Podcasts about treasury department

In this episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz, Senator Ted Cruz and Ben Ferguson discuss Cruz’s trip aboard Air Force One, President Trump’s campaign strategy heading into the midterms, and two major Treasury Department decisions involving Trump Accounts and the school choice tax credit. They also examine the president’s visit to the Peterbilt manufacturing plant in Texas, the state of the economy, and the growing attention on the Texas Senate race. Additionally, they react to reports of a dramatic in-flight attack aboard a FlyDubai flight and highlight the actions of passengers who helped prevent a potential catastrophe. Senator Ted Cruz joins Ben Ferguson after flying aboard Air Force One with President Trump, offering a behind-the-scenes look at their conversations about the midterm elections, the Texas Senate race, and key administration priorities. With the election campaign entering its final stretch, Trump is preparing for an aggressive rally schedule across the country. Cruz discusses the president’s focus on voter turnout, his visit to Texas, and the political stakes surrounding the race between Ken Paxton and James Talarico. Topics Covered: Ted Cruz’s conversations with President Trump aboard Air Force One Trump’s campaign strategy and nationwide midterm rally schedule Treasury decisions on Trump Accounts auto-enrollment and school choice tax credits The Texas Senate race between Ken Paxton and James Talarico Trump’s visit to the Peterbilt manufacturing plant and economic messaging Reports of a thwarted in-flight attack aboard a FlyDubai flight to Israel Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week, the Treasury Department released rules for a new nationwide school choice program that could end up providing billions of dollars to students attending private schools. Taxpayers will be able to opt in to the program by giving up to $1,700 to third-party groups that provide scholarships to students, and can later deduct that donation from their taxes. Many public school advocates, however, oppose the program. Also in this episode: weaker-than-expected jobs data and reimagined research parks.Every story has an economic angle. Want some in your inbox? Subscribe to our daily or weekly newsletter.Marketplace Morning Report is more than a radio show. Check out our original reporting and financial literacy content at marketplace.org — and consider making an investment in our future.Stories from this episode:Private schools are likely to be the beneficiaries of new federal school voucher programResearch parks were designed for working. That's starting to change.

This week, the Treasury Department released rules for a new nationwide school choice program that could end up providing billions of dollars to students attending private schools. Taxpayers will be able to opt in to the program by giving up to $1,700 to third-party groups that provide scholarships to students, and can later deduct that donation from their taxes. Many public school advocates, however, oppose the program. Also in this episode: weaker-than-expected jobs data and reimagined research parks.Every story has an economic angle. Want some in your inbox? Subscribe to our daily or weekly newsletter.Marketplace Morning Report is more than a radio show. Check out our original reporting and financial literacy content at marketplace.org — and consider making an investment in our future.Stories from this episode:Private schools are likely to be the beneficiaries of new federal school voucher programResearch parks were designed for working. That's starting to change.

The Trump administration commenced distribution of $500 Treasury Department refund payments on September 30, 2026, to approximately 1 million Affordable Care Act enrollees.According to The White House Fact Sheet, the administration had accumulated a $500 million surplus fund derived from excess user fees levied on insurance companies operating on the federal exchange, which were subsequently transferred to consumers through elevated premium costs.Health policy experts consulted by journalists observed that although the $500 checks offer immediate financial relief, they address only a portion of the substantial premium increases that enrollees experienced following the expiration of COVID-era federal health insurance subsidies earlier in the year.The refunds are being transmitted automatically to a designated subset of health insurance enrollees. Recipients residing in one of the 30 states that depend exclusively on the federal HealthCare.gov exchange marketplace rather than a state-administered exchange constitute the primary recipients. Eligible enrollees are those who did not receive premium assistance subsidies and remitted full premiums. The majority of qualifying individuals earn in excess of 400% of the federal poverty line.Eligible individuals will receive the funds automatically through physical mail or direct deposit. Households containing multiple qualifying members may receive more than one check. Checks are accompanied by a letter bearing President Trump's signature.Nevertheless, certain commentators have characterized the initiative as a "political gimmick" strategically timed preceding the consequential midterm elections.They contest the Trump administration's assertions that the Biden administration imposed excessive charges on citizens, contending that the distributed funds may have originated from fees collected during Trump's preceding term. Critics further argue that the disbursements do not constitute a substantive, enduring approach to addressing the persistent escalation of healthcare premiums.Organizations such as Protect Our Care, alongside various policy analysts, emphasize that five hundred dollars represents merely a modest portion of the substantial premium increases that middle-income households encounter as a consequence of lapsed federal tax credit provisions.In contrast, the Trump administration and its proponents characterize these payments as an essential remedy for governmental administrative deficiencies.

Nationally syndicated financial columnist and author Terry Savage joins John Williams to talk about the Treasury Department creating a new, more secure log-in procedure for buying Treasury bills, using a private company called ID.me. Also joining Terry and John is Wes Turbeville, Senior Vice President, Federal and Healthcare, ID.me, who tells us everything you need to know […]

This week, we're bringing you an episode of WSJ's Take On the Week. Host Miriam Gottfried is joined by guest co-host and WSJ markets reporter Sam Goldfarb to break down the unprecedented surge in the 10-year Treasury yield. Meghan Swiber, U.S. rates strategist at Bank of America, joins the show to discuss what influences these yields, and how a 5% yield affects everyday borrowing costs including mortgage rates, which are again topping 7%. Swiber unpacks the Treasury Department's surprising buybacks, and how this strategy compares to the actions the Federal Reserve took to mitigate the effects of the last financial crisis. Plus, how is the market reacting to the Fed, which is trying to battle inflation by hiking rates? Have an idea for a future guest or episode? How can we better help you take on the week? We'd love to hear from you. Email the show at takeontheweek@wsj.com. To watch the video version of this episode, visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of WSJ.com Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this week's episode of WSJ's Take On the Week, co-host Miriam Gottfried is joined by guest co-host and WSJ markets reporter Sam Goldfarb to break down the unprecedented surge in the 10-year Treasury yield. Meghan Swiber, U.S. rates strategist at Bank of America, joins the show to discuss what influences these yields, and how a 5% yield affects everyday borrowing costs including mortgage rates, which are again topping 7%. Swiber unpacks the Treasury Department's surprising buybacks, and how this strategy compares to the actions the Federal Reserve took to mitigate the effects of the last financial crisis. Plus, how is the market reacting to the Fed, which is trying to battle inflation by hiking rates? This is WSJ's Take On the Week where co-hosts Telis Demos, writer for WSJ's Heard on the Street, and Miriam Gottfried, WSJ's investing and wealth management reporter, cut through the noise and dive into markets, the economy and finance—the big trades, key players and business news ahead. Have an idea for a future guest or episode? How can we better help you take on the week? We'd love to hear from you. Email the show at takeontheweek@wsj.com. To watch the video version of this episode, visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of WSJ.com Further Reading The Robust U.S. Economy Powers Through Rate Hikes and Rising Bond Yields A Guide to Owning Bonds When They Are Selling Off For more coverage of the markets and your investments, head to WSJ.com, WSJ's Heard on The Street Column, and WSJ's Live Markets blog. Sign up for the WSJ's free Markets A.M. newsletter. Follow Miriam Gottfried here and Telis Demos here. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

During the 2010s, the United States netted just under one million new immigrants each year; between 2022 and 2024, that number was closer to three million. But since the election of Donald Trump, immigration to the U.S. has taken a nosedive, and potentially so has the economic growth of the country. The economic impact of the rise and fall of immigration to the U.S. is a focus of this episode of Stats and Stories, with Tara Watson. Tara Watson is the Director of the Center for Economic Security and Opportunity at the Brookings Institution, where she's also the John C. and Nancy D. Whitehead Chair of Economic Studies. She is also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. Watson's an economist whose work focuses on U.S. social policy, with interests in the safety net, health, and immigration. In 2015, she served as deputy assistant secretary for microeconomic analysis in the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Economic Policy. In 2021, she published the book ”The Border Within: The Economics of Immigration in an Age of Fear,” co-authored with journalist Kalee Thompson. Earlier this year, Watson published a report with Brookings on the economic impact of immigrants on the U.S. economy.

