Individual Economists

Trump Is Successfully Corralling Countries To Join Trade War Against China

Zero Hedge -

Trump Is Successfully Corralling Countries To Join Trade War Against China

By Benjamin Picton, senior market strategist at Rabobank

Central Banks and State Visits

The week ahead is shaping up as somewhat of a watershed for markets as the FOMC looks poised to deliver the first rate cut of the second Trump presidency. 85 of 93 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg are predicting a 25bp cut (including RaboResearch), with 6 forecasting no change and 2 plumping for an extra-large 50bp cut.

OIS futures are convinced that a cut of at least 25bps is a done deal, despite core PCE and CPI sitting well above the Fed’s 2% target at 2.9% and 3.1% respectively. A delta of 26.1bps is currently priced in to the implied Fed Funds rate following a dovish pivot from Jerome Powell at Jackson Hole, two consecutive months of dreadful jobs figures (which the FT is today laying at the feet of Trump’s tariffs) and some even more dreadful revising-away of previously reported employment gains that appear to have been – in part – magicked-up by the BLS’s Birth-Death model.

Regular readers will recall that Trump – unhappy with the swings in reported employment levels – sensationally fired BLS head Erika McEntarfer after the July payrolls report disclosed a huge 258,000 downward revision to reported employment gains in May and June.

The intrigue of this week’s FOMC meeting will be heightened by the Senate confirmation hearing of Trump acolyte Stephen Miran that is scheduled to take place later today. The administration is pushing to have Miran confirmed as replacement for Adriana Kugler – who recently stepped down from her position as a Fed Governor – before the FOMC meeting begins tomorrow. There’s little doubt that Miran would join July dissenters Bowman and Waller in pushing for a rate cut (maybe even a 50bp cut?) if his appointment is confirmed later today. President Trump certainly seems to think so, he told reporters on Sunday that he is expecting a “big cut” from the FOMC this week.

Separately, President Trump renewed a request on Sunday for a Federal appeals court to allow him to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook prior to this week’s FOMC meeting. Bloomberg Economics lists Cook amongst the most dovish Fed Governors on its spectrometer, which seems to run counter to the idea that Trump wants to stack the FOMC with doves. Could it be that the President is convinced that Fed Governors’ determinations of the appropriateness of monetary policy are not a purely technocratic process and actually exhibit some malleability dependent on who happens to be occupying the White House? See here for our full preview of this week’s FOMC meeting.

The Fed is not the only central bank in action this week. The Bank of Canada, Bank of England, Norges Bank, Bank of Japan and Brazil Central Bank will all be meeting to set policy rates. Of those listed, the BOC and Norges Bank are expected to deliver 25bp cuts, while the BOJ, BOE and BCB keep rates unchanged.

The Bank of Canada finds itself in a similar position to the Fed, whereby the course of its monetary policy is being dictated by a rapidly deteriorating labour market even as inflation pressures remain uncomfortably elevated. As Molly Schwartz and Christian Lawrence point out here, the Canadian economy is being buffeted by tariff shocks through the trade channel which were not helped by the economic nationalism adopted by former PM Trudeau while he had one foot out the door earlier this year. Increasingly, Mark Carney seems to be walking back Trudeau’s hairy-chested approach in favour of a more “go along to get along” strategy with Canada’s Southern Neighbor.

Carney’s slow motion fold on the tariff fight is interesting in the context of Donald Trump’s suggestions late last week that NATO allies should place tariffs of 50-100% on China and India as secondary sanctions for their continued purchases of Russian energy. Uncomfortably, the EU also continues to purchase Russian energy and no leaders of NATO countries have seen fit to endorse Trump’s plan.

However, it might be worth remembering that it was only a short while ago that the 5% spending target demanded of NATO allies by the USA was seen as a non-starter and impossible under current fiscal constraints – until it wasn’t. It was similarly assumed that the EU would not sign on to a one-sided trade agreement with the United States – until it did, and South Korea wasn’t going to agree to 3.5% defence spending – until it did. Are we seeing a pattern here?

Trump has been transparent in his efforts to corral allies into supporting his strategy of isolating China economically and geopolitically, though many media outlets remain oblivious to the broader strategy and continue to see only chaos.

Canada got in ahead of time to impose tariffs of 100% on Chinese EVs and 25% on Chinese steel and aluminum, while Mexico – ahead of USMCA renegotiations slated for next year – has announced tariffs of up to 50% on cars and other products made in China and Asian economies suspected of acting as intermediaries for Chinese transshipment. The EU imposed tariffs of up to 35% on Chinese EVs in October last year, and South Korea has placed duties of 38% on Chinese steel plate and 21% on stainless steel while also making commitments to lend its expertise (and capital) to help revive US shipbuilding. Trump’s demands are prodding allies further down a protectionist path that they are already on toward common tariffs against China.

For further signs of Western leaders crabwalking towards the US’ policy demands, look no further than Australia. Having spent months pushing back on suggestions that Australia would be forced to increase defence spending in line with US demands, PM Albanese recently announced an A$1.7bn investment in a new fleet of AI-equipped undersea lethal drones to be built by US arms manufacturer Anduril. Shortly afterwards, Albanese announced a A$12bn “downpayment” to expand shipbuilding and maintenance facilities in Western Australia where US Virginia class and UK Astute class nuclear submarines will be rotationally-based and undergo sustainment under the terms of the AUKUS agreement (even as a Chinese defence industry study says that AI could make it “nearly impossible” for submarines to survive in future naval combat), thereby reducing capacity pressures on the US’ own shipbuilding and maintenance facilities. Again, are we sensing a trend here?

Trump himself will make a state visit to the UK from Tuesday this week with NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang and OpenAI’s Sam Altman in tow. The FT reports that PM Starmer is today set to announce a new US-UK agreement on nuclear energy, which apparently includes an agreement between the UK’s Centrica and US’ X-Energy to build advanced modular reactors in Hartlepool, England. Other deals covering tech, AI and Scotch whiskey are also likely to be announced.

Of course, energy is an input to all production and the immense electricity consumption of AI-enabling data centres requires abundant affordable energy to be viable. While reporting on the nuclear energy partnership the FT concurrently bemoans that “the West is buried under red tape” as risk-shy bureaucrats ladle on regulation and complexity, thereby killing competition, innovation and productivity of the kind that will be needed to realise the ‘affordable’ part of ‘abundant, affordable energy’. Trump’s trade tariffs and the various national responses to them are pointed to as another source of complexity that Western business has to deal with.

Perhaps a common external tariff would simplify things?

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:45

Trump Is Successfully Corralling Countries To Join Trade War Against China

Zero Hedge -

Trump Is Successfully Corralling Countries To Join Trade War Against China

By Benjamin Picton, senior market strategist at Rabobank

Central Banks and State Visits

The week ahead is shaping up as somewhat of a watershed for markets as the FOMC looks poised to deliver the first rate cut of the second Trump presidency. 85 of 93 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg are predicting a 25bp cut (including RaboResearch), with 6 forecasting no change and 2 plumping for an extra-large 50bp cut.

OIS futures are convinced that a cut of at least 25bps is a done deal, despite core PCE and CPI sitting well above the Fed’s 2% target at 2.9% and 3.1% respectively. A delta of 26.1bps is currently priced in to the implied Fed Funds rate following a dovish pivot from Jerome Powell at Jackson Hole, two consecutive months of dreadful jobs figures (which the FT is today laying at the feet of Trump’s tariffs) and some even more dreadful revising-away of previously reported employment gains that appear to have been – in part – magicked-up by the BLS’s Birth-Death model.

Regular readers will recall that Trump – unhappy with the swings in reported employment levels – sensationally fired BLS head Erika McEntarfer after the July payrolls report disclosed a huge 258,000 downward revision to reported employment gains in May and June.

The intrigue of this week’s FOMC meeting will be heightened by the Senate confirmation hearing of Trump acolyte Stephen Miran that is scheduled to take place later today. The administration is pushing to have Miran confirmed as replacement for Adriana Kugler – who recently stepped down from her position as a Fed Governor – before the FOMC meeting begins tomorrow. There’s little doubt that Miran would join July dissenters Bowman and Waller in pushing for a rate cut (maybe even a 50bp cut?) if his appointment is confirmed later today. President Trump certainly seems to think so, he told reporters on Sunday that he is expecting a “big cut” from the FOMC this week.

Separately, President Trump renewed a request on Sunday for a Federal appeals court to allow him to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook prior to this week’s FOMC meeting. Bloomberg Economics lists Cook amongst the most dovish Fed Governors on its spectrometer, which seems to run counter to the idea that Trump wants to stack the FOMC with doves. Could it be that the President is convinced that Fed Governors’ determinations of the appropriateness of monetary policy are not a purely technocratic process and actually exhibit some malleability dependent on who happens to be occupying the White House? See here for our full preview of this week’s FOMC meeting.

The Fed is not the only central bank in action this week. The Bank of Canada, Bank of England, Norges Bank, Bank of Japan and Brazil Central Bank will all be meeting to set policy rates. Of those listed, the BOC and Norges Bank are expected to deliver 25bp cuts, while the BOJ, BOE and BCB keep rates unchanged.

The Bank of Canada finds itself in a similar position to the Fed, whereby the course of its monetary policy is being dictated by a rapidly deteriorating labour market even as inflation pressures remain uncomfortably elevated. As Molly Schwartz and Christian Lawrence point out here, the Canadian economy is being buffeted by tariff shocks through the trade channel which were not helped by the economic nationalism adopted by former PM Trudeau while he had one foot out the door earlier this year. Increasingly, Mark Carney seems to be walking back Trudeau’s hairy-chested approach in favour of a more “go along to get along” strategy with Canada’s Southern Neighbor.

Carney’s slow motion fold on the tariff fight is interesting in the context of Donald Trump’s suggestions late last week that NATO allies should place tariffs of 50-100% on China and India as secondary sanctions for their continued purchases of Russian energy. Uncomfortably, the EU also continues to purchase Russian energy and no leaders of NATO countries have seen fit to endorse Trump’s plan.

However, it might be worth remembering that it was only a short while ago that the 5% spending target demanded of NATO allies by the USA was seen as a non-starter and impossible under current fiscal constraints – until it wasn’t. It was similarly assumed that the EU would not sign on to a one-sided trade agreement with the United States – until it did, and South Korea wasn’t going to agree to 3.5% defence spending – until it did. Are we seeing a pattern here?

Trump has been transparent in his efforts to corral allies into supporting his strategy of isolating China economically and geopolitically, though many media outlets remain oblivious to the broader strategy and continue to see only chaos.

