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.

It’s no secret that America’s monetary policy is once again becoming political theater. But this time, the stakes feel even higher. I’ve said before—and will keep saying—that any President will find themselves in a tug-of-war with the Federal Reserve over interest rates. What we’re seeing now isn’t just a policy disagreement. It’s a brewing battle between competing visions for America’s economy, one rooted in market intervention and another in monetary restraint.

Over the last decade, Ray Dalio—billionaire founder of Bridgewater Associates and one of the most successful investors in modern history—has not been shy about sharing his concerns. His warnings have grown louder in recent years, pointing to a convergence of systemic risks that could shape the global economy for decades.

At Bailey Financial Services, we believe these warnings should not be taken lightly. Dalio has an impressive track record of spotting long-term trends before they become front-page news. And if he’s right again, the months and years ahead could require a fundamental rethinking of portfolio risk.

For months now, markets have seemed strangely buoyant. Despite two wars, rising debt levels, sticky inflation, and the most aggressive interest rate tightening cycle in 40 years, equities continue to trade near all-time highs. But not everyone is convinced the storm has passed — and few voices carry more weight than Jamie Dimon, the long-time CEO of JPMorgan Chase.

Dimon is no stranger to tough calls. He’s been at the helm of one of the world’s largest banks through multiple crises — including the Great Financial Crisis of 2008. And in recent weeks, he’s become more vocal about the gathering risks that, in his view, are not being fully appreciated by the markets. His message is clear: a recession remains very possible, and current conditions warrant caution.

Wars, by their very nature, disrupt the movement of goods across borders. Conflict zones become inaccessible. Ports are blocked, shipping lanes become battlegrounds, and airspace can be restricted or shut entirely. When Russia invaded Ukraine, for example, Black Sea ports were closed, grain exports halted, and ripple effects were felt from Europe to Africa. Wars in the Middle East often tighten oil supply, causing crude prices to surge—even when the fighting occurs thousands of miles from a consumer’s gas pump.

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.