This week we talk about lobbying, renewables, and the NRA.We also discuss implied threats, midterm elections, and political action committees.Recommended Book: Sunward by William AlexanderTranscriptFor much of the late 20th century and the first few decades of the 21st, one of the most feared interest groups in US politics was the National Rifle Association, the NRA.Its power came from a large and politically engaged membership, a mailing list, a grading system that reduced complicated voting records to a letter, and a reputation for ending political careers over specific votes.Once it attained that reputation, the NRA didn't have to defeat every politician it disagreed with. Members of Congress only had to believe it could defeat them, and that belief shaped races in which the group spent nothing; politicians went out of their way not to anger the NRA. Money can buy an advertisement or a meeting. What tends to change a vote is the expectation that one choice will be rewarded and another will carry consequences.The NRA's influence has declined following internal scandals, financial trouble, and the growth of well-funded gun-control groups. But its model remains potent: pick a few visible fights, and allow your reputation to do a lot of the work for you, in the future.In 2010, the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, alongside a related appeals-court ruling later that year, helped create the modern super PAC: a political committee that can raise and spend unlimited sums advocating for or against candidates, so long as it does not coordinate that spending with their campaigns.This did not eliminate the effort and resources required to build influence, but it meant a few wealthy donors, a competent team, and some carefully selected races could establish a reputation in months rather than decades.In 2026, solar, wind, and batteries are projected to account for about 93% of new utility-scale electrical generating capacity added in the United States.That doesn't mean they provide 93% of the country's electricity—natural gas remains the largest source in the US—but these technologies are now the overwhelming majority of what the industry is building.Despite that growth, in 2025 Congress passed a law that sharply rolled back federal support for much of the clean-energy industry, and most of the politicians who voted for those rollbacks appeared to suffer no political consequences for doing so.What I'd like to talk about today is the effort to build a feared clean-energy lobby, how it has influenced a series of Republican primaries, and what its early successes do and do not tell us about the role of money in American politics.—The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or OBBBA, was signed into law on July 4, 2025.For wind and solar projects, the new law generally ended production and investment tax credits for facilities placed in service after December 31, 2027, unless construction began within twelve months of the bill's enactment.That twelve-month window closed in July of 2026, and a subsequent executive order directed the Treasury Department to adopt a stricter definition of when construction actually begins, further clamping down on entities hoping to benefit from those now-defunct credits.Tax credits for electric vehicles and residential efficiency upgrades ended in 2025, while support for clean hydrogen was curtailed. Other technologies, including batteries, nuclear power, and geothermal energy, were treated differently, so it would be misleading to say the law eliminated every federal clean-energy incentive, though it did severely curtail a lot of renewables-oriented industries and construction in the US.Republicans have generally been more supportive of fossil-fuel production and more hostile to federal wind and solar subsidies, while Democrats have generally taken the opposite position. There are important regional exceptions, especially among Republicans whose districts have attracted manufacturing plants, wind farms, and other energy investments. Several Republican lawmakers have even written letters asking party leaders to preserve some of the credits, in part because projects and jobs in their districts depended on them. When the final vote arrived, though, nearly all congressional Republicans voted for the bill.Tom Matzzie, the founder of the retail electricity company CleanChoice Energy, previously worked for Democratic campaigns and served as the Washington director of the progressive organization MoveOn.org, so he was familiar with electoral campaigning as well as the energy industry. In the wake of the passing of the OBBBA, he posed a question to Canary Media, possibly alluding to the success of political interest groups like the NRA when he said, “Are we someone that people can hurt without consequences?”Matzzie recruited Chris Larsen, the billionaire co-founder of the blockchain company Ripple and an investor in clean energy, and Michael Brune, the former executive director of the Sierra Club, and together they formed the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition, or ITC, an acronym that also evokes the investment tax credit the group was organized, in part, to defend.Federal Election Commission records show that the coalition raised about $6.8 million during the first half of 2026. Larsen provided $6 million, while the organizers said they had assembled commitments of around $20 million and hoped to spend as much as $30 million during the election cycle. Matzzie called the group's candidate-targeting spreadsheet the “Revenge Tour Matrix,” which is an unusually candid name for a political document.The group's most interesting strategic decision, though, is arguably that its advertisements generally did not mention clean energy.When ITC opposed Texas Representative Chip Roy in the Republican runoff for state attorney general, its ads questioned Roy's loyalty to President Trump. When it opposed Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles, it created a website called Lyin' Andy that focused on his missed votes and a federal investigation into his campaign-finance reporting.The coalition openly identified its reason for entering these races, but its advertisements used whatever campaign research suggested would move primary voters, not what its donors wanted them to think about solar panels.This approach was especially well suited to Republican primaries, where relatively small electorates can be reached through a concentrated group of conservative television, social-media, and streaming outlets.In Ogles' race, for instance, the two campaigns had each spent roughly $600,000, while ITC spent around $2 million attacking Ogles and introducing voters to his challenger, Charlie Hatcher.The coalition describes its record so far as five wins in five races.In May, Roy lost the Texas attorney-general runoff by 10.4 percentage points.In June, Iowa Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, a Republican who had defended renewable-energy interests in Congress, survived her primary with help from ITC, including a $125,000 contribution.Later that month, South Carolina Representative Ralph Norman finished a distant third in the Republican primary for governor after the coalition opposed him.In August, Ogles lost his primary by more than six points despite an endorsement from Trump and more than $700,000 from the House Freedom Caucus' political fund.And in late August, Norman lost a second race, this time a Republican Senate primary, to Darline Graham, the sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham. ITC spent about $1 million in that contest, which Norman lost by five points.The reactions from Norman and Ogles were almost as useful to the group as the election results.Norman blamed outside political spending in his concession speech, while Ogles, before his loss, said the coalition was attempting to make an example of him and that could have a chilling effect on other conservatives in Congress.Those statements do not prove ITC caused either defeat. But they do advertise the consequence the organization wants other politicians to anticipate; come after clean energy investment and they'll come after you.This strategy is notable because it separates political deterrence from public persuasion.It does not need Republican primary voters to become enthusiastic about solar tax credits. It just needs politicians to believe that aggressively attacking solar companies could make their next primary more difficult.The ads questioning Roy's loyalty to Trump are probably the clearest version of this distinction. The message voters received and the policy outcome the donors wanted were almost entirely unrelated, and that was intentional.It's worth mentioning here that the power of a wealthy individual to shape a low-turnout primary does not become less concerning because the spending supports a technology someone likes. The same rules are available to fossil-fuel companies, cryptocurrency investors, labor unions, and ideological groups of all kinds.That said, Ogles entered his primary with several liabilities unrelated to energy policy, including controversial public comments, questions about his finances, and a district whose boundaries had changed. Darline Graham had Trump's support in her race against Norman.In Texas, the coalition's roughly $1.7 million in spending was substantial, but the winning campaign spent nearly $25 million and Roy's campaign spent around $12 million. Roy dismissed the coalition's influence and said he would take the same positions again.Matzzie's response to all this is, more or less, that proof of causation is unnecessary: if lawmakers believe the coalition can hurt them, the deterrent works.That may be true, but it makes the group's claim difficult to test. The measurable outcome is that five races ended the way the group preferred, but it's currently unknown, and maybe unknowable, how much responsibility the group can claim for those victories.An analysis highlighted by Yale Climate Connections estimated that fossil-fuel interests spent about $219 million supporting candidates in the 2024 election cycle, with roughly 88% of that spending benefiting Republicans. The oil and gas industry also spent more than $150 million lobbying the federal government that year.What the coalition may have demonstrated is that a relatively modest sum, precisely applied in low-turnout elections with inexpensive media markets, can attract attention far beyond the size of the investment. That is as much a finding about the vulnerability of primary elections as it is about the political strength of clean energy.Now all that said, the renewable energy industry itself is divided over whether this is a useful approach.Tim Pawlenty, the former Republican governor of Minnesota who now leads the Solar Energy Industries Association, has said his organization's job is to make more friends rather than more enemies—an arguably rational position for a trade group that needs access to both parties.Steve McBee, meanwhile, launched an organization called Amped to encourage clean-energy professionals to engage more visibly in politics, arguing that a major infrastructure industry, and one that's growing in scale by the year, still behaves as if it were a marginal alternative, and that needs to change.These approaches can of course coexist, but there is a tension between building a coalition and threatening to make an example of anyone who doesn't fall into line, and each tactic can make the other more difficult.The coalition's first announced Democratic target was Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee, who blamed some of the state's electricity-price problems on clean-energy policies and proposed delaying its renewable-energy target while reducing funding for efficiency programs.ITC committed about $500,000 to oppose him in the September 9 primary. Targeting a Democrat helps establish that it is enforcing an industry position rather than functioning as another Democratic-aligned group. And that investment may have paid off: former CVS executive Helena Foulkes beat McKee on September 9's runoff, with around 62% to McKee's 38%—not even close.This wasn't a clean experiment, though. McKee was already trailing Foulkes by a wide margin, and his standing had been damaged by controversies unrelated to energy, including the prolonged closure of a major bridge.The next test will be whether the approach works outside primaries. General elections have larger, less ideologically uniform electorates, more expensive advertising, and more competing messages. Matzzie has not offered much detail about the coalition's plans, and a tactic that works in a small primary may not scale in November.The midterm elections on November 3 will clarify what this produces at the federal level, but deterrence and legislation are different things. Roy and Norman were running for offices outside the House, while Hatcher was not a wind-and-solar champion. Replacing an outspoken opponent may help the industry, but it does not produce the votes required to restore a tax credit.The protected begin-construction window for many wind and solar projects closed in July, and the placed-in-service deadline arrives at the end of 2027. Congress could change those dates, but doing so would require legislation that can pass both chambers and receive a presidential signature; a different electoral environment could make that more plausible, but would not make it automatic.There's also a risk that a campaign built around retaliation will make clean energy more firmly associated with one political party, even as the industry expands through many Republican districts and states.Targeting McKee complicates that interpretation, and supporting Miller-Meeks shows a willingness to reward a Republican ally. Still, most targets have been Republicans because most recent federal opposition to wind and solar support has come from Republicans.That is a current political fact, but it's not necessarily a permanent alignment. And clean energy companies would no doubt love to get both parties on side, rather than contributing to a further divide, in which one party forever opposes the sorts of projects they're trying to support.Thinking back to previous examples of how these sorts of things have played out, the NRA's influence was never just a function of how much it spent. It came from a reputation, constructed one race at a time, that even influenced politicians who never personally faced its advertisements and spending.The Invest in Tomorrow Coalition is attempting to compress that process into a single election cycle, using a campaign-finance tool that did not exist in its current form when the NRA first built its power.Five primaries in, the outlines of that reputation are visible, but its ability to changes votes in Congress, survive a loss, and work with a broader electorate will tell us whether this is the beginning of a durable clean-energy lobby, or just an unusually effective run of well-selected races.Show Noteshttps://www.canarymedia.com/articles/politics/super-pac-crushing-clean-energy-foeshttps://www.canarymedia.com/articles/politics/clean-energy-super-pac-looks-to-take-down-a-democratic-governorhttps://insideclimatenews.org/news/29082026/super-pac-targets-conservatives-against-clean-energy/https://www.eenews.net/articles/emboldened-clean-energy-donors-eye-big-campaign-spending/https://newrepublic.com/post/214762/green-energy-group-pick-off-republican-candidateshttps://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-trump-ally-warns-super-pac-bankrolled-dem-billionaire-meddling-gop-primaryhttps://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/the-one-big-beautiful-bill-impact-on-the-iras-clean-energy-tax-credits.htmlhttps://bipartisanpolicy.org/explainer/2025-reconciliation-debate-one-big-beautiful-bill-act-energy-provisions/https://seia.org/research-resources/clean-energy-provisions-big-beautiful-bill/https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-energy/chart-us-overwhelmingly-build-clean-powerhttps://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00936997/https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/speechnoworg-v-fec/https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/understanding-independent-expenditures/https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explainedhttps://yaleclimateconnections.org/2025/01/the-fossil-fuel-industry-spent-219-million-to-elect-the-new-u-s-government/https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/industries/summary?cycle=2024&id=e01https://www.amped.org/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/09/09/us/elections/results-rhode-island-governor-primary.html This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