Canada got in ahead of time to impose tariffs of 100% on Chinese EVs and 25% on Chinese steel and aluminum, while Mexico – ahead of USMCA renegotiations slated for next year – has announced tariffs of up to 50% on cars and other products made in China and Asian economies suspected of acting as intermediaries for Chinese transshipment. The EU imposed tariffs of up to 35% on Chinese EVs in October last year, and South Korea has placed duties of 38% on Chinese steel plate and 21% on stainless steel while also making commitments to lend its expertise (and capital) to help revive US shipbuilding. Trump’s demands are prodding allies further down a protectionist path that they are already on toward common tariffs against China.

For further signs of Western leaders crabwalking towards the US’ policy demands, look no further than Australia. Having spent months pushing back on suggestions that Australia would be forced to increase defence spending in line with US demands, PM Albanese recently announced an A$1.7bn investment in a new fleet of AI-equipped undersea lethal drones to be built by US arms manufacturer Anduril. Shortly afterwards, Albanese announced a A$12bn “downpayment” to expand shipbuilding and maintenance facilities in Western Australia where US Virginia class and UK Astute class nuclear submarines will be rotationally-based and undergo sustainment under the terms of the AUKUS agreement (even as a Chinese defence industry study says that AI could make it “nearly impossible” for submarines to survive in future naval combat), thereby reducing capacity pressures on the US’ own shipbuilding and maintenance facilities. Again, are we sensing a trend here?

Trump himself will make a state visit to the UK from Tuesday this week with NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang and OpenAI’s Sam Altman in tow. The FT reports that PM Starmer is today set to announce a new US-UK agreement on nuclear energy, which apparently includes an agreement between the UK’s Centrica and US’ X-Energy to build advanced modular reactors in Hartlepool, England. Other deals covering tech, AI and Scotch whiskey are also likely to be announced.

Of course, energy is an input to all production and the immense electricity consumption of AI-enabling data centres requires abundant affordable energy to be viable. While reporting on the nuclear energy partnership the FT concurrently bemoans that “the West is buried under red tape” as risk-shy bureaucrats ladle on regulation and complexity, thereby killing competition, innovation and productivity of the kind that will be needed to realise the ‘affordable’ part of ‘abundant, affordable energy’. Trump’s trade tariffs and the various national responses to them are pointed to as another source of complexity that Western business has to deal with.

Perhaps a common external tariff would simplify things?

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:45

Ram Cancels All-Electric Pickup Truck Plan Citing Slowing Demand

Zero Hedge -

Ram Cancels All-Electric Pickup Truck Plan Citing Slowing Demand

Ram has abandoned plans to launch an electric pickup truck, according to a Sept. 12 statement from Stellantis.

“As demand for full-size battery-electric trucks slows in North America, Stellantis is reassessing its product strategy and will discontinue development of a full-size [battery-electric] pickup,” the company stated.

In December 2024, the company stated that it planned on launching its Ram 1500 battery-electric pickup in the first half of 2025.

As part of the latest decision, Ramcharger, a pickup truck featuring an electric battery and a gas engine, will be renamed the Ram 1500 REV.

“This vehicle will set a new benchmark in the half-ton segment, offering exceptional range, towing capability, and payload performance,” the Stellantis statement reads.

As Naveen Athrappully reports below for The Epoch Times, Stellantis’s decision to end its full battery-electric trucks comes as a federal tax incentive for purchasing electric vehicles (EVs) is scheduled to end this month.

The New Clean Vehicle Tax Credit grants up to $7,500 in incentives for buying an EV. The credit was offered as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022.

On July 4, President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law, scheduling the credit to end on Sept. 30. After this date, EV purchases will stop receiving subsidies.

In a Sept. 9 statement, General Motors said it expects negative effects over the short term from the incentives ending.

It stated that August was GM’s “best month ever” in terms of EV sales and that the company is expecting strong demand in September as well.

“The question, of course, is what’s next?“ the company stated. ”There’s no doubt we’ll see lower EV sales next quarter after tax credits end September 30, and it may take several months for the market to normalize. We will almost certainly see a smaller EV market for a while, and we won’t overproduce.”

However, GM remains positive about the EV market’s potential.

“We believe GM can continue to grow EV market share,“ the company stated. ”Our confidence in the future of our EV business starts with our portfolio. Before there was an [Inflation Reduction Act], the strongest segments were affordable EVs and luxury, and we have those bases covered with our stunning Cadillacs, the Chevrolet Equinox EV, and soon, the new Chevrolet Bolt.”

According to a Sept. 3 statement from Cox Automotive, the EV market outlook among dealers hit a “record low” in the third quarter.

“The EV market outlook index, which asked dealers about the EV market three months from now, dropped to 30, the lowest score on record,” Cox stated in a commentary.

Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox, said: “The outlook for future EV sales really comes as no surprise: Dealers have calendars too; they see the end of government-backed incentives fast approaching and are expecting a slowdown as the market adjusts to a new reality in Q4.”

On his first day in office, Trump signed the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order, calling for the removal of incentives for EVs.

Burdensome and ideologically motivated regulations have impeded the development of the United States’ abundant energy resources, the order states.

The order calls for ending the EV mandate, removing regulatory barriers to motor vehicle access, and terminating state emission waivers that limit the sale of gas-powered vehicles.

In June, Trump signed a package of resolutions blocking California’s vehicle emission mandates, which included phasing out the sale of new gasoline-only vehicles by 2035.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta then sued the administration over the revocation of state policies, according to a June 12 statement from the governor’s office.

“Trump’s all-out assault on California continues—and this time he’s destroying our clean air and America’s global competitiveness in the process,“ Newsom said at the time. ”We are suing to stop this latest illegal action by a President who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big polluters.”

California is also mulling funding the $7,500 tax credit for EV vehicles as a way to maintain its zero emissions market.

Meanwhile, a Sept. 9 analysis by EY (previously Ernst & Young) predicts that EV sales in the United States will slow down because of the end of incentives, legislative uncertainty, and new import tariffs.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:25

Ram Cancels All-Electric Pickup Truck Plan Citing Slowing Demand

Zero Hedge -

Ram Cancels All-Electric Pickup Truck Plan Citing Slowing Demand

Ram has abandoned plans to launch an electric pickup truck, according to a Sept. 12 statement from Stellantis.

“As demand for full-size battery-electric trucks slows in North America, Stellantis is reassessing its product strategy and will discontinue development of a full-size [battery-electric] pickup,” the company stated.

In December 2024, the company stated that it planned on launching its Ram 1500 battery-electric pickup in the first half of 2025.

As part of the latest decision, Ramcharger, a pickup truck featuring an electric battery and a gas engine, will be renamed the Ram 1500 REV.

“This vehicle will set a new benchmark in the half-ton segment, offering exceptional range, towing capability, and payload performance,” the Stellantis statement reads.

As Naveen Athrappully reports below for The Epoch Times, Stellantis’s decision to end its full battery-electric trucks comes as a federal tax incentive for purchasing electric vehicles (EVs) is scheduled to end this month.

The New Clean Vehicle Tax Credit grants up to $7,500 in incentives for buying an EV. The credit was offered as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022.

On July 4, President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law, scheduling the credit to end on Sept. 30. After this date, EV purchases will stop receiving subsidies.

In a Sept. 9 statement, General Motors said it expects negative effects over the short term from the incentives ending.

It stated that August was GM’s “best month ever” in terms of EV sales and that the company is expecting strong demand in September as well.

“The question, of course, is what’s next?“ the company stated. ”There’s no doubt we’ll see lower EV sales next quarter after tax credits end September 30, and it may take several months for the market to normalize. We will almost certainly see a smaller EV market for a while, and we won’t overproduce.”

However, GM remains positive about the EV market’s potential.

“We believe GM can continue to grow EV market share,“ the company stated. ”Our confidence in the future of our EV business starts with our portfolio. Before there was an [Inflation Reduction Act], the strongest segments were affordable EVs and luxury, and we have those bases covered with our stunning Cadillacs, the Chevrolet Equinox EV, and soon, the new Chevrolet Bolt.”

According to a Sept. 3 statement from Cox Automotive, the EV market outlook among dealers hit a “record low” in the third quarter.

“The EV market outlook index, which asked dealers about the EV market three months from now, dropped to 30, the lowest score on record,” Cox stated in a commentary.

Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox, said: “The outlook for future EV sales really comes as no surprise: Dealers have calendars too; they see the end of government-backed incentives fast approaching and are expecting a slowdown as the market adjusts to a new reality in Q4.”

On his first day in office, Trump signed the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order, calling for the removal of incentives for EVs.

Burdensome and ideologically motivated regulations have impeded the development of the United States’ abundant energy resources, the order states.

The order calls for ending the EV mandate, removing regulatory barriers to motor vehicle access, and terminating state emission waivers that limit the sale of gas-powered vehicles.

In June, Trump signed a package of resolutions blocking California’s vehicle emission mandates, which included phasing out the sale of new gasoline-only vehicles by 2035.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta then sued the administration over the revocation of state policies, according to a June 12 statement from the governor’s office.

“Trump’s all-out assault on California continues—and this time he’s destroying our clean air and America’s global competitiveness in the process,“ Newsom said at the time. ”We are suing to stop this latest illegal action by a President who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big polluters.”

California is also mulling funding the $7,500 tax credit for EV vehicles as a way to maintain its zero emissions market.

Meanwhile, a Sept. 9 analysis by EY (previously Ernst & Young) predicts that EV sales in the United States will slow down because of the end of incentives, legislative uncertainty, and new import tariffs.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:25

Invest Or Index - Exploring 5-Different Strategies

Zero Hedge -

Invest Or Index - Exploring 5-Different Strategies

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Investing is about choices. Every investor faces the same challenge: how to grow wealth while controlling risk. Over the years, distinct approaches have proven effective, though none guarantee success. Some strategies require patience. Others demand discipline in timing and execution. A few provide stability and income. There is no right or wrong way to invest, and every strategy has pros and cons. In some cycles, one approach will outperform another. That doesn’t mean a strategy is broken; it just means it is out of favor in the current environment. The problem that investors often face is that they abandon an underperforming strategy to chase another, often at precisely the wrong time.

The cycle rotation on investment strategies was discussed in detail in “Why Investing Is Like Gardening:“

“Like everything in life, there is a “season” and a “cycle.” When it comes to the markets, “seasons” are dictated by the “technical and economic constructs,” and the “cycles” are dictated by “valuations.” The seasons are shown in the chart below.”

With this in mind, we will examine five major investment strategies: value, growth, momentum, dividend, and index investing. Each comes with strengths and weaknesses. More importantly, each offers lessons from history’s greatest investors, including Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett. By exploring these strategies, you can better align your portfolio with your financial goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon.

1. Value Investing

Value investing focuses on buying stocks trading below their intrinsic value. Benjamin Graham, often called the father of value investing, defined the approach in Security Analysis (1934) and later The Intelligent Investor. Graham wrote: “An investment operation is one which, upon thorough analysis, promises safety of principal and an adequate return. Operations not meeting these requirements are speculative.”

