the article is worth remembering: “If you think this is all just accidental, you’re not paying attention.” The author challenges readers to drop the illusion and look at reality: the system is corrupt, the currency is devaluing, and the people in charge are not interested in course correction.

They are benefiting from the chaos. This insight aligns strongly with my own views: we are not in a normal market cycle. We are in a moment of historic consequence.

It’s not often that a former Director of the Office of Management and Budget calls out the entire American economic system as a rigged casino—but that’s exactly what David Stockman does in his latest scorcher.

In “American Capitalism’s Worst Nightmare,” he paints a chilling picture of a once-vibrant free-market economy now suffocating under the weight of central bank distortion, fiscal recklessness, and politically driven malinvestment. This isn’t just a rant—it’s a forensic autopsy of how American capitalism has been systematically sabotaged.

Washington insiders have long joked that the Marriner S. Eccles Building resembles a “marble bunker.” After eighty‑eight years of service, the bunker is getting a $2½ billion makeover—complete with skylit atria, rooftop gardens, and a visitor pavilion that looks more Silicon Valley than New Deal. The Board of Governors insists the renovation is about seismic safety and 21st‑century tech, not gilded excess, but the price tag has ballooned 34 percent since the original 2019 estimate.

Nietzsche challenges us to pierce the veil of herd thinking — to question the narratives we’re being fed and the institutions we blindly trust.

Markets today are flooded with easy money, rampant speculation, and a moral narrative that suggests, “Don’t worry — we’ve got it under control.” But Nietzsche would see that as dangerous complacency — the kind that precedes collapse.

Imagine you’ve got a tangled fishing line — knots everywhere, some loops so tight you can barely see through them. You hand it to someone who claims to be an expert, and they say, “No worries. I’ll handle this.”

Instead of carefully untangling the mess, they grab a pair of scissors and snip the whole thing in half. Problem solved? Technically — yes. But practically? Now your line’s ruined, and your fishing day is done.

Every few years, a few brave souls crawl out of the political swamp and whisper something shocking:
"Maybe we should have sound money again."
Cue the laughter, the sneering, the rolling of eyes.
Sound money? In this political environment?
You have a better chance of teaching a cat to do calculus.

The establishment narrative, as reflected in outlets like The New York Times and CNN, frames Trump’s attacks on Powell as a dangerous assault on institutional norms, warning that undermining Fed independence could crash markets and destabilize the global economy. There’s truth here: central bank independence has been a cornerstone of stable monetary policy since the 1980s, and overt political interference could rattle investors. But this narrative often glosses over the Fed’s own missteps, like its tardy response to 2021-2022 inflation, which Powell himself admitted was a mistake. Critics on the right, including Breitbart’s economics editor John Carney, argue that the Fed’s “restrictive” stance may already be too tight, and Trump’s push for lower rates aligns with economic realities like falling commodity prices.

In a recent interview that is sending ripples through financial circles, Ray Dalio — the billionaire founder of Bridgewater Associates — issued a stark warning: the United States may soon face an economic crisis "worse than a recession" if current trends continue unchecked. Given Dalio’s track record for analyzing macroeconomic trends and forecasting major shifts, his concerns deserve careful attention.

Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press on April 13, 2025, Dalio discussed the mounting risks he sees building across trade, monetary policy, and global geopolitics. His message was clear: we are standing at the edge of a very dangerous cliff, and unless deliberate actions are taken soon, we could experience a downturn far more damaging than a typical recession.

Right now, we're sitting on a pile of debt, fantasy valuations, political chaos, and a central bank that's out of ammo. The whole system is more fragile than most people want to admit.

When the next serious storm rolls in — and it will — the VIX won't just whisper. It’ll be screaming bloody murder.

And if you’re still partying while the fear gauge is hitting the ceiling, don’t say you weren’t warned.

The groundwork for the Fed was laid in 1910 at a secretive meeting on Jekyll Island, Georgia. A group of influential bankers and politicians, including Senator Nelson Aldrich, drafted a plan for a central banking authority. Their proposal aimed to balance public oversight with private expertise. After years of debate and revision, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law on December 23, 1913. The Fed officially began operations in 1914, structured as a unique hybrid: a decentralized system of 12 regional banks overseen by a central Board of Governors, blending government control with private banking input.

In Washington, the refusal to face hard truths has led to a dangerous reliance on debt to fund everything from wars to welfare to Wall Street bailouts. Rather than making tough decisions, politicians have leaned on the Federal Reserve to print more money and suppress interest rates. That’s no longer working. Inflation is no longer “transitory.” Debt payments are now one of the largest line items in the federal budget. And investor confidence is starting to crack.

The investment world is not immune from this same complacency. Many financial advisors still push the same playbook they’ve used for decades—despite mounting evidence that it’s failing to protect portfolios in real-time. Kicking the can with your money, hoping “the market always comes back,” is just as dangerous as doing so in Washington.

Predicting the future is always tricky, but economists agree that managing long-term debt growth is a key policy challenge. As interest rates and inflation fluctuate, elected officials and policymakers will need to strike a balance between investing in critical areas—like infrastructure, education, and healthcare—and dealing with the debt that has spiraled out of control.

During short periods of time, a growing economy can help keep the Debt-to-GDP ratio in check, as a booming GDP effectively makes the debt load relatively smaller. But in the long run, cost-cutting, revenue adjustments, or more efficient spending is needed to maintain a sustainable debt path.