Todays headlines include: The Treasury Department has released a new report on what Australia might look like in 2066, 40 years from now. The trial of former police officer Beau Lamarre-Condon for the murder of his ex-boyfriend Jesse Baird and Baird’s new partner Luke Davies began on Monday. U.S. media reports Presley Gerber, the son of supermodel Cindy Crawford and businessman Randy Gerber, has died at 27. And today’s good news! The World Health Organisation has confirmed two countries, Chile and Bhutan, have this month eliminated the spread of rabies from dogs to humans. Sign up to our newsletters here! Hosts: Emma Gillespie and Lucy Tassell Producer: Elliot Lawry Want to support The Daily Aus? That's so kind! The best way to do that is to click ‘follow’ on Spotify or Apple and to leave us a five-star review. We would be so grateful. The Daily Aus is a media company focused on delivering accessible and digestible news to young people. We are completely independent. Want more from TDA?Subscribe to The Daily Aus newsletterSubscribe to The Daily Aus’ YouTube Channel Have feedback for us?We’re always looking for new ways to improve what we do. If you’ve got feedback, we’re all ears. Tell us here.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Eldorbek Umirkulov, Head of Treasury Department, Open Bank

P.M. Edition for Sept. 15. The annual Census report on households' financial well-being showed that median household income notched a new record last year. But as WSJ economics reporter Rachel Wolfe explains, not all Americans are seeing the gains. Plus, a landmark bill that would regulate the crypto industry failed in a procedural vote in the Senate. We hear from reporter Vicky Ge Huang about where the measure goes from here. And the Kennedy Center's board voted to close the venue for renovations, even as President Trump threatened to block them over a naming dispute. Alex Ossola hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

FBI Director Kash Patel faces the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. He's likely to be pressed on his leadership, arrests related to the 2020 election, and probes into attempts to overturn that election. It's Patel's first appearance before the Senate since May.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testifies before the House Financial Services Committee hearing on Tuesday on the economy. It comes as the Treasury Department targets banks that are supporting Iran financially under Operation Economic Fury, as trade tensions between the United States and Canada persist, and as the benchmark 10-year Treasury bond yield reached its highest level since 2023.