Value investing emphasizes fundamentals—strong balance sheets, healthy cash flow, and low debt. The strategy assumes markets misprice securities in the short run, but eventually, fundamentals assert themselves. Graham explained this with his famous line: “In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.”

“Why do quality stocks outperform over the long run? The below graph is pretty clear, although recent years could question the conclusions drawn from it: does high-quality always outperform lower-quality? Market euphoria, quantitative easing et cetera oftentimes lead to temporary deviations from this general trend.” – The Compounding Tortoise

Warren Buffett, Graham’s most famous student, captured the essence of value investing in fewer words: “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.” He also stressed the importance of discipline through the idea of a margin of safety. By buying below the intrinsic value, investors protect themselves if the company underperforms or the market takes longer to recognize value.

Tactics for Value Investors

  • Screen for companies with low price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios.

  • Favor firms with consistent free cash flow and limited debt.

  • Require a margin of safety before buying.

  • Diversify across sectors to avoid concentration risk.

  • Exercise patience. Recognition of value often takes years.

Value investing works best for investors willing to wait for fundamentals to assert themselves. It is not exciting, but it has delivered reliable long-term returns.

2. Growth Investing

Growth investing takes the opposite view. Instead of focusing on undervaluation, it targets companies expected to expand faster than the market. Technology, healthcare, and other innovation-driven sectors dominate this space. These companies often reinvest earnings into expansion rather than pay dividends, prioritizing growth over immediate income.

The attraction is clear: owning the next Amazon, Apple, or Nvidia before the market fully appreciates its potential can generate outsized returns. But growth investing carries risks. Paying high multiples for future earnings leaves no margin for error. If growth slows or expectations are missed, share prices fall quickly.

As noted above, growth investing works during economic expansion cycles. However, in late-cycle and pre-recessionary periods, the risks of being solely allocated to growth investing can be detrimental.

Buffett once said: “It’s far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.” This statement captures both value and growth perspectives. Growth matters, but only when tied to quality and reasonable valuation.

Tactics for Growth Investors
  • Target companies with sustained revenue growth above the market average.
  • Use metrics like price-to-sales and price-to-earnings-growth (PEG) to avoid overpaying.
  • Dollar-cost average into volatile names to manage timing risk.
  • Limit allocation. Growth should complement a portfolio, not dominate it.
  • Be prepared for volatility and trim exposure when valuations stretch.

Growth investing suits investors with longer time horizons and higher risk tolerance. The rewards can be significant, but discipline is essential.

3. Momentum Investing

Momentum investing rests on a simple premise: stocks that are rising tend to keep rising, while those falling tend to keep falling. Investors identify strong trends and ride them until they weaken. This strategy relies heavily on technical analysis and often involves short holding periods.

Momentum thrives in bull markets. Herd behavior pushes winners higher, creating self-reinforcing trends. But the risks are significant. Trends can reverse quickly. Benjamin Graham warned: “The more you trade, the more you are likely to lose.” Frequent trading increases costs and exposes investors to sharp reversals when sentiment shifts.

We discussed the concept in more detail in “Momentum Investing:”

“The chart shows the difference in the performance of the “value vs. growth” index. (Fidelity Value Fund vs S&P 500 Index).

Notable are the periods when “value investing” outperforms.

While it may seem like the current bull market will never end, abandoning decades of investment history would be unwise. As Howard Marks once stated:

“Rule No. 1: Most things will prove to be cyclical.

Rule No. 2: Some of the most exceptional opportunities for gain and loss come when other people forget Rule No. 1.”

Momentum is not about fundamentals. It is about psychology and timing. That makes it risky for most investors.

Tactics for Momentum Investors
  • Use strict stop-loss orders to protect capital.
  • Limit position size and portfolio exposure.
  • Focus on liquidity. Stick to names where you can exit quickly.
  • Be disciplined about exits. Do not wait for confirmation once momentum fades.
  • Treat momentum as tactical, not core.

Momentum requires constant monitoring and emotional discipline. It is not for casual investors, but it can be effective for those willing to stay vigilant.

4. Dividend Investing

Dividend investing focuses on stability and income. Investors buy companies with reliable dividend payments and strong balance sheets. This approach appeals to retirees and others who prioritize cash flow over growth. The benefit of dividend investing is that the provision of consistent income reduces reliance on capital gains. They also offer a compounding advantage when reinvested. Over time, reinvested dividends significantly increase portfolio value.

“Dividends have played a significant role in the returns investors have received during the last several decades. Going back to 1960, 85% of the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index can be attributed to reinvested dividends and the power of compounding.” – Hartford Funds

Dividend stocks tend to be less volatile than growth names. Companies that pay dividends often have mature businesses and steady earnings. But this stability comes with trade-offs. High-dividend companies may reinvest less in expansion, limiting growth. Dividend stocks are also sensitive to interest rate changes, as higher bond yields can make them less attractive.

Tactics for Dividend Investors
  • Seek companies with long records of raising dividends.
  • Avoid chasing yield. High yields may signal financial distress.
  • Diversify across industries such as utilities, consumer staples, and healthcare.
  • Reinvest dividends during accumulation years.
  • Transition to income withdrawals during retirement.

Dividend investing provides both income and resilience. It works best for investors seeking stability and compounding power.

5. Index Investing

Index investing is simple. Buy a portfolio that mirrors a benchmark, such as the S&P 500, and hold it. This passive approach minimizes costs and provides broad diversification.

Buffett has long recommended index funds for most investors. In his 2013 annual letter to shareholders, he wrote: “My advice to the trustee could not be simpler: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund.” His reasoning is straightforward; most active managers underperform the market after fees.

Index investing reduces the need for constant decision-making. It captures market returns without trying to predict winners. But it also has drawbacks. Index funds hold every stock in the benchmark, including poor performers. They will not outperform the market, because they are the market.

Tactics for Index Investors
  • Use low-cost funds to minimize expense drag.
  • Make index funds the foundation of your portfolio.
  • Rebalance annually to maintain allocation.
  • Combine with active strategies if you want additional exposure.
  • Stay invested. The biggest risk with index investing is abandoning the strategy during downturns.

Index investing suits those seeking long-term consistency without the complexity of stock selection.

Final Thoughts

Each strategy offers lessons. Value emphasizes patience and fundamentals. Growth rewards innovation but demands valuation discipline. Momentum takes advantage of market psychology but carries high risk. Dividends provide stability and compounding. Index investing delivers simplicity and cost efficiency.

Benjamin Graham warned against speculation disguised as investing: “The essence of investment management is the management of risks, not the management of returns.” Warren Buffett added his own guardrail: “Know your circle of competence, and stick within it. The size of that circle is not very important; knowing its boundaries, however, is vital.”

In practice, the best approach often blends elements of each. Index funds can form a low-cost core. Value and dividend strategies add resilience. Growth provides upside. Momentum, if used carefully, offers tactical opportunities. Success lies not in chasing the latest idea, but in consistency through cycles.

Markets will always be volatile. Strategies will fall in and out of favor. What matters most is discipline. The investor who remains patient, diversified, and focused on long-term goals will outperform those who chase trends or panic during downturns.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:05

Invest Or Index - Exploring 5-Different Strategies

Zero Hedge -

Invest Or Index - Exploring 5-Different Strategies

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Investing is about choices. Every investor faces the same challenge: how to grow wealth while controlling risk. Over the years, distinct approaches have proven effective, though none guarantee success. Some strategies require patience. Others demand discipline in timing and execution. A few provide stability and income. There is no right or wrong way to invest, and every strategy has pros and cons. In some cycles, one approach will outperform another. That doesn’t mean a strategy is broken; it just means it is out of favor in the current environment. The problem that investors often face is that they abandon an underperforming strategy to chase another, often at precisely the wrong time.

The cycle rotation on investment strategies was discussed in detail in “Why Investing Is Like Gardening:“

“Like everything in life, there is a “season” and a “cycle.” When it comes to the markets, “seasons” are dictated by the “technical and economic constructs,” and the “cycles” are dictated by “valuations.” The seasons are shown in the chart below.”

With this in mind, we will examine five major investment strategies: value, growth, momentum, dividend, and index investing. Each comes with strengths and weaknesses. More importantly, each offers lessons from history’s greatest investors, including Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett. By exploring these strategies, you can better align your portfolio with your financial goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon.

1. Value Investing

Value investing focuses on buying stocks trading below their intrinsic value. Benjamin Graham, often called the father of value investing, defined the approach in Security Analysis (1934) and later The Intelligent Investor. Graham wrote: “An investment operation is one which, upon thorough analysis, promises safety of principal and an adequate return. Operations not meeting these requirements are speculative.”

Value investing emphasizes fundamentals—strong balance sheets, healthy cash flow, and low debt. The strategy assumes markets misprice securities in the short run, but eventually, fundamentals assert themselves. Graham explained this with his famous line: “In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.”

“Why do quality stocks outperform over the long run? The below graph is pretty clear, although recent years could question the conclusions drawn from it: does high-quality always outperform lower-quality? Market euphoria, quantitative easing et cetera oftentimes lead to temporary deviations from this general trend.” – The Compounding Tortoise

Warren Buffett, Graham’s most famous student, captured the essence of value investing in fewer words: “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.” He also stressed the importance of discipline through the idea of a margin of safety. By buying below the intrinsic value, investors protect themselves if the company underperforms or the market takes longer to recognize value.

Tactics for Value Investors

  • Screen for companies with low price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios.

  • Favor firms with consistent free cash flow and limited debt.

  • Require a margin of safety before buying.

  • Diversify across sectors to avoid concentration risk.

  • Exercise patience. Recognition of value often takes years.

Value investing works best for investors willing to wait for fundamentals to assert themselves. It is not exciting, but it has delivered reliable long-term returns.

2. Growth Investing

Growth investing takes the opposite view. Instead of focusing on undervaluation, it targets companies expected to expand faster than the market. Technology, healthcare, and other innovation-driven sectors dominate this space. These companies often reinvest earnings into expansion rather than pay dividends, prioritizing growth over immediate income.

The attraction is clear: owning the next Amazon, Apple, or Nvidia before the market fully appreciates its potential can generate outsized returns. But growth investing carries risks. Paying high multiples for future earnings leaves no margin for error. If growth slows or expectations are missed, share prices fall quickly.

As noted above, growth investing works during economic expansion cycles. However, in late-cycle and pre-recessionary periods, the risks of being solely allocated to growth investing can be detrimental.

Buffett once said: “It’s far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.” This statement captures both value and growth perspectives. Growth matters, but only when tied to quality and reasonable valuation.

Tactics for Growth Investors
  • Target companies with sustained revenue growth above the market average.
  • Use metrics like price-to-sales and price-to-earnings-growth (PEG) to avoid overpaying.
  • Dollar-cost average into volatile names to manage timing risk.
  • Limit allocation. Growth should complement a portfolio, not dominate it.
  • Be prepared for volatility and trim exposure when valuations stretch.

Growth investing suits investors with longer time horizons and higher risk tolerance. The rewards can be significant, but discipline is essential.

3. Momentum Investing

Momentum investing rests on a simple premise: stocks that are rising tend to keep rising, while those falling tend to keep falling. Investors identify strong trends and ride them until they weaken. This strategy relies heavily on technical analysis and often involves short holding periods.

Momentum thrives in bull markets. Herd behavior pushes winners higher, creating self-reinforcing trends. But the risks are significant. Trends can reverse quickly. Benjamin Graham warned: “The more you trade, the more you are likely to lose.” Frequent trading increases costs and exposes investors to sharp reversals when sentiment shifts.

We discussed the concept in more detail in “Momentum Investing:”

“The chart shows the difference in the performance of the “value vs. growth” index. (Fidelity Value Fund vs S&P 500 Index).

Notable are the periods when “value investing” outperforms.

While it may seem like the current bull market will never end, abandoning decades of investment history would be unwise. As Howard Marks once stated:

“Rule No. 1: Most things will prove to be cyclical.

Rule No. 2: Some of the most exceptional opportunities for gain and loss come when other people forget Rule No. 1.”

Momentum is not about fundamentals. It is about psychology and timing. That makes it risky for most investors.

Tactics for Momentum Investors
  • Use strict stop-loss orders to protect capital.
  • Limit position size and portfolio exposure.
  • Focus on liquidity. Stick to names where you can exit quickly.
  • Be disciplined about exits. Do not wait for confirmation once momentum fades.
  • Treat momentum as tactical, not core.

Momentum requires constant monitoring and emotional discipline. It is not for casual investors, but it can be effective for those willing to stay vigilant.

4. Dividend Investing

Dividend investing focuses on stability and income. Investors buy companies with reliable dividend payments and strong balance sheets. This approach appeals to retirees and others who prioritize cash flow over growth. The benefit of dividend investing is that the provision of consistent income reduces reliance on capital gains. They also offer a compounding advantage when reinvested. Over time, reinvested dividends significantly increase portfolio value.

“Dividends have played a significant role in the returns investors have received during the last several decades. Going back to 1960, 85% of the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index can be attributed to reinvested dividends and the power of compounding.” – Hartford Funds

Dividend stocks tend to be less volatile than growth names. Companies that pay dividends often have mature businesses and steady earnings. But this stability comes with trade-offs. High-dividend companies may reinvest less in expansion, limiting growth. Dividend stocks are also sensitive to interest rate changes, as higher bond yields can make them less attractive.

Tactics for Dividend Investors
  • Seek companies with long records of raising dividends.
  • Avoid chasing yield. High yields may signal financial distress.
  • Diversify across industries such as utilities, consumer staples, and healthcare.
  • Reinvest dividends during accumulation years.
  • Transition to income withdrawals during retirement.

Dividend investing provides both income and resilience. It works best for investors seeking stability and compounding power.

5. Index Investing

Index investing is simple. Buy a portfolio that mirrors a benchmark, such as the S&P 500, and hold it. This passive approach minimizes costs and provides broad diversification.

Buffett has long recommended index funds for most investors. In his 2013 annual letter to shareholders, he wrote: “My advice to the trustee could not be simpler: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund.” His reasoning is straightforward; most active managers underperform the market after fees.

Index investing reduces the need for constant decision-making. It captures market returns without trying to predict winners. But it also has drawbacks. Index funds hold every stock in the benchmark, including poor performers. They will not outperform the market, because they are the market.

Tactics for Index Investors
  • Use low-cost funds to minimize expense drag.
  • Make index funds the foundation of your portfolio.
  • Rebalance annually to maintain allocation.
  • Combine with active strategies if you want additional exposure.
  • Stay invested. The biggest risk with index investing is abandoning the strategy during downturns.

Index investing suits those seeking long-term consistency without the complexity of stock selection.

Final Thoughts

Each strategy offers lessons. Value emphasizes patience and fundamentals. Growth rewards innovation but demands valuation discipline. Momentum takes advantage of market psychology but carries high risk. Dividends provide stability and compounding. Index investing delivers simplicity and cost efficiency.

Benjamin Graham warned against speculation disguised as investing: “The essence of investment management is the management of risks, not the management of returns.” Warren Buffett added his own guardrail: “Know your circle of competence, and stick within it. The size of that circle is not very important; knowing its boundaries, however, is vital.”

In practice, the best approach often blends elements of each. Index funds can form a low-cost core. Value and dividend strategies add resilience. Growth provides upside. Momentum, if used carefully, offers tactical opportunities. Success lies not in chasing the latest idea, but in consistency through cycles.

Markets will always be volatile. Strategies will fall in and out of favor. What matters most is discipline. The investor who remains patient, diversified, and focused on long-term goals will outperform those who chase trends or panic during downturns.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 13:05

President Trump Calls To End Quarterly Financial Reporting, Suggesting Semiannual Schedule Instead

Zero Hedge -

President Trump Calls To End Quarterly Financial Reporting, Suggesting Semiannual Schedule Instead

President Donald Trump suggested Monday on Truth Social that companies should stop filing quarterly earnings reports and instead move to a semiannual schedule. Trump’s call to replace quarterly earnings reports with semiannual filings revives a debate that also surfaced during his first term.

In his post, Trump said the idea is “subject to SEC approval” and would “save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies.” He added: “Did you ever hear the statement that, ‘China has a 50 to 100 year view on management of a company, whereas we run our companies on a quarterly basis??? Not good!!!’”

The concept has long divided business leaders and regulators. In 2018, Warren Buffett and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon argued against quarterly guidance, writing: “In our experience, quarterly earnings guidance often leads to an unhealthy focus on short-term profits at the expense of long-term strategy, growth and sustainability.”

But others warn that reducing reporting could weaken transparency. “Trying to get companies less hyper focused on the short-term quarterly hamster wheel would be good, but it's far from clear that reducing investor disclosure to semi-annual reporting would do that,” Dennis Kelleher, CEO of advocacy group Better Markets, told Axios. “The real solution would be getting Boards of Directors to incentivize and then support corporate executives to focus more on the long term and less on the short term.”

TD Cowen, in a note Monday, said Trump’s comments could carry weight: given his push to roll back regulations, the post moves the idea “from improbable to probable though not guaranteed,” according to Axios.

“In speaking with some of the world’s top business leaders I asked what it is that would make business (jobs) even better in the U.S. ‘Stop quarterly reporting & go to a six month system,’ said one. That would allow greater flexibility & save money. I have asked the SEC to study!” Trump said in a post on X during his first term in 2018.

Currently, U.S. companies must file quarterly reports, though forecasts remain voluntary. Proponents say frequent reports give investors timely, reliable insights, with GAAP standards ensuring consistency. Critics, however, argue that short-term pressure hampers long-range planning.

Despite Trump’s comparison to China, firms there are required to file quarterly, semiannual, and annual reports. Hong Kong-listed companies report every six months, similar to rules in the U.K. and EU, where quarterly updates are optional. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund recently proposed semiannual reporting as well, citing the need for companies to prioritize long-term growth.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 12:45

President Trump Calls To End Quarterly Financial Reporting, Suggesting Semiannual Schedule Instead

Zero Hedge -

President Trump Calls To End Quarterly Financial Reporting, Suggesting Semiannual Schedule Instead

President Donald Trump suggested Monday on Truth Social that companies should stop filing quarterly earnings reports and instead move to a semiannual schedule. Trump’s call to replace quarterly earnings reports with semiannual filings revives a debate that also surfaced during his first term.

In his post, Trump said the idea is “subject to SEC approval” and would “save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies.” He added: “Did you ever hear the statement that, ‘China has a 50 to 100 year view on management of a company, whereas we run our companies on a quarterly basis??? Not good!!!’”

The concept has long divided business leaders and regulators. In 2018, Warren Buffett and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon argued against quarterly guidance, writing: “In our experience, quarterly earnings guidance often leads to an unhealthy focus on short-term profits at the expense of long-term strategy, growth and sustainability.”

But others warn that reducing reporting could weaken transparency. “Trying to get companies less hyper focused on the short-term quarterly hamster wheel would be good, but it's far from clear that reducing investor disclosure to semi-annual reporting would do that,” Dennis Kelleher, CEO of advocacy group Better Markets, told Axios. “The real solution would be getting Boards of Directors to incentivize and then support corporate executives to focus more on the long term and less on the short term.”

TD Cowen, in a note Monday, said Trump’s comments could carry weight: given his push to roll back regulations, the post moves the idea “from improbable to probable though not guaranteed,” according to Axios.

“In speaking with some of the world’s top business leaders I asked what it is that would make business (jobs) even better in the U.S. ‘Stop quarterly reporting & go to a six month system,’ said one. That would allow greater flexibility & save money. I have asked the SEC to study!” Trump said in a post on X during his first term in 2018.

Currently, U.S. companies must file quarterly reports, though forecasts remain voluntary. Proponents say frequent reports give investors timely, reliable insights, with GAAP standards ensuring consistency. Critics, however, argue that short-term pressure hampers long-range planning.

Despite Trump’s comparison to China, firms there are required to file quarterly, semiannual, and annual reports. Hong Kong-listed companies report every six months, similar to rules in the U.K. and EU, where quarterly updates are optional. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund recently proposed semiannual reporting as well, citing the need for companies to prioritize long-term growth.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 12:45

The Fed Models Were Wrong About The US Economy

Zero Hedge -

The Fed Models Were Wrong About The US Economy

Authored by Daniel Lacelle,

In 2025, the mainstream Keynesian narrative that the United States would inevitably experience a recession and stagflation has proven to be utterly incorrect.

The American economy is performing much better than its comparable nations, is showing broad-based strength, and even has indications of accelerating growth, giving investors and consumers plenty of reason to feel more optimistic, despite the consensus estimates from earlier in the year.

The consensus was wrong.

The United States economy is outperforming the economies of the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and the entire euro area, showing estimates of economic growth that exceed those of the best-performing developed nations, along with significantly lower unemployment rates and solid real wage growth.

Due to exaggerated expectations of the impact of factors like new tariffs, global uncertainty, and the potential for persistently high inflation, most mainstream analysts and market commentators projected a stagnant or recessionary environment for the US in 2025, while hailing the euro area as the place to invest. We have seen the opposite.

US bond yields are falling, while euro area sovereign yields are rising despite ECB rate cuts. Additionally, GDP growth estimates for the euro area are weak, and US economic growth is stronger than the European Union’s “engines of growth,” whereas Japan and the UK remain stagnant. Inflation is under control, real wage growth is strong, and the private sector is improving.