Keith welcomes back macroeconomist Richard Duncan of Macro Watch to examine where mortgage rates are headed and what's driving them there.  Duncan explains how the U.S. shifted from capitalism to what he calls "creditism" after the dollar left gold in 1971, and why today's AI investment boom, rising defense spending, and a $40 trillion national debt are all pointing inflation and interest rates in the same direction.  He also makes the case for rental property on land as a long-term inflation hedge, and answers a question many have asked: if the government can print currency, why does it collect taxes?  Episode Page: GetRichEducation.com/623 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREinvestmentcoach.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  For predictable 10-12% quarterly returns, visit FreedomFamilyInvestments.com/GRE or text  FAMILY to 66866  Join Mid South Home Buyers' one-time, free live webinar featuring Keith Weinhold on September 30 at GetRichEducation.com/MidSouth to learn how Memphis' economic expansion could create new real estate investment opportunities, and have your questions answered in real time. Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search "how to leave an Apple Podcasts review"  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— GREletter.com  Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Keith Weinhold  0:01   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. You're going to get a good idea of where future mortgage rates are headed as we're talking to one of the world's most brilliant macroeconomists today. Will AI be more inflationary or deflationary? And the profundity of how we're on the brink of moving into a completely new economic system today on Get Rich Education. What if I told you that one of America's strongest cash flow real estate markets is also becoming the new brains and brawn behind AI? That city is Memphis, believe it or not. In September 30th, we're going to show you why the smart money is paying attention now, along with an investing opportunity you won't want to miss. Join me, Terry Kerr and Matthew Van Horn of Mid South Home Buyers, the largest turnkey company in Memphis with more than 6000 homes under management, for a free live webinar the likes of which I've never done before. We're going to look at what billions in new investment could mean for jobs, housing demand, neighborhood appreciation, and your portfolio. Everyone who attends live will also get exclusive access to the best deal terms Mid South has ever offered. Reserve your free seat at getricheducation.com/midsouth again. that september 30. Don't say we didn't tell you. Save your spot at getricheducation.com/midsouth.   Speaker 1  1:34   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is Get Rich Education.   Keith Weinhold  1:50   Welcome to GRE from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to Lancaster, California, and across 188 nations worldwide. I'm Keith Weinhold. You're listening to Get Rich Education, and I really appreciate that you're here. Yes, those two cities, though spelled the same, are pronounced differently. Framing this entire episode today with our brilliant guest, you'll learn which direction future mortgage rates are probably going to move, and it's decidedly either going to be higher or lower. You'll get a clear answer. Now I've said that trying to predict mortgage rates definitively is foolish. We're only talking about probabilities today. Look, have you ever wondered if the government can just print its own currency? Then why do they have to collect taxes from us. We're going to get that answer today. Back in 1971, the U.S. economy left a system of capitalism, in fact, and embarked on a journey of creditism as defined by today's guest. Well, now we're about to leave creditism. You'll learn what is poised to replace it, and it is an AI-fueled answer. You know, to prep you with some context today, I've said it here before. But when you start talking about the enormity of a national economy, the words billion and trillion start to get thrown around a lot. A trillion seconds ago, you know how long ago that was. That takes you further back than the Roman Empire, because a trillion seconds is 31,700 years. Well, 31,700 years ago, that is just about as far back as when the plains of Europe were being roamed by Neanderthals. Yeah, that was a trillion seconds ago. Coming up on the show here, the man who wrote the book on the Pareto principle 30 years ago. That's the 80-20 principle, where 20% of your effort yields 80% of the results. We'll talk to him and learn how those insights can improve your life on a different upcoming episode.   Keith Weinhold  4:08   Here, the book Rich Dad Poor Dad was originally written by two authors. One of those two was Robert Kiyosaki. We had Kiyosaki on the show here with us in June, and by the way, the New York Post recently wrote an article, and they cited the Get Rich Education podcast in how Kiyosaki revealed on the show here that he is 1.2 billion dollars in debt. You can find that in the September 1st edition of the New York Post. That's the June 1st episode of the Get Rich Education podcast that they're citing. Well, a lot of people they don't know who the other author of Rich Dad Poor Dad is, but we're going to have her here with us on the show soon. So some really fascinating episodes coming up. Let's meet today's guest. Returning this week is one of the foremost macroeconomic minds in the world. He was this show's first ever guest nearly 12 years ago on episode seven. A prolific author, he publishes the popular video series Macro Watch at RichardDuncaneconomics.com, and he's really influential. For example, not long ago, he presented his economic policy proposals to congressional members of the House Ways and Means Committee. Hey, it's a warm Get Rich Education. Welcome back to the incomparable Richard Duncan.   Richard Duncan  5:39   Thank you, Keith. Thank you for having me back on.   Keith Weinhold  5:42   I don't know if you and the audience are ready for this. This is some perspective. It recently made news when the U.S. hit its national public debt milestone of $40 trillion. When Richard made his GRE debut here in November of 2014, it was $18 trillion. That national debt has more than doubled since you were first here, Richard.   Richard Duncan  6:07   That's right. The government has been playing probably the leading role in keeping the economy growing, and a couple of times since then has played the sole role in preventing a new Great Depression in the aftermath of the crisis of 2008 and during COVID, it's the massive government budget deficits, often more than a trillion dollars a year. Last couple of years, it's been 1.8 trillion dollars. That's been driving the economy, and whenever it needs some additional support, the Fed steps in and creates a few trillion dollars here and there, and combined they've been keeping the economy growing and, in fact, booming. And wealth has absolutely exploded as a result of the government spending and the Fed money creation. In 2008, the total wealth of all the Americans net worth $60 trillion. Now, it's tripled to $180 trillion. That that is a direct result of the government's intervention through budget deficits and paper money creation by the Fed.   Keith Weinhold  7:14   I will call that the world's least desirable investment portfolio minus 40 t. That is one way to think about it, but when you bring up interventionism, you know something I shared with the audience about a month ago, Richard. It is just remarkable to think about all the crises we've had just since 2020. We had COVID, we had Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we had Israel, Gaza. We had tariffs. Now we've got the war in Iran, and what is the result of all this? Largely due to government interventionism. Oh, both the stock market and real estate market in the U.S. are near all-time highs.   Richard Duncan  7:54   Who would have imagined? But things work very differently now than they did in the old days when money was backed by gold, and the Fed and the government played a much smaller role in the economy. It's a different world now. That was capitalism. This is creditism. Our new economic system is driven by credit growth, and whenever necessary, the government steps in with massive budget deficits, and the Fed steps in with massive money creation to make sure that credit keeps expanding and the economy keeps growing, because if credit doesn't keep expanding, if it even dips a little bit like it started to in 2009, then the whole bubble implodes and we repeat the 1930s Great Depression, probably followed by what happened in the 1940s.   Keith Weinhold  8:39   This is interesting. When you were first here 12 years ago. You talked about how society isn't so much capitalism that it's creditism, and you expounded on that. And before we're done, I know that we have now morphed into a new ism, post-creditism that Richard is going to share with us, it's fascinating. But Richard, since you were last here, the Iran War is new. It's been going on for over six months now. So I'd like to get your thoughts on that, and principally, if the Iran War is going to create lasting inflation or only a temporary energy spike. What are your thoughts?   Richard Duncan  9:20   Let's broaden this out. I know that your listeners are very interested in in real estate, and of course that's very impacted by interest rates. And interest rates are impacted, of course, primarily by inflation. So it is true that the Iran war is pushing up energy prices, and that's pushing up inflation. It's not just Iran alone. Before that, we had trade tariffs, and that's pushing up inflation. And on top of that, we've simultaneously got this extraordinary AI investment boom, and the investment by the hyperscalers is just mind-boggling. The four biggest hyperscalers-Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Meta-they're expected just the four of them to invest something close to $750 billion this year. 750 billion, just four of them. Now, to put that into perspective, the U.S. military, in one year, the most recent year, only spends half that much on procurement and research and development, roughly 320 billion. You've got these four hyperscalers spending twice as much as the U.S. military does on procurement and research and development. That is just hard to wrap your mind around, and of course, that's pushing up everything from the cost of memory chips to electrical equipment, the cost of electricity itself, power generation equipment, and all the kinds of materials that go into building data centers. So that's another source of inflation. And then there is this wealth effect that I just referred to a minute ago. Wealth has tripled from $60 trillion to $180 trillion since 2008. All that wealth is giving a lot of rich people a lot of money to spend on a very large scale, and that also is inflationary. So all of those things are inflationary, and none of them seem to be going away in the immediate future. Now, on top of that, the inflation is not the only thing that is affecting the interest rates. Other things are affecting the interest rates as well. For instance, the budget deficit this year looks like the U.S. budget deficit is going to be quite close to $2 trillion. So that will be $2 trillion of government borrowing, and this doesn't look like it's going to go down anytime soon either. President Trump is requesting $1.5 trillion for the total defense budget in fiscal year 2027, which starts in October. That's up from just $900 billion in fiscal year 2025, so that's a huge increase in military spending, which makes the percent-   Keith Weinhold  9:20   Increase plus, y   Richard Duncan  10:52   Going to keep growing, and that spending will be inflationary as well. But so the government is going to have to borrow, so the demand for money from the government is enormous, and as I've just mentioned, because of the AI boon, the hyperscalers and many of the other companies in the AI industry or related to the AI industry, they're also tapping the bond market on a very large scale. So demand for borrowing from these AI-related companies, the demand is pushing up interest rates. This is not directly related to inflation, so you've got a lot of demand for borrowing from the government and from the private sector related to artificial intelligence primarily. So that's on the demand side for money, and on the supply side, well, the United States is not making a lot of new friends these days. We seem to be losing friends pretty quickly, and many of the people who were very enthusiastic about buying American government bonds in the past are becoming increasingly reluctant to do so. Most of them still are. Most of them don't really have any viable options, but on the margin, there are fewer friendly buyers of our debt, and so fewer people willing to buy the debt also puts upward pressure on U.S. interest rates. So recently, the 30-year U.S. government bond hit a 19-year high at 5.33% That's a very high number, and this has spooked the Treasury Department. Treasury Secretary Besant has begun doing some very unusual things that suggest that he's very concerned. He has helped stop the yen from weakening by selling some euros that the U.S. government owned and buying yen. He did this to make the yen stronger, and this meant that Japan wouldn't have to sell its U.S. government bonds in order to have dollars to use to buy yen to make the yen stronger. So that was a strange move.   Richard Duncan  9:20   And then more recently, he's announced that the Treasury Department is going to start buying twice as many long-dated bonds as it has been doing. Each operation now, the Treasury Department has been buying $2 billion worth of bonds at the long end and financing it with short-term borrowing. So borrowing at the short end, the say two-year bonds, which have a much lower interest rate, and using that money to buy 10 or 30-year bonds that have a higher interest rate, in order to push up the bond prices and push down the bond yields at the long end, to try to hold down the 30-year bond yield and the 10-year bond yield, which of course directly affects the mortgage. This is beginning to seem like there's some degree of, well, let's call it perhaps not panic, but deep concern in the Treasury about how high interest rates in the U.S. are going, and just moving forward with this idea, all of these pressures, the inflationary pressures are not likely to go away anytime soon. The demand for borrowing is not going to go away anytime soon. So there's going to continue to be this upward pressure on interest rates. And I think ultimately, what we are going to see is another big round of quantitative easing from the Fed. The Fed is going to have to step back in and announce that it's going to create a great deal of money one more time, and use that money that it creates to buy government bonds to push up their price and to drive down their yield. And we shouldn't forget that already the Fed is currently printing, creating money. It launched a new program. What is it called? Reserve management purchases. This was a program they announced in December last year, where they were just going to create some money and inject bank reserves into the financial system, so that they could manage reserves at a good level, so everyone would have plenty of liquidity. Just since December, they have created $210 billion. This is kind of going under the radar, but $210 billion since December is not an insignificant amount of money.   Richard Duncan  14:49   If the budget deficit this year turns out to be 2 trillion, then that's financing 10% of the government's budget deficit, right? More than 10% So we've already got a significant amount of money creation by the Fed going on currently, and that's not enough to prevent the yields from moving sharply higher. So I think what we're going to get is another much bigger round of quantitative easing in the not too distant future, and that's going to have a lot of ramifications.   Keith Weinhold  17:00   That's a really interesting insight, and Richard, one word keeps popping into my head as we have this discussion. Okay, inflationary pressure correlates with higher interest rates, sure, but how much are these high bond yields, which flow right over to our mortgage rates, a result of an erosion in trust. I'm thinking about trust   Richard Duncan  17:24   to some degree, yes, but not overwhelmingly. The reality is, at the end of the day, there is a certain amount of money in the world that has to be invested somewhere, and that is the most important fact to understand. There is a pool of money; it keeps getting larger, and it has to go somewhere. And U.S. government bonds are considered the safest place for it to go. For instance, the United States has a very large trade deficit with the rest of the world. For the last two years, the current account deficit, which is more or less the trade deficit, has been 1.2 trillion dollars a year. It's easier to understand it as a trade deficit. That's been throwing off 1.2 trillion dollars into the surplus countries. The surplus countries sell things in the United States, countries like China and Vietnam and all the others. They sell things in the United States that they make at home. They get paid in dollars. They take their dollars back home to China and Vietnam and all the other countries, and what do they do with the dollars? They own dollars. They've got to do something with those dollars. They're getting 1.2 trillion more dollars every year. Now, the thing they do with it primarily is they buy treasury bonds with it, and so there is an inherent and growing demand for treasury bonds. You may be thinking, okay, they could take those dollars and they could convert them into euros. That's true, they could, but whoever they buy the euros from, they then own dollars, and they would need to buy U.S. dollar-denominated assets with them. The main driver behind the buying of Treasury bonds is just the fact that there are so many dollars in the world, an increasing amount of dollars outside the United States that need to be invested in U.S. dollar-denominated assets. People can lose confidence in "quote unquote, but what are they going to do with their dollars? It has to go somewhere, and so it ultimately ends up going round and round, and an enormous amount of it ends up in U.S. Treasury bonds, and that's not going to change so long as the U.S. has a very large trade deficit with the rest of the world. The rest of the world is going to keep accumulating dollars for that reason, and they're going to keep accumulating Treasury bonds for that reason.   Keith Weinhold  19:44   Well, what do these effects mean for real estate, Richard? I mean, which force you think will ultimately win for housing here with this increased inflationary pressure? Is it more of a damaged affordability problem, or do we see rising? Placement costs that continue to help float real estate values up.   Richard Duncan  20:05   Real estate prices, home prices, have not been performing very well over the last year to two. Pretty flat, unlike in prior years, immediately after COVID when they were booming. I suppose that's what we're going to continue to see for some time. If interest rates remain high, the affordability is not there. But if we do get this new round of quantitative easing, which I think is a real possibility, then that will effectively push down the interest rates, making home affordability better. And at the same time, by creating more money, that does push up asset prices across the board. So over the long run, I do believe that real estate is a very good investment, and also it can be a very good investment from the point of view of providing diversity in your portfolio. I'd like to focus in particular on it can be an inflation hedge. So, if you buy a house and use a say a 30-year fixed mortgage, and then we or a 15-year fixed mortgage to pay for a significant part of that purchase, and then we do get inflation, then the inflation eats away your mortgage. Your mortgage evaporates because of the inflation, so in that way you're somewhat protected from the risk of future inflation by having inflation destroys your debt. In other words, so that helps. So I do believe that buying houses, I think rental income is a very good investment, particularly houses on a piece of land buy the house with a fixed rate mortgage. You rent out the house, and over 10 to 15 years, the house pays for itself, and it keeps appreciating in value over time. Decade after decade, it will become increasingly valuable over the long run, and you'll have also a supply cash flow, and you'll have this inflation hedge that I just described. So I think owning rental property that is on land, I'm not so keen on buying condos. There's no limit as to how many condos can be built in the air, but there is a limited amount of land in the world, and so land is as good as gold because if gold goes up; the land will also go up for the same reasons. So I think owning rental property is a very important part of having a broadly diversified portfolio, which is usually the best thing for most people to do to have a broadly diversified investment portfolio.    Keith Weinhold  22:37   Yeah, in this era of both war and increased interventionism, yeah, we still have a resource here, real estate that is scarce, that is necessary, and is built with this basket of goods and commodities constituting that replacement cost.   Richard Duncan  22:53   I agree.   Keith Weinhold  22:55   Well, Richard and I have a lot more to talk about when we come back, including what phase of the economy that we're in post-creditism and a lot more. You're listening to Get Rich Education. Our guest is the publisher of Macro Watch, Richard Duncan. I'm your host, Keith Weinhold.   Keith Weinhold  23:12   What if you got your mortgage loans the same place I get mine? You sure can at Ridge Lending Group NMLS 42056. They provided GRE listeners with more loans than anyone because Ridge specializes in investment property. They'll help you build a long-term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. Start your prequal and even chat directly with President Caeli Ridge while it's on your mind. Start at ridgelendinggroup.com. That's ridgelendinggroup.com. Let me ask you something: If you've worked hard to build wealth, is your money positioned to actually support your goals? A lot of accredited investors leave capital sitting in cash because it feels safe, but inflation and missed income opportunities can quietly erode its value. Freedom Family Investments offers freedom notes for investors seeking structured income backed by real estate. It's a straightforward approach built on real assets, not speculation. In full disclosure, I'm an investor myself. What I like is that their team walks you through how it all works, so you can decide if it aligns with your portfolio and income goals. Every investment carries risk, and nothing is guaranteed. But with a track record of consistent, on-time investor payouts, they built real credibility. Go to freedomfamilyinvestments.com to book a clarity call, or text family 266866. That's family 266866.   Robert Helms  24:44   Hey everybody, it's Robert Helms of the Real Estate Guys Radio Program. So glad you found Keith Weinhold and Get Rich Education. Don't play your daydream.   Keith Weinhold  25:04   Welcome back to Get Rich Education. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. We're talking with Richard Duncan. Check out him and his work at RichardDuncanEconomics.com. So much interesting stuff has happened in the macroeconomic world since we last had him here with the Iran War, with the AI arms race heating up, and with hitting that milestone of $40 trillion in total public national debt. Which, by the way, that $40 trillion-that is more than the combined debt of Germany, Japan, France, Italy, the UK, and Canada. That's basically the entire rest of the G7 just to try to get your head wrapped around that $40 trillion number, and you know, Richard, when it comes to the government, their income and their expenses and their assets in their debt, some wonder, including me, if the government can just print its own currency, then why must they collect taxes from us?   Richard Duncan  26:04   Okay, well, to understand the answer to that question, it's necessary to understand that it wasn't always possible for the government to print its own currency. Up until 1968, 1971, the Fed was legally required to back the dollars it created with gold, and the United States had the obligation to allow other countries to convert the dollars they accumulated into U.S. gold. So up until then, that wasn't a possibility for the government to finance its spending by money printing. And so, over the centuries that preceded, the government would tax the people to obtain the money that it needs for spending. So imagine today: here we are. The government now is spending about $7 trillion a year, and its tax revenues are about $5 trillion a year. So if it suddenly said, "Okay, we're not going to tax anyone anymore, that would mean that people would have an extra $5 trillion to spend, and if the people started spending $5 trillion, we would have hyperinflation, because there's only a limited amount of industrial capacity in the United States, or even in the world for that matter. It couldn't absorb a $5 trillion of additional spending from households and businesses, so it's not that they can't technically create the money as much money as they want to pay for everything they want. The constraint is not money creation technically; it's the inflation that it would produce if they just stopped taxing everyone and just created money instead. So that's the reason they can't.   Keith Weinhold  27:46   Just slowly taper it away and give people some income tax relief. Why can't they do that?   Richard Duncan  27:52   Well, that's what they've been doing. Taxes are far lower now than they were under when President Reagan took office, and that's one of the reasons we have $40 trillion in debt.   Keith Weinhold  28:03   Okay, but that is how the income and expenses look on an annual basis, right, Richard? This is how I think of it. Like the United States basically has 5 trillion in annual income, much of it from personal tax collection, and 7 trillion in annual expenses. That's how we get to the annual deficit of about 2 trillion, which rolls into that $40 trillion of overall debt.   Richard Duncan  28:30   That's right. What you said is correct. But we would have much more than $5 trillion income from taxes had the government not reduced the tax rate so often and so radically, starting in the early 1980s under President Reagan, if taxes hadn't been cut so sharply, we wouldn't have a two-trillion-dollar budget deficit, $40 trillion of government debt. So they've already been tapering the amount that they tax by cutting tax rates very sharply over the last decades,   Keith Weinhold  29:02   I guess a lot of people, admittedly me included, haven't been thinking about it that way. Maybe because it's painful, and I do write checks to the IRS. But when we talk about this propensity for continued inflation, one component of this is what's happening with the AI arms race, and I know you've looked at this closely. You know, because one thing I think about is, well, wait, will the AI arms race actually be deflationary over time because it lowers production costs and makes us more efficient, or is it going to be inflationary because it requires enormous capital and electricity and infrastructure in the building of these data centers. So you know I can see it going either way with the AI arms race, inflationary or deflationary. But since you studied it a lot, including talking about it on macrowatch, tell us more about the AI arms race and what this all means, Richard.   Richard Duncan  29:59   So yes. On your point that you just made, in the short term, it looks like the AI boom is going to be inflationary. Yeah, it's driving up electricity prices, land prices, and all of the things that we discussed before. Everything that goes into making artificial intelligence intelligence, including memory chips, which drive up the cost of your iPhone and iPad. So it's inflationary in the short run, but over the long run, it could probably and probably will be quite disinflationary or even deflationary. I think that's several years away. Now, moving on to the next question, the AI arms race. I think it's very helpful to understand the world around us by putting it in the context of how our economic system has evolved since dollars ceased to be backed by gold. 1968, the Fed was no longer required to back dollars with gold. 1971, President Nixon said, "Sorry, Europe, we we said we would let you convert your dollars into gold, but we changed our mind and you can't. So after that, there was no longer any gold backing for the dollar, and here are a list of things that have happened as a result of that change. Our huge trade deficits couldn't have happened if the dollars were backed by gold. The huge budget deficits that we have couldn't have happened. The Fed couldn't have created trillions of dollars through quantitative easing. Inflation rate has fallen from the 1980s, from the the mid teens to well below the Fed's 2% inflation target for most of the last 20 years, and wealth in the United States has exploded, as I mentioned, from 60 trillion to 180 trillion. That wouldn't have happened if dollars had remained backed by gold because credit has exploded. Total debt or total credit, two sides of the same coin. Total debt in the U.S. It's government debt, household debt, corporate debt, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac debt, all the debt. It first went through $1 trillion in 1960. Now it's 110 trillion. So 110 times increase in my lifetime in total debt. That wouldn't have happened if dollars had remained backed by gold, and because of all of that credit expansion and the massive trade deficits we had with the rest of the world through globalization occurred, and that allowed Asia to industrialize, and Asia wouldn't be industrialized as it is now. China wouldn't be an economic superpower as it is now had dollars remained backed by gold, because it wouldn't have been able to grow through export-led growth. And so, China, instead of looking like it does today, it would look like it did in 1970, basically being a very poor third world country, and globalization has pulled hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.   Richard Duncan  32:47   They would still be in poverty had dollars remained backed by gold. The Soviet Union probably would still be around because the U.S. under President Reagan wouldn't have been able to to spend so much on the military that it bankrupted the Soviet Union trying to keep up with us, and finally, China wouldn't be the national security threat that it's become now because it wouldn't have had a trade surplus and it wouldn't have had any economic growth to speak of for the last 50 years. That's the world that we're living in now. The world we live in now is the direct result of dollars no longer being backed by gold, and to understand the world around us, you have to understand that that's the starting point. Now, coming to your question, this explosion of wealth that has been created under the system that I call creditism-we did have capitalism. It was driven by saving and investment, Capital accumulation, hence capitalism and investment that drove capitalism. That's not how our system works. Our system is driven by credit creation and consumption, and more credit creation and more consumption. That's creditism. It used to be driven by private sector credit growth, but the private sector became too heavily indebted in 2008, and they blew up, and that almost resulted in the complete collapse and bankruptcy of every bank in the United States and probably most of the banks around the world as well. So the government had to step in, and since that time, it's been government borrowing primarily.   Richard Duncan  34:17   This driven creditism and kept credit expanding with the help of the Fed, so this has been the evolution of creditism and has produced extraordinary amounts of wealth. So it's had two consequences that we need to focus in on now. For one, I've mentioned already, it turned China into an economic superpower, which is now on the verge of overtaking us, not just economically, but also technologically and militarily, it's become an extreme national security threat to the United States. But the second thing that has occurred, the creation of all of this wealth has provided the funds that have allowed a. Technological revolution to occur so quickly, this AI revolution that we're now living through, that is the direct result of the ample liquidity that has been created and flowing around the world, originating largely from the Fed's printing press and the government's budget deficits. That's created trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars of wealth that wouldn't have existed otherwise, and that wealth has gone into funding this development of data centers and the technology that's created the artificial intelligence. Now we are experiencing this AI revolution, and it's become quite apparent to everyone that whoever wins the AI arms race is going to rule the world. We're on the verge of machines becoming more intelligent than humans, and then after that point, through self-training and self-improvement, going on 24 hours a day, they're going to become exponentially more intelligent than humans very quickly, so whoever wins this race is going to have dominance of every other country in the world. So, as creditism has evolved, it has created a national security threat in China and has created artificial intelligence. And as a result of the two combined, we now have this artificial intelligence arms race with the United States that must win. That's why President Trump is calling for a 1.5 trillion dollar defense budget.   Richard Duncan  36:30   So this is one of the main themes that MacroWatch has been focused on this year. I've done a series of videos on the new defense spending boom, looking in one video at the traditional titans of defense like Lockheed Martin, RTX, Boeing, in another video looking at the new up-and-coming Silicon Valley challengers in the defense industry, companies like Andrel, Palantir, and most important of all, SpaceX. This is now the driving force in the economy. the The absolute necessity of winning this AI arms race is going to require much greater government spending on the military, and it's going to require what we're seeing extraordinary amounts of money being invested in developing artificial intelligence because whoever gets there first wins, and whoever doesn't is going to be subjugated by the winner. So that's where we are. So that brings us up to we've been discussing the change from capitalism into creditism, and we've seen how creditism has evolved from being first driven by private sector credit to later being driven by government sector borrowing and spending, now leading to this AI arms race, which I think we're now moving toward a different kind of economic system beyond creditism. So let me back up just a minute and say that economic systems are best defined by the constraints that limit what they can do. So we've been talking about capitalism. Capitalism's main constraint was the requirement that money be backed by gold, and when that constraint, when that gold-backed money constraint was removed, the constraint was gone. The economic system evolved into a different kind of economic system. Creditism has created extraordinary amounts of wealth and growth since early 1970s. This is not the first time economic systems have evolved. If you look back through history, there have been many different kinds of economic systems. They've all been defined by the constraints that binded what they could do. If you go back to hunter-gatherer economic system, that economic system was constrained because the people didn't have tools for cultivation or any way to store the food that they created for long-term storage, but once they developed that those tools and the ability to store food, those constraints were removed and they evolved into a different kind of economic system. Ultimately, into feudalism. Feudalism was an economic system that was constrained by very poor roads, so there was very little transportation. There were no banks, so no banking system or credit, and there was very limited legal social mobility.   Richard Duncan  39:28   But eventually, cities developed, and because of cities, trade flourished, and that removed the constraints that had defined feudalism. Okay, so fast forward, capitalism was constrained by gold-backed money. When gold was removed, we moved into creditism. Now here we are in creditism, late-stage creditism, and we're seeing this phenomenal expansion of artificial intelligence. So every economic system throughout history has. Had two constraints in common. There have been labor constraints, a limited labor supply, and there has been the constraint of limited human intelligence. We're now, thanks to artificial intelligence, on the verge of removing those two constraints that have limited every economic system up until today, when artificial intelligence is embedded in humanoid robots, that's going to remove the labor constraint. We will no longer have any labor constraint. Robots will be able to produce all the labor and then some that's required. So there goes the labor constraint, and when we hit superintelligence, that's going to remove the constraint of human intelligence that has bound economic systems. So those have been the two primary binding constraints on every economic system so far, and they're just now about to be removed by artificial intelligence. We're moving into a new era without intelligence constraints and without labor constraints, and this is going to radically change everything. When those constraints are removed, creditism is going to evolve into an economic system that's no longer driven by credit creation. It's going to be driven by intelligence creation, knowledge creation, or an explosion of cognition. So I call the new system that we're moving toward cognitism, because rather than being driven by credit as creditism is, it's going to be driven by exponential expansion of intelligence or cognition, and it's probably going to create undreamt of wealth, but it's going to completely change from bottom to top everything about the world and society and social relations that exist today, and that is what we're very quickly moving into over the next 10 to 20 years. That that's where we're going to go, and I believe it deserves a new name. So I've coined the term cognitism to describe this new economic system. The post-creditism world is cognitivism.   Keith Weinhold  42:12   Wow, this is massive. Ever since we met, you talked about creditism, and really, that's the economic system that we live in, not capitalism, so we're on the brink again of moving from creditism into cognitivism, because oftentimes these forces and their change are defined by having the constraints removed, and we're on the brink of removing the labor constraint and the human intelligence restraint from creditism to move us into cognitivism over the next 10 or 20 years. I'm just reviewing what you said as I'm thinking this through, Richard. Talk to us at least a little about what the ramifications are for us, just everyday people and investors with this cognitimism economic system.   Richard Duncan  43:02   It's very difficult to guess what the consequences are going to be. They're going to be not only economic, but they're going to very quickly become political, and the political consequences are difficult to guess how they will play out. But it does look like when robots can do all the manual labor, and machines can do all of the intellectual work on a much more accurately, much more rapidly, much more flawlessly than humans can. There won't be any need for humans to have work unless legislation is in place to ensure that they do, and if they don't have work, then they're going to not have any income. And if they don't have any income, they're going to start being very unhappy, and they're going to start rioting, and governments are going to begin to fall, and we don't know how that's going to play out. So there's going to have to be arrangements made to ensure that people do have enough income to benefit from all of the extraordinary wealth that could be created through limitless labor and limitless intelligence, but to work in a way that can satisfy our wildest dreams and beyond our wildest dreams is going to be a matter of restructuring the political economy, if you will, to ensure that people benefit from this technological revolution that is now speeding up.   Keith Weinhold  44:30   Yeah, I would say all we do know is we don't know and how it's going to turn out. But you know whether it's been tractors replacing horses or whether it's been the advent of the assembly line, or whether it's been the advent of the internet, people always say it's going to destroy net jobs, and historically, it really hasn't.   Richard Duncan  44:53   You're right, but the replacement of horses with automobiles didn't really work out so well for the horses.   Keith Weinhold  45:00   So, is there any way we can think about this in order to stay nimble as investors and everyday people, Richard? As we move into cognitism.   Richard Duncan  45:10   Absolutely, everyone needs to subscribe to Macro Watch, and they'll be able to follow it very closely there as I map it out as it unfolds from month to month.   Keith Weinhold  45:22   They should, and it's fascinating, and you've really been on the cutting edge of that. Tell us more about subscribing to Macro Watch, something that a lot of listeners should be interested in.   Richard Duncan  45:33   So my background is has been in finance. I started working in Hong Kong in 1986 as a securities analyst, I later on became an economist and then a strategist. I worked for the World Bank for a couple of years in Washington. I was the head of global investment strategy in London for ABN AMRO Asset Management. So my background is in finance, and I have spent most of my career living in Asia for the last 40 years, primarily in Asia. Along the way, I've written four books. The first one was the Dollar Crisis back in 2003. The most recent one was The Money Revolution in 2023. So my background is in finance. But 13 years ago, I launched Macro Watch. Macro Watch is a video newsletter. Every couple of weeks, I upload a new video. It's essentially me making a PowerPoint presentation discussing something important happening in the global economy and how that's likely to impact asset prices. So it's essentially become a compendium of the global economy. Essentially, everything that has happened in the last 13 years at the macro level that matters is discussed in these macro watch videos. For instance, there is a complete history of everything the Federal Reserve has done since it was founded in 1913. There is a complete description of government debt from the beginning, the increase in government debt and budget deficits. It explains things like how the Fed actually creates money, what are bank reserves, what is Japanese monetary policy, what is European monetary policy. All the major macroeconomic developments are described there and are available to subscribers every two weeks. They upload a new video, and so if your listeners would like to check it out, my website is richarddunkeneconomics.com. That's richarduneconomics.com, and if they'd like to subscribe, hit the subscribe button. And I'd like to offer everyone a 50% subscription discount.   Keith Weinhold  47:36   Thank you.   Richard Duncan  47:36   They'll be prompted to put in a discount coupon code if they use the discount code GRE, like Get Rich Education, they can subscribe at a 50% discount. They'll find it very affordable, and at the very least, they can sign up for my free blog while they're there, and they can follow my work that way.    Keith Weinhold  47:57   It is fascinating the AI arms race poised to have us completely change economic systems from criticism to cognitism. Richard, is there any last thing that you would like to leave us with? Whether it has something else to do with AI, maybe I didn't think about asking you, or something with the Iran war and the inflation, or anything else in the economy. Any last thought for what we should do or be aware of?   Richard Duncan  48:24   One thing, of course, I think is very important is for everyone to learn to use AI as much as they possibly can. It's easy to use, and it will teach you how to use it. And as we evolve into this new world is going to be crucial to make use of this most important tool humanity has ever had-the ability to use AI. This suddenly gives you access to all the world's knowledge. All you have to do is ask, and it will tell you in a very friendly way. So, by being able to use AI, you'll be in a much better position to survive the transition and prosper in the decade ahead.   Keith Weinhold  49:09   That is an actionable way to stay on top of it, Richard. It's been valuable as always. Thanks so much for coming back onto the show.   Richard Duncan  49:16   Thank you, Keith. I've enjoyed it.   Keith Weinhold  49:24   Yeah, keen insights from Richard as always. Yeah, the U.S. sure has been making enemies the past couple years. That could make other nations less likely to buy our debt, and then in turn, it takes higher interest rates in order to attract bond buyers. Well, that in turn increases mortgage rates. But to some extent, other nations have to buy our debt. Richard says that a bigger round of future QE is a distinct possibility. That is code for money printing. That's clearly. Inflationary, but few seem to know we've already been involved in liquidity operations since last December. Whether that's called QE or something else, it is taking more government spending to keep up with the AI race. That's inflationary too. What about that? When horses were replaced with cars. How did it work out for the horse? I don't know if that made it better or worse for the horse. Maybe horses were out of work, but then they got to live free. Will AI make that very predicament apply to humans? Nobody knows. The economic system will have moved from creditism to cognitism when the economy is no longer driven by credit creation but intelligence creation, from RichardDuncanEconomics.com, you can hit the subscribe to MacroWatch button and enter the discount code GRE for a 50% discount. Just about everything that you heard today is poised to drive mortgage rates higher, not lower. Big thanks to Macro Watch Mastermind Richard Duncan today. Next week it's a more real estate centered show. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. Don't quit your daydream.   Speaker 2  51:21   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal, or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial, or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of Get Rich Education LLC exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  51:49   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth building, getricheduceducation.com  