The mainstream consensus predictions were biased and incorrect. Rather, the US economy has reported strong real GDP growth: following a short contraction in Q1, growth in the second quarter bounced back to 3–3.3% annually, and the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model currently projects Q3 growth at a stable 3% pace. In addition to consumer spending and imports, business investment also contributed to this GDP strength, and, more importantly, it came with government spending under control.

The most recent CPI and PPI data dispel concerns that the tariff regime is causing inflation. CPI and core measures in August came in close to or below expectations, indicating that headline monthly inflation and producer price increases are still under control. Prices for durable and nondurable goods are still stable, and, despite negative forecasts, tariffs have not generated a significant increase in the cost of living for Americans; instead, energy and important imports have either decreased or stabilised.

Despite recent revisions, the private-sector labor market maintained momentum from January through August. The significant negative revisions occurred during the January-December 2024 period, indicating that the Biden administration’s job creation was only half of what was reported and required a two million downward adjustment to the job figures from 2023 to 2024. What the Bureau of Labour Statistics has shown clearly is that the United States was in a private sector recession in 2024, which justified the negative sentiment from citizens.

Private payrolls have reported consistent net gains, particularly in the important service and construction segments, despite slight revisions to previous months. Even more encouraging is the fact that real wage growth is accelerating rather than merely keeping up with inflation. Real average hourly earnings increased by 1.2%, and real weekly earnings increased by 1.4% between July 2024 and July 2025. Increased purchasing power is boosting middle-class disposable income and driving retail demand because wage gains are outpacing price growth.

Retail sales also remain resilient in the face of market volatility and trade uncertainty. Bloomberg predicts that headline retail sales will increase by 0.2% in August, while the core control group will increase by 0.3%. This increase is significantly better than what April estimates showed, particularly since consumer sentiment is still cautious but generally stable. Throughout the third quarter, household consumption is increasing due to strong private labor markets and healthy wage growth.

The growing agreement that inflation risks are under control represents the most significant development for financial markets, paving the way for the Federal Reserve to finally recognise reality and cut interest rates in the coming months. Markets are beginning to anticipate that the Fed will soon lower interest rates, which could further boost borrowing, investment, and the economy’s momentum for the rest of 2025.

Despite the pessimistic predictions of recession and stagflation, they have proven to be undeniably wrong. The US economy is in a period of true private sector expansion, thanks to strong job and wage growth, favourable taxation, and deregulation, whereas tariffs are having no real impact on inflation. Now the Fed needs to be truly data dependent. Putting aside the pessimism of the previous year, the data currently indicates an improving outlook and a recovery from the private sector recession and fiscal mess inherited in 2024.

The Fed models were wrong about inflation and used labor market figures that were hugely inflated. The Fed should have read its own Beige Book, which alerted of a marked slowdown in job creation in March and April, instead of succumbing to the biased consensus narrative.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 12:25

The Fed Models Were Wrong About The US Economy

Zero Hedge -

The Fed Models Were Wrong About The US Economy

Authored by Daniel Lacelle,

In 2025, the mainstream Keynesian narrative that the United States would inevitably experience a recession and stagflation has proven to be utterly incorrect.

The American economy is performing much better than its comparable nations, is showing broad-based strength, and even has indications of accelerating growth, giving investors and consumers plenty of reason to feel more optimistic, despite the consensus estimates from earlier in the year.

The consensus was wrong.

The United States economy is outperforming the economies of the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and the entire euro area, showing estimates of economic growth that exceed those of the best-performing developed nations, along with significantly lower unemployment rates and solid real wage growth.

Due to exaggerated expectations of the impact of factors like new tariffs, global uncertainty, and the potential for persistently high inflation, most mainstream analysts and market commentators projected a stagnant or recessionary environment for the US in 2025, while hailing the euro area as the place to invest. We have seen the opposite.

US bond yields are falling, while euro area sovereign yields are rising despite ECB rate cuts. Additionally, GDP growth estimates for the euro area are weak, and US economic growth is stronger than the European Union’s “engines of growth,” whereas Japan and the UK remain stagnant. Inflation is under control, real wage growth is strong, and the private sector is improving.

The mainstream consensus predictions were biased and incorrect. Rather, the US economy has reported strong real GDP growth: following a short contraction in Q1, growth in the second quarter bounced back to 3–3.3% annually, and the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model currently projects Q3 growth at a stable 3% pace. In addition to consumer spending and imports, business investment also contributed to this GDP strength, and, more importantly, it came with government spending under control.

The most recent CPI and PPI data dispel concerns that the tariff regime is causing inflation. CPI and core measures in August came in close to or below expectations, indicating that headline monthly inflation and producer price increases are still under control. Prices for durable and nondurable goods are still stable, and, despite negative forecasts, tariffs have not generated a significant increase in the cost of living for Americans; instead, energy and important imports have either decreased or stabilised.

Despite recent revisions, the private-sector labor market maintained momentum from January through August. The significant negative revisions occurred during the January-December 2024 period, indicating that the Biden administration’s job creation was only half of what was reported and required a two million downward adjustment to the job figures from 2023 to 2024. What the Bureau of Labour Statistics has shown clearly is that the United States was in a private sector recession in 2024, which justified the negative sentiment from citizens.

Private payrolls have reported consistent net gains, particularly in the important service and construction segments, despite slight revisions to previous months. Even more encouraging is the fact that real wage growth is accelerating rather than merely keeping up with inflation. Real average hourly earnings increased by 1.2%, and real weekly earnings increased by 1.4% between July 2024 and July 2025. Increased purchasing power is boosting middle-class disposable income and driving retail demand because wage gains are outpacing price growth.

Retail sales also remain resilient in the face of market volatility and trade uncertainty. Bloomberg predicts that headline retail sales will increase by 0.2% in August, while the core control group will increase by 0.3%. This increase is significantly better than what April estimates showed, particularly since consumer sentiment is still cautious but generally stable. Throughout the third quarter, household consumption is increasing due to strong private labor markets and healthy wage growth.

The growing agreement that inflation risks are under control represents the most significant development for financial markets, paving the way for the Federal Reserve to finally recognise reality and cut interest rates in the coming months. Markets are beginning to anticipate that the Fed will soon lower interest rates, which could further boost borrowing, investment, and the economy’s momentum for the rest of 2025.

Despite the pessimistic predictions of recession and stagflation, they have proven to be undeniably wrong. The US economy is in a period of true private sector expansion, thanks to strong job and wage growth, favourable taxation, and deregulation, whereas tariffs are having no real impact on inflation. Now the Fed needs to be truly data dependent. Putting aside the pessimism of the previous year, the data currently indicates an improving outlook and a recovery from the private sector recession and fiscal mess inherited in 2024.

The Fed models were wrong about inflation and used labor market figures that were hugely inflated. The Fed should have read its own Beige Book, which alerted of a marked slowdown in job creation in March and April, instead of succumbing to the biased consensus narrative.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 12:25

Kash Patel Confirms DNA Evidence Match In Kirk Assassination, Reveals Details Of Note

Zero Hedge -

Kash Patel Confirms DNA Evidence Match In Kirk Assassination, Reveals Details Of Note

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

DNA evidence matching that of Charlie Kirk’s suspected killer was found at the crime scene, FBI Director Kash Patel said on Monday.

A police mugshot of Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the fatal shooting of U.S. conservative commentator Charlie Kirk during an event at Utah Valley University, in Orem, Utah, in this photo released by the Utah Department of Public Safety on Sept. 12, 2025. Utah Department of Public Safety/Handout via Reuters

Tyler Robinson, the suspect arrested for the Sept. 10 assassination of the conservative Christian influencer at Utah Valley University, also left a note indicating that he expressed that he had an opportunity to kill Kirk, Patel said.

In a Sept. 15 interview with Fox News, Patel said, “I can report today that the DNA hits from the towel that was wrapped around the firearm and the DNA on the screwdriver are positively processed for the suspect in custody.”

Patel also referred to reports of an alleged note left behind by Robinson, saying that the suspect wrote that he had the “opportunity to take out” Kirk and wrote, “I’m going to take it.” That message was written before the Sept. 10 shooting, he added.

Patel said that it was both a “note” and a “text message exchange,“ adding that it was ”destroyed“ but that investigators recovered it. Other evidence in the case, Patel said, was ”shocking,” although he didn’t go into more detail.

Touching on a possible ideologically based motive, Patel said that Robinson’s family said that he “subscribed to left-wing ideology,” echoing a statement made by Utah Gov. Spencer Cox during several Sunday interviews about the suspect’s viewpoints.

Cox confirmed that Robinson was in a “romantic relationship” with a transgender individual who was also his roommate. That individual is cooperating with federal officials, although Robinson is not, Cox has said.

“Friends have confirmed that there was kind of that deep, dark internet, the Reddit culture, and these other dark places of the internet where this person was going deep,” the governor said.

And he added that his “roommate was a romantic partner, a male transitioning to female.”

“I can say that he has been incredibly cooperative, this partner has been very cooperative, had no idea that this was happening,” Cox said.

This past week, Cox also said that the suspected killer engraved messages containing anti-fascist viewpoints on bullets that were recovered by authorities. Court records and Cox said that one bullet casing had the message, “Hey, fascist! Catch!”

The update comes as the Utah County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to The Epoch Times on Sunday that Robinson was moved to a “special watch” area in the jail facility, adding that there is no evidence to suggest that he wants to kill himself.

Kirk founded Turning Point USA in 2012 to bring more young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics as effective influencers, and he was a confidant of President Donald Trump. Nationwide, vigils were held, including one Sunday night at the Kennedy Center in Washington.

Kirk, a 31-year-old father of two, became prominent in part through his campus speaking tours. He was shot on Wednesday while answering a question at the college in Orem, Utah.

Speakers at the Kennedy Center included White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, two House members whose remembrances of Kirk were briefly stalled when they teared up, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., House Speaker Mike Johnson, and White House adviser Stephen Miller.

“I had a conversation once with Charlie. We were talking about the danger that we were both challenging entrenched interests, and he asked if I was scared of dying. And I said, ‘There’s a lot worse things than dying,'” Kennedy said.

With Kirk’s death, Kennedy said that “it’s our job” to “win this battle for our country.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

*  *  *

These are amazing, organic, and help you poop if you eat 2 bags in an afternoon according to a friend and definitely not me.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 11:45

Kash Patel Confirms DNA Evidence Match In Kirk Assassination, Reveals Details Of Note

Zero Hedge -

Kash Patel Confirms DNA Evidence Match In Kirk Assassination, Reveals Details Of Note

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

DNA evidence matching that of Charlie Kirk’s suspected killer was found at the crime scene, FBI Director Kash Patel said on Monday.

A police mugshot of Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the fatal shooting of U.S. conservative commentator Charlie Kirk during an event at Utah Valley University, in Orem, Utah, in this photo released by the Utah Department of Public Safety on Sept. 12, 2025. Utah Department of Public Safety/Handout via Reuters

Tyler Robinson, the suspect arrested for the Sept. 10 assassination of the conservative Christian influencer at Utah Valley University, also left a note indicating that he expressed that he had an opportunity to kill Kirk, Patel said.

In a Sept. 15 interview with Fox News, Patel said, “I can report today that the DNA hits from the towel that was wrapped around the firearm and the DNA on the screwdriver are positively processed for the suspect in custody.”

Patel also referred to reports of an alleged note left behind by Robinson, saying that the suspect wrote that he had the “opportunity to take out” Kirk and wrote, “I’m going to take it.” That message was written before the Sept. 10 shooting, he added.

Patel said that it was both a “note” and a “text message exchange,“ adding that it was ”destroyed“ but that investigators recovered it. Other evidence in the case, Patel said, was ”shocking,” although he didn’t go into more detail.

Touching on a possible ideologically based motive, Patel said that Robinson’s family said that he “subscribed to left-wing ideology,” echoing a statement made by Utah Gov. Spencer Cox during several Sunday interviews about the suspect’s viewpoints.

Cox confirmed that Robinson was in a “romantic relationship” with a transgender individual who was also his roommate. That individual is cooperating with federal officials, although Robinson is not, Cox has said.

“Friends have confirmed that there was kind of that deep, dark internet, the Reddit culture, and these other dark places of the internet where this person was going deep,” the governor said.

And he added that his “roommate was a romantic partner, a male transitioning to female.”

“I can say that he has been incredibly cooperative, this partner has been very cooperative, had no idea that this was happening,” Cox said.

This past week, Cox also said that the suspected killer engraved messages containing anti-fascist viewpoints on bullets that were recovered by authorities. Court records and Cox said that one bullet casing had the message, “Hey, fascist! Catch!”

The update comes as the Utah County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to The Epoch Times on Sunday that Robinson was moved to a “special watch” area in the jail facility, adding that there is no evidence to suggest that he wants to kill himself.

Kirk founded Turning Point USA in 2012 to bring more young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics as effective influencers, and he was a confidant of President Donald Trump. Nationwide, vigils were held, including one Sunday night at the Kennedy Center in Washington.

Kirk, a 31-year-old father of two, became prominent in part through his campus speaking tours. He was shot on Wednesday while answering a question at the college in Orem, Utah.

Speakers at the Kennedy Center included White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, two House members whose remembrances of Kirk were briefly stalled when they teared up, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., House Speaker Mike Johnson, and White House adviser Stephen Miller.

“I had a conversation once with Charlie. We were talking about the danger that we were both challenging entrenched interests, and he asked if I was scared of dying. And I said, ‘There’s a lot worse things than dying,'” Kennedy said.

With Kirk’s death, Kennedy said that “it’s our job” to “win this battle for our country.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

*  *  *

These are amazing, organic, and help you poop if you eat 2 bags in an afternoon according to a friend and definitely not me.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 11:45

Romania Is 2nd NATO Country In A Week To Be Breached By Russian Drones

Zero Hedge -

Romania Is 2nd NATO Country In A Week To Be Breached By Russian Drones

Romania summoned the Russian ambassador to Bucharest on Sunday after alleging a Russian drone had entered its airspace, marking the second such incident involving a NATO member in less than a week, and at a moment NATO assets in the region remain on high alert, after the Poland incident.

The Russian drone was said to have been tracked by Poland's air force in the vicinity of Ukraine's southern border, the country’s defense minister said. A European Union official has blasted the latest breach as a "reckless escalation".

Romania scrambled a pair two F-16 fighter jets in response to monitor the air situation near the border with Ukraine, following Russian strikes on Ukrainian Danube infrastructure" at 6:05pm Saturday local time.

Source: EPA/BBC

However, Romania's military also noted that the drone did not fly over populated areas and "did not pose an imminent threat to the civilian population." The breach incident came after "Russian air attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure on the Danube."

Romanian Foreign Minister Oana Toiu confirmed that Russia's ambassador to Bucharest had been summoned in "protest against this unacceptable and irresponsible act, which represents a violation of Romania's sovereignty."

Interestingly, the Romanian pilots had a chance to intercept the drones and decided not to, allowing them to freely exit the airspace, according to BBC:

Under a new Romanian law passed this summer, the pilots were authorized to shoot the Russian drone down, but decided not to.

The defence ministry said it "assessed the collateral risks and decided not to open fire". The statement came after the air force was criticized in Romanian media for not shooting the drone down.

Last week's incident in Poland resulted in three of the Russian drones - which some sources described as mere decoy drones - being shot out of the sky. PM Donald Tusk indicated 19 drones were observed breaching Poland's airspace.

But in that case, one drone did fall on a Polish family's house, resulting in damage but no casualties. It could be that the Romanian pilots were concerned over debris possibly hurting civilians or damaging infrastructure below, and held off intercepting.

Just last month, Russia once again struck energy and port infrastructure just across the border, within visibility of the Romanian side...

Despite Bucharest playing down the fresh incident, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has once again seized the opportunity, saying on X that "The Russian military knows exactly where their drones are headed and how long they can operate in the air. Their routes are always calculated."

He concluded: "This cannot be a coincidence, a mistake, or the initiative of some lower-level commanders. It is an obvious expansion of the war by Russia - and this is exactly how they act. Small steps at first, and eventually big losses."

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 11:25

2nd Look at Local Housing Markets in August

Calculated Risk -

Today, in the Calculated Risk Real Estate Newsletter: 2nd Look at Local Housing Markets in August

A brief excerpt:
Tracking local data gives an early look at what happened the previous month and also reveals regional differences in both sales and inventory.

August sales will be mostly for contracts signed in June and July, and mortgage rates averaged 6.82% in June and 6.72% in July (somewhat lower than for closed sales in July).

Closed Existing Home SalesIn August, sales in these early reporting markets were down 5.0% YoY. Last month, in July, these same markets were up 0.5% year-over-year Not Seasonally Adjusted (NSA).

Important: There were one fewer working days in August 2025 (21) as in August 2024 (22). So, the year-over-year change in the headline SA data will be more than the NSA data (there are other seasonal factors).
...
Many more local markets to come!
There is much more in the article.

The Anti-Immigration AfD Party Is Once Again Achieving Record Results In Eastern Germany

Zero Hedge -

The Anti-Immigration AfD Party Is Once Again Achieving Record Results In Eastern Germany

Via Remix News,

Another poll has recorded a record result for the Alternative for Germany (AfD), this time in the eastern German state of Thuringia, which shows the party receiving 37 percent of the vote.

The poll comes shortly after the AfD received a record result in another east German state, Saxony-Anhalt.

The poll, from Insa, shows AfD has improved its result by 4.2 points from its Sept. 1, 2024, results, when it finished in first place in Thuringia with a large lead.

The other poll in Saxony-Anhalt, conducted by Infratest dimap, recorded a shockingly high result of 39 percent for the AfD.

Both polls are rippling through the German establishment, which appears powerless to challenge the AfD through democratic means. In turn, calls for a ban are growing louder and more shrill as more and more Germans line up behind the policies presented by the AfD.

Currently, the state of Thuringia is led by Minister-President Mario Voigt, who came in second after the AfD in the 2024 elections. In fact, the CDU was 12 points behind, receiving 25 percent. However, a governing coalition arose of the CDU, BSW and SPD, which allowed them to secure a majority. The party is also dependent on the Left Party.

It appears that a large number of voters from the left-wing BSW have jumped to the AfD, with the party falling from 15.8 to 9 percent, and the SPD is at 7 percent. Together, this coalition would only have 41 percent, a drop from its 45.5 percent in the state election.

The AfD has seen a sharp surge in support in the west of Germany, but it still retains its highest share of support in the east of the country.

This could one day translate into the AfD holding power in some of these states, but in nationwide elections, the eastern states have a far smaller share of the population compared to the west.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 10:15

Key Events This Week: Central Banks Galore

Zero Hedge -

Key Events This Week: Central Banks Galore

This week is all about central banks in general, and specifically the Fed decision on Wednesday which will see the continuation of the US rate cutting cycle that started exactly a year ago (two months before the election) and got as far as one 50bps and two 25bps cuts (after Trump won), with the last being 9 months ago now (after Trump won, again).

The Fed is not the only big central bank meeting this week with the Bank of Canada also meeting on Wednesday with the BoE and Norges Bank on Thursday, and the BoJ on Friday being the other main ones deciding on rates. Markets are pricing in an 85% probability of a Canadian cut, a 61% of a Norwegian one but minuscule probabilities of a change in Japan or the UK. Overall, Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid calculates that there are 16 global central banks deciding on rates this week with Brazil and Indonesia on Wednesday the largest of the rest, with markets expecting both to stay on hold.

Other highlights through the week are speeches from the likes of Lagarde and Schnabel from the ECB today; US retail sales, industrial production, and the NAHB index, alongside the UK employment data, Canadian CPI, the German ZEW survey and a 20yr UST auction tomorrow; US housing starts and permits, and UK inflation on Wednesday; the US Philly Fed, jobless claims and a 10yr TIPS auction on Thursday; and Japanese CPI, German PPI and UK, French and Canadian retail sales on Friday (full day by day calendar of events below).

Previewing the Fed now: markets are pricing in 26bps worth of cuts and haven't ever gone beyond 29bps (just after payrolls 10 days ago) for this meeting. So, assuming no big surprises, this FOMC is all about the signalling via the statement, Powell's press conference, and the SEP. Last week, DB economists changed their view to 75bps worth of cuts this year, 25bps at each of the remaining meetings. This path would leave the fed funds rate at 3.5-3.75% by year end, consistent with their view of neutral. The weaker labor market data and slightly lower inflation than they anticipated has led them to this view, but they don't expect further cuts in 2026 although the risks are on the downside, and much might depend on how the Fed leadership and board composition evolves. Markets are pricing in 141bps of cuts by next December, so significantly above DB's forecasts, with Goldman among the most vocal banks expecting continued rates cuts next year. 

Taking a closer look, DB economists believe that the median dot of the updated SEP will likely show 75bps of total reductions for 2025, 25bps more than in June. However, there is likely to be differing views within the committee. On the dovish side there could be three calling for a 50bp cut and possibly one or two voting for no change. It has the potential to be the first meeting where three governors dissent since 1988, and the first with dissents on both sides since September 2019.

Powell’s discussion of the labor market is likely to sound materially different compared to the July meeting and closer to his communications at Jackson Hole, but he could still allude to some of the slowdown in job gains reflecting supply-side dynamics driven by immigration policies. His tone on inflation will likely be more dovish as although August CPI was somewhat hotter than expected the details from PPI and CPI point to a more subdued reading on core PCE later this month, likely in the 20-24bps range. Overall the meeting's most important theme will be what it signals going forward. 