In this episode of the Financial Survival Network, host Kerry Lutz is joined by Matthew Tuttle of Tuttle Capital Management to break down the latest troubling economic indicators. Opening with a personal story about soaring everyday prices, Lutz sets the stage for a discussion on stubborn inflation, highlighted by recent PCE numbers rising at 3.7% against the Fed's 2% target. With GDP slowing to 1.5%, Tuttle outlines the sticky position this creates for the Federal Reserve and incoming Chair Kevin Warsh as they head into Jackson Hole and upcoming FOMC meetings. The duo explores the political pressure on the Fed to cut rates, the treasury market interventions by the Treasury Department, and why the long-dormant "bond vigilantes" may force interest rates higher regardless of central bank policy. Turning toward actionable investment strategies, Tuttle argues that traditional 60/40 portfolios and long-duration bonds are currently uninvestable in an inflationary environment. Instead, he shares Tuttle Capital's unique approach to modern portfolio construction: balancing high-upside AI "bottleneck" stocks with "Halo" (heavy asset, low obsolescence) value companies and century-old "Lindy" stocks. He highlights tactile assets like gold and silver—noting key technical signals for silver at $70 and $75—alongside cryptocurrency and property and casualty (P&C) insurance stocks, which he utilizes as higher-upside, zero-benchmark bond substitutes. Find Matthew here: https://www.tuttlecap.com/ Find Kerry here:  https://khlfsn.substack.com and here: https://inflation.cafe    All Kerry's books are available here:  Amazon Bookstore    