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday September 15

  • Data: US September Empire manufacturing index, China August retail sales, industrial production, home prices, property investment, Germany August wholesale price index, Italy July trade balance, general government debt, Eurozone July trade balance, Canada August existing home sales, July manufacturing sales
  • Central banks: ECB's Lagarde, Kocher and Schnabel speak

Tuesday September 16

  • Data: US August retail sales, industrial production, import price index, export price index, capacity utilisation, September New York Fed services business activity, NAHB housing market index, July business inventories, UK July average weekly earnings, unemployment rate, August jobless claims change, Japan July Tertiary industry index, Germany September Zew survey, Eurozone September Zew survey, July industrial production, Q2 labour costs, Canada August CPI, housing starts
  • Central banks: ECB's Escriva speaks
  • Auctions: US 20-yr Bond (reopening, $13bn)

Wednesday September 17

  • Data: US August building permits, housing starts, UK August CPI, RPI, July house price index, Japan August trade balance, Canada July international securities transactions, New Zealand Q2 GDP
  • Central banks: Fed decision, BoC decision, ECB's Lagarde, Muller, Escriva, Cipollone and Nagel speak
  • Earnings: General Mills

Thursday September 18

  • Data: US September Philadelphia Fed business outlook, August leading index, July total net TIC flows, initial jobless claims, Japan July core machine orders, Italy July current account balance, ECB July current account, Eurozone July construction output, Australia August labour report
  • Central banks: BoE decision, Norges Bank decision, ECB's Lagarde, Guindos, Escriva, Nagel and Schnabel speak
  • Earnings: FedEx, Lennar
  • Auctions: US 10-yr TIPS (reopening, $19bn)

Friday September 19

  • Data: UK September GfK consumer confidence, August retail sales, public finances, Japan August national CPI, Germany August PPI, France September manufacturing confidence, August retail sales, Canada July retail sales
  • Central banks: BoJ decision

Looking at just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data releases this week are the retail sales report on Tuesday and the Philly Fed manufacturing index on Thursday. The September FOMC meeting is this week. The post-meeting statement will be released at 2:00 PM ET, followed by Chair Powell’s press conference at 2:30 PM.

Monday, September 15 

  • 08:30 AM Empire State manufacturing survey, September (consensus 4.9, last 11.9)

Tuesday, September 16 

  • 08:30 AM Retail sales, August (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.5%); Retail sales ex-auto, August (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.3%); Retail sales ex-auto & gas, August (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.2%); Core retail sales, August (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.5%): We estimate core retail sales increased 0.3% in August (ex-autos, gasoline, and building materials; month-over-month SA). Our forecast reflects sequentially slower measures of card spending growth. We estimate headline retail sales increased 0.2%, reflecting a decline in auto sales.
  • 08:30 AM Import price index, August (last +0.4%): Export price index, August (last +0.1%)
  • 09:15 AM Industrial production, August (GS -0.1%, consensus -0.1%, last -0.1%); Manufacturing production, August (GS -0.2%, consensus -0.3%, last flat); Capacity utilization, August (GS 77.4%, consensus 77.4%, last 77.5%): We estimate industrial production declined by 0.1% in August, as declines in non-auto manufacturing, natural gas, electricity and mining production outweighed a modest rebound in auto production. We estimate capacity utilization edged down to 77.4%.
  • 10:00 AM Business inventories, July (consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%)
  • 10:00 AM NAHB housing market index, September (last 32)

Wednesday, September 17 

  • 08:30 AM Housing starts, August (GS -3.0%, consensus -3.7%, last 5.2%); Building permits, August (consensus +0.6%, last -2.2%)
  • 02:00 PM FOMC statement, September 16-17 meeting: We expect the FOMC to lower the fed funds rate by 25bp at its September meeting, followed by 25bp cuts at the October and December meetings and two additional cuts in 2026 for a terminal rate of 3-3.25%. We expect the statement to acknowledge the softening in the labor market but do not expect a change to the policy guidance or a nod to an October cut. We expect the median dot to show just two cuts in total in 2025 to 3.875%, though by a narrow margin, two more cuts in 2026 to 3.375%, one cut in 2027 to 3.125%, no change in 2028, and an unchanged longer-run or neutral rate of 3%. In the 2025 economic projections, we expect the median to continue to show 1.4% GDP growth, a 4.5% unemployment rate, and 3.1% core PCE inflation, all close to or in line with our own forecasts.

Thursday, September 18 

  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended September 13 (GS 236k, consensus 240k, last 263k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended September 6 (last 1,939k): After fraudulent unemployment insurance applications in Texas drove the national series sharply higher last week, we forecast a retrenchment in initial claims to their two-week-ago level of 236k.
  • 08:30 AM Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index, September (GS 2.5, consensus 3.0, last -0.3)

Friday, September 19 

  • There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 

Source: DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 10:05

"Trump Inherited A Turd Of An Economy" - Ed Dowd Warns Of 'Panic Rate-Cut Cycle'

Zero Hedge -

"Trump Inherited A Turd Of An Economy" - Ed Dowd Warns Of 'Panic Rate-Cut Cycle'

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Former Wall Street money manager and financial analyst Ed Dowd of PhinanceTechnologies.com had a storied Wall Street career.  He got out of Enron and Lucent long before they crashed and burned. 

A few of the many other more recent correct calls Dowd has made include:  interest rates topping and heading lower (they did), housing tanking and going lower (happening now), massive fraud propping up the Biden economy with illegal immigration (20 million brought in by Biden Admin) and the BLS just restated job creation numbers for 12 months ending in March. 

The restatement revealed an eye popping 911,000 jobs were fake.  Dowd said just after the 2024 election that “Trump inherited a turd of an economy.”  Now, Dowd says, “Trump has to deal with a turd of a disaster.” 

On the phony jobs number alone, Dowd says,

“You could say this is statistical fraud or bureaucratic incompetence.  Let’s say it’s both.  It such an egregious 7 standard deviation. 

3.4 standard deviation is the chance of lightning hitting you at least once in your lifetime.  It’s not likely.  7 deviation is suggestive of fraud–full stop.”

All the frauds propping up the Biden economy isn’t causing inflation now–just the opposite.  Dowd says,

“The housing market is rolling over because people can’t afford them.  What was keeping a floor in the housing market were rents by the illegal aliens.  That’s all going the wrong way.  Trump is deporting people, and we closed down the border.  Our housing report that we put out a month ago . . . all the indicators are rolling over, and we are going to have a housing recession.  We are going to see inflation go lower because housing is 36% of the economy.  We expect to see a sub 2% print on inflation.”

What about the Fed cutting interest rates next week? 

Dowd says, “They cut rates in the Great Financial Crisis starting in 2007.  Our stock market did not bottom until 2009.  This is the beginning of what I think is the ‘panic rate cut cycle.’"

"We are going to see the Fed cutting rates all the way down into this asset deflation that we see coming in this panic rate cut cycle. 

Cutting into slowing growth does not cause assets to reinflate.  They are behind the curve, and they are going to be cutting all the way down as we deflate.”

Dowd still likes gold and says his clients are acquiring gold and land, not crypto. 

He also says there are big problems coming in the not-so-distant future from China and Europe. 

Dowd says his forecast of the world going into a “very deep recession” will come true soon.

There is much more in the 54-minute interview.

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with money manager and investment expert Ed Dowd, author of the updated book called “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021, 2022 and 2023” for 9.13.25. 

Dowd contends the “sudden deaths” and disabilities are still happening at epidemic levels.  Now, there are 6 million Americans permanently disabled from the CV19 injections!!

*  *  *

Just like Ed Dowd - Sharp, Solid, Incredibly effective

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 09:33

Watch: Drone Erupts Over Israel's Southern Airport, Now Under Repeat Attack

Zero Hedge -

Watch: Drone Erupts Over Israel's Southern Airport, Now Under Repeat Attack

This weekend saw a lot of drone action out of Yemen against Israel. This included Houthi military leadership claiming that three drones struck Ramon Airport in the southern city of Eilat, while a fourth allegedly hit a military installation in the Negev region.

The Houthis claimed all drones successfully reached their targets, but dramatic footage was published from Israel of the inbound drone attack, with at least one being blown up during a daytime raid - perhaps contradicting the Houthi claims. For example, below is the moment a Houthi drone erupts over near Ramon Airport.

Israeli media indicated that sirens were activated in the nearby town of Be'er Ora following the launch of an interceptor missile by the Iron Dome system, which successfully destroyed the large UAV, still leaving concerns over falling debris.

Israeli leadership did not acknowledge any destructive drone impact at Ramon. This is unlike last week, where there was clear damage left at the southern airport, after at least one drone made it past Israel's anti-air defenses.

The airport has since opened up after making repairs, only to see itself once again come under Houthi assault. An elderly man had been injured in that prior attack.

Israel's YNet on Sunday reported that "four days after the strike on Ramon Airport and less than 24 hours after the Israeli military bombed Houthi targets in Yemen, the rebels are continuing to launch drones toward Israel."

Last Wednesday say another IDF retaliatory attack on Yemen, which it said were Houthi military camps where operatives were gathered, as well as a strike the headquarters of the terror group’s propaganda division, and a fuel depot. Scores were reported injured and killed in this latest aerial raid.

Meanwhile, Al Jazeera points out that last week Israel attacked six countries, among them Qatar (targeting the Hamas leaders in Doha) - which is a first. 

"The attack was part of a wider wave of Israeli strikes extending beyond its immediate borders, and marked the sixth country attacked in just 72 hours and the seventh since the start of this year," the publication writes.

This included strikes on Lebanon and Syria as well, at a moment Washington is pressuring the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah. But so long as the Israeli strikes on south Lebanon continue, Hezbollah says it is not gong to disarm. The Houthis are also refusing to relent in their Gaza-related aggression on Israel and in the Red Sea.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 09:25

Was The Current Madness Birthed In The University?

Zero Hedge -

Was The Current Madness Birthed In The University?

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

America is currently sick.

The young conservative organizer and media personality Charlie Kirk was just murdered in a political assassination by a 22-year-old ‘anti-fascist’ and trans advocate, Tyler Robinson. As planned, he eliminated the most astute and successful political activist in a generation. Indeed, Kirk may well have ensured that Donald Trump won the 2024 election by not just increasing his youth vote by 6 percent since 2020 but, more importantly, by margins in the swing states of 15-24 percent, ensuring Trump’s victory.

No sooner was he killed than thousands on left-wing social media erupted in celebration—among them scores of teachers and professors. Their venom was eerily reminiscent of their earlier canonization of left-wing murderer Luigi Mangione. Recall, Mangione was the spoiled nepo baby who lethally ambushed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Thereby, he became an icon to the Left as a social justice warrior fighting the evil capitalist system, which had so enriched himself and his own family.