Join me on Substack! Look up my name.Today I'm joined by two economists who spent a decade inside a room most of us will never see — the basement of the U.S. Treasury Department — building the first database that ever linked confidential tax records to the individual owners of America's private businesses.Episode Sponsor: Fiscal AI is a modern data terminal that gives investors instant access to twenty years of financials, earnings transcripts, and extensive segment and KPI data—use my link for a two-week free trial plus 15% off: https://fiscal.ai/talkingbillions/Owen Zidar teaches at Princeton, Eric Zwick teaches at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, and together they've written a book that completely reframed how I think about wealth in this country: The Everywhere Millionaire.Their argument, backed by data nobody had ever assembled before, is that America's real fortune isn't sitting with the Forbes 400 on the coasts — it's sitting with three million "ordinary" business owners: car dealers, dental practices, gutter manufacturers, hiding in plain sight in nearly every town in the country. They define an "everywhere millionaire" as a private business owner worth $5 million or more, and collectively, these three million households hold thirteen times the wealth of the Forbes 400.We trace the hidden engine behind that wealth, and they share story after story of the individuals who built it. We go beyond the economic power of this group into the political influence it quietly carries too.Their book is eye-opening and genuinely inspiring. It makes the case that the American Dream is very much alive, and that there are far more paths to it than most of us realize. Some readers may even find themselves seeing, for the first time, that they're not alone — that they're part of a much larger, wealthier, more established group than the billionaires who steal all the spotlight. And maybe that's exactly where they want to be: financially successful, politically influential, yet comfortably out of sight, living among the rest of us.Podcast Program – Disclosure StatementBlue Infinitas Capital, LLC is a registered investment adviser and the opinions expressed by the Firm's employees and podcast guests on this show are their own and do not reflect the opinions of Blue Infinitas Capital, LLC. All statements and opinions expressed are based upon information considered reliable although it should not be relied upon as such. Any statements or opinions are subject to change without notice.Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investments involve risk and, unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed.