Such utter moral bankruptcy was on display as well by the social media praise of Palestinian activist Elias Rodriguez (“Free Palestine”), after he brutally murdered a young Jewish couple at the Jewish museum in Washington, D.C. Rodriguez supposedly showed the world how to deal with Zionists—reifying the hateful rhetoric that pervades the modern campus.

Was that ghoulishness confined to such anonymous left-wing nuts and fringe trolls?

Not really.

MSNBC’s guest “analyst,” Matthew Dowd, casually raised an asinine suggestion that the lethal shot came from a Kirk supporter firing off a round. And then, in Pavlovian fashion, he blamed the assassination of Kirk—on Kirk himself—for being an unapologetic “divisive” activist.

Dowd, who was subsequently fired by an embarrassed MSNBC president, only took his cue from anchorwoman, the untouchable Katy Tur, who first editorialized Kirk as a “divisive” figure. By her logic, would that mean that, say, a Bernie Sanders or Zohran Mamdani would also be divisive? What does Joe Biden, by Tur’s logic, deserve after labeling half the country as “semi-fascists” or reducing them to “garbage,” “chumps,” and “dregs”—or boasting he’d like to take Trump behind the gym and beat him up?

Does Tur mean that anyone deemed “divisive” then should naturally expect what befell Charlie Kirk?

Yet, in truth, Charlie Kirk was an upbeat, happy warrior not unlike William F. Buckley in his youth, willing to politely debate political opponents without anger and bias.

The multimillionaire socialist Rep. Ilhan Omar, who once claimed that the Trump “dictatorship” was worse than what she had fled from in her native Somalia, claimed the slain Kirk mourners were “full of sh-t” in a long, incoherent rant. Such creepy examples could be easily multiplied, such as the accustomed lunacy of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She now claimed that those who block gun control legislation could not blame others for inciting the violence: i.e., Charlie Kirk should have expected to reap what he sowed.

A dense AOC seems clueless that not even her fellow leftists seriously advocate confiscating bolt-action .30-06 hunting rifles of the sort that the assassin used to kill Kirk. Perhaps it might be wiser not to try to hunt down and round up 500 million guns in America, but rather to enforce existing unenforced gun laws that prohibit felons, the mentally ill, and domestic terrorists (“anti-fascists”) from possessing them.

Just prior to the murder of Charlie Kirk, a video had been issued of a 23-year-old Ukrainian immigrant, Iryna Zarutska, brutally murdered on public transit in Charlotte, North Carolina. Her throat was slashed by one Decarlos Brown, an African-American, 14-time felon, recently and prematurely released from custody.

The horror followed the now familiar left-wing script. The left-wing mayor, Vi Lyles, immediately tried to stop the release of the transit video, lest it cause anyone or anything to be blamed. Then she followed with the usual DEI boilerplate that excuses evil: do not judge the homeless, arresting people solves nothing, and the murder was merely “tragic,” as if there is no culpability, just bad luck or fate.

As expected, most of the media suffocated the murder story. After all, it upset the dominant racial narrative that must remain unquestioned. We have been told for decades that systemically racist Americans prey on victimized blacks, and thus, Ibram X. Kendi-style antiracism—de facto stigmatizing and demonizing whites—is needed to stop racism.

The left knows that black males, age 15-40, commit well over 50 percent of the most violent crimes in America, while comprising about 3 percent of the population. They know it and privately navigate accordingly, but few speak of it, and none seem to have answers to it. So the topic remains taboo.

Any “tragedy” that highlights that fact—such as the murder of Ms. Zarutska or the recent brutal strangling of Auburn retired professor Julie Schnuelle by a young black man with a felony record who was released back into the public—must be suppressed. So too we rarely hear of the recent murder of the elderly Queens couple by the alleged career felon and released criminal Jamel McGriff. He robbed them, he tied them up, he murdered them, and then he torched their home. And on and on the crime continues, the narrative continues, and we dare not say a word.

In our post-Daniel Penny world, three young black people, sitting just feet away from Zarutska, witnessed Decarlos Brown slit her throat—and did nothing. Perhaps they were afraid, we were told. Perhaps, we were advised, no first aid could have staunched such horrific wounds. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps…

Nonetheless, when Zarutska was staring out at eternity in her death throes, bewildered that someone or something had just ended her life, none of the three lifted a finger to help her—or even console her in her final moments. Instead, the killer, blood dripping from his person, calmly walked off the train unmolested. And even then, in his absence, there was no effort of any of the nearby witnesses to tend to the dying Zarutska. Instead, they sidestepped her and left her behind on the train as she lay gasping her last breaths.

The killer, Decarlos Brown? He can be heard on the video mumbling twice, “I got that white girl.” Yet we were told either that the video was doctored, or too unclear, or irrelevant. If accurate, it demolished the media elite’s insistence that Decarlos Brown had not a racial thought in his mind.

Instead, we were to listen to media analyst Van Jones pontificate that the late Charlie Kirk should have been ashamed for connecting Decarlos Brown to racist hatred. Perhaps Van Jones should reconsider. He should review the entire narrative of how Zarutska found herself a target of a killer. Brown was a 14-time felon. He was out on cashless bail. The magistrate Teresa Stokes, who freed him, had no law degree. Such a “judge” had never taken, much less passed, a bar exam.

She owned an out-of-state alternative treatment center and was involved in another local one. In a prior sane world, magistrates had law degrees. They had been certified as competent by the bar exams. They followed conflict-of-interest protocols that prohibited them from even indirectly profiting from their judicial decisions.

But again, that narrative too is passé, given the power of diversity, equity, and inclusion to exempt norms and protocols for the supposed greater collective good.

From where does all this hatred, violence, and moral vacuity arise? Why did the shooter inscribe his bullets with “anti-fascist” messaging, cruel taunts, and trans jargon?

Is the hatred caused by the media, who talk about toxic “whiteness” nonstop? Is it the collateral damage from the racial obsessions of a Jasmine Crockett, Joy Reid, and septuagenarian Al Sharpton, now ending his racialist career where he started it?

Or is the promulgator the Democratic Party and the Left, out of power, impotent, and angry that their superior intelligence and morality are not properly appreciated by 51 percent of the people? Who put a photoshopped Trump on a New Republic cover as Hitler?

If a General Milley (“now I realize he’s a total fascist”) or a General Kelly (“certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure”) calls a current or ex-president a fascist, and presidential candidate Kamala Harris agrees (“a president…who admires dictators and is a fascist”), then does an unhinged 22-year-old “anti-fascist” college student feel the popular culture might approve of his own efforts in dealing with “fascist” Trump supporters?

Milley, Kelly, Harris, and the rest can call anyone a fascist but without ever defining the term.

Did Trump suspend immigration law to let in 12 million illegals? Did he invite into the DOJ or White House the prosecutors Nathan Wade, Jack Smith, and the revolving door Michael Colangelo to coordinate lawfare against an ex-president?

Is Trump ignoring the improper usurpation of executive power by left-wing lower-court judges or instead appealing their decisions through lawful channels?

Did he hire a foreign national to undermine his presidential rival with a fake dossier?

Did he round up “51 former intelligence officials” to lie to the American people to warp the election?

Did he pardon his entire criminally minded family and then cover it up by in absentia outsourcing to his aides the pardoning of hundreds of criminals through an autopen? So please define fascism before smearing a president and lowering the bar of the acceptable.

What is the point of the past violent braggadocio of Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority Leader, posing with a baseball bat, or huffing that he will take the “fight” against the Trump agenda “to the streets?” Was he merely following on the earlier example of Rep. Maxine Waters, who urged supporters to whip up a crowd and physically confront Trump officials in stores and restaurants?

Why are congresswomen kickboxing and punching the screen as they video their seriousness to assault Trump?

What does now-campaigning California Governor Gavin Newsom mean when he promises, “It’s not about whether we play hardball anymore—it’s about how we play hardball. We are going to fight back, and we’re going to punch this bully in the mouth.” What would a potential third assassin think of that promise?

If the governor of the largest state in the union wants to bloody the face of the President of the United States or physically attack his opponents (“We’re gonna punch these sons of b‑‑‑‑es in the mouth”), then might lesser underlings and sympathizers try to outdo that?

Or, finally, is the culprit for the madness found ultimately in the elite university? Who, after all, mainstreamed the idea of racial re-segregation in dorms and graduation ceremonies and taught America that racial essentialism is part of the new tribal America?

Who ignored court rulings and civil rights legislation in their arrogance to recalibrate admissions by race? Who taught the anti-Jewish assassin Elias Rodriguez his hatred of Israel and his pro-Hamas zealotry, and who influenced Luigi Mangione, an honors graduate, to despise “capitalist” CEOs?

Where did the practice of identifying one’s pronouns at the end of memos start, or demanding that biological males could compete in women’s sports, and demonizing anyone who objected that there were still two, not three, biological sexes?

Where did the critical race theory and critical legal theory that empowered Black Lives Matter, Defund the Police, Cashless Bail, and all the laws that assured the public that thefts less than $950 were not really thefts?

From where did the new anti-Semitism come, and so strangely after the slaughter of October 7—if not from the campus?

Where else in America were young Jews fleeing to a library with the mob pounding on the windows? Where else are Jews roughed up by a thug who is subsequently given an award by their university? Where did demonstrations arise on behalf of those who murdered 1,200 on October 7?

Why, in the aftermath of the murder of Charlie Kirk, are so many teachers, professors, and college-graduate bureaucrats so eager to gloat over and cheer his death? Who taught them that?

Are universities critical to America’s prosperity and security now only in terms of the sciences, math, engineering, and medical schools?

As for the humanities? They scarcely exist at the elite universities as we once knew them. Either de facto or literally, they have been overwhelmed and distorted by endless studies-courses, DEI radicalism, 90 percent leftist faculties, and suppression of free thought and free expression.

Where did the envisioning of violent crime as the fault of a flawed society, the institutionalization of modern racialism, chauvinism, and essentialism, and the empowerment of militant transgenderism that in so many insidious ways has filtered throughout society—if not originally birthed in the university—come from?

Those sins of commission are force-multiplied by those of omission. Hundreds of thousands of students emerge from campuses not just indoctrinated with contempt for the Western tradition and American exceptionalism, and not just often thousands of dollars in debt from inflated tuition, but also poorly educated by the standards that once defined education.

The working classes and high school graduates, supposedly the losers of our society, are not those who are dividing the country. They are not often advocating violence or trying to use any means necessary to overturn the established order. But so often the products of the modern university are doing just that.

Sadly, in all these recent horrors, the ideology behind them—the premise that either birthed or appeased them—was birthed in modern higher education.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/15/2025 - 09:00

Pages