This week's indicators: Is The U.S. Treasury Department futzing with financial markets?; Is Patagonia's pretty picturesque setting … for data centers?; Was the summer box office actually swell? Fact checking by Sierra Juarez.Your Next Listen — A Treasury showdown with the bond marketConnect with The Indicator — Sign up for The Indicator's weekly newsletter! — Buy the Planet Money book — Find our socials, YouTube and more! — For sponsor-free episodes, subscribe to NPR+ Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show's perks include sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

The Treasury Department recently eliminated a rule that required American companies to identify their owners. The rule was intended to prevent money laundering. What's driving the decision to drop it? *** Thank you for listening. Help power On Point by making a donation here: wbur.org/giveonpoint

Plus: The European Central Bank raises interest rates. And the Iran-backed Houthi militia seizes a key strategic port city, threatening Saudi oil exports. Alex Ossola hosts. Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As the nation marks the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, the ABA Banking Journal Podcast — returning for its ninth season — brings you conversations with two financial industry professionals to help illuminate the impact 9/11 had on bankers, the financial system and the whole nation. ABA President and CEO Rob Nichols was a senior Treasury Department official on 9/11, and he recounts being sent to a secure bunker in the White House complex with Vice President Dick Cheney and other top officials. At Treasury, Nichols had a front-row seat to how the financial system was rewired in the months after 9/11 to stop flows of funds to terrorists and their sponsors. Beth Chunn, a regular contributor to the ABA Banking Journal, was working for Morgan Stanley in the South Tower of the World Trade Center. Building on her article in the latest issue of the Banking Journal, Chunn recounts what it was like to be in the World Trade Center that day, to evacuate from the building and from Manhattan.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, discusses health care fraud and says more than $20 billion identified by the Treasury Department in suspected health care fraud and money laundering could double the life of the Medicare trust fund. Dr. Oz also says more drug pricing deals are in the works and calls on Congress to codify the administration’s most favored nation pricing agreements. Oz spoke with Bloomberg's Kailey Leinz.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

President Trump talks up America's "tremendous" success as he promises a 'dividend' to US adult citizens if the Republicans retain control of Congress - in a pledge totalling more than a trillion dollars. The 10-year US bond yield jumps to its highest level in three years as the Treasury Department announces plans to buy back up to 6 billion dollars in longer-term debt - triple the normal level. UBS CEO Sergio Ermotti telling CNBC he sees investor complacency as geopolitical and economic risks mount. Apple unveils its long-awaited foldable phone, with the 'iPhone Duo' coming in just shy of $2,000 in a major shakeup of its lineup under new CEO John Ternus. The ECB looks poised to raise rates at today's meeting, with traders pricing in a near 100 percent chance of a 25 basis point hike.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Stocks take a leg lower as the 10-year treasury yield spikes to its highest level in nearly 3 years. Why the Treasury Department's buyback announcement isn't cooling things down, and what the yield surge means ahead of key inflation reports this week. Plus more weakness in the retail sector, Apple's bold move into foldable devices, and the AI threat that could wipe out humanity. The stark warning from one industry expert who says the tech could kill us all… Fast Money Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Plus: Treasury yields climb to new highs. And Apple shares are little changed as the company announces a foldable iPhone. Imani Moise hosts. Sign up for WSJ's free What's News newsletter. An artificial-intelligence tool assisted in the making of this episode by creating summaries that were based on Wall Street Journal reporting and reviewed and adapted by an editor. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week we talk about money policies, yield curves, and government bonds.We also discuss the Fed, the Treasury Department, and a WWII accord between them.Recommended Book: Paved Paradise by Henry GrabarTranscriptIn April of 1942, a few months after the United States entered World War 2, the US Treasury Department asked the Federal Reserve to help it borrow a truly staggering amount of money, and as cheaply as possible. The Fed agreed, committing itself to holding short-term Treasury bill rates at three-eighths of 1%, while also capping the yield on long-term government bonds at 2.5%.This was a type of yield curve control. Rather than allowing the market to decide how much interest the government would pay, the Fed decided that price and promised to enforce it.That helped finance the war, because the Treasury knew its borrowing costs wouldn't spiral out of control at a moment when it needed to spend unprecedented sums on ships, planes, weapons, soldiers, and all the other machinery of an ongoing global conflict.The downside was that the Fed lost control of an important monetary policy lever.Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions, so keeping yields below a certain level meant the Fed had to stand ready to buy bonds whenever their prices dropped. It couldn't decide in advance how many it would buy, or how much money it would create in the process. The market would thus forth decide that, instead.Consequently, the Fed became, in some ways, an extension of the Treasury's debt-management operation, its inflation-related responsibilities made secondary to the government's need for cheap financing.That arrangement persisted after the war ended, despite the return of inflation, and President Harry Truman's administration pushed to maintain it during the Korean War, as well.Fed officials resisted, though, with inflation running at more than 8%, and after a very public, very contentious standoff, on March 4, 1951, the Treasury and the Fed announced that they had reached what became known as the Treasury-Fed Accord.That agreement did not make the Fed independent all at once, but it established the principle underlying the modern relationship between these institutions: the Treasury manages government borrowing, while the Fed sets monetary policy based on inflation and employment, not on how much that policy costs the government.The market, in other words, would once again be allowed to decide the price of long-term US debt.What I'd like to talk about today is what happens when that price goes up, what's pushing long-term US borrowing costs toward levels we haven't seen in decades, and why two people appointed by the same president are pulling in opposite directions on this issue.—The Federal Reserve's primary interest-rate lever is the federal funds rate, which is the overnight rate banks charge each other to borrow money. The Fed currently targets a range of 3.5 to 3.75 percent for that rate, and while it has other tools, this is the number people are usually talking about when they say the Fed raised, cut, or held rates.The Fed does not directly set the yield on 10- or 30-year Treasuries, though.Those securities are sold at auction and then traded in a huge secondary market, and their yields reflect a combination of what investors expect inflation to look like, where they think short-term rates will go over the life of the bond, and what's called the term premium.The term premium is basically extra compensation for uncertainty. If you lock up your money for 30 years instead of rolling over short-term debt, you accept the risk that inflation, growth, government policy, and other variables will change in ways that make your bond less valuable over that thirty year period. The more uncertain the future seems, the more compensation you're likely to demand.And again, when demand for a bond falls, its price falls and its yield rises. When we say yields are rising, that means borrowers have to offer investors, the people and institutions giving them the money they want to borrow, more money, more interest, to convince them to buy those bonds.That doesn't only affect the government. The 10-year Treasury serves as something like a reference rate for the entire economy, influencing mortgages, business loans, and the value of long-lived assets.As of September 3 of 2026, the average US 30-year fixed mortgage rate was 6.71%, up from 6.5% a year earlier. That increase is the result of yield increases in the bond market.Long-term Treasury yields have been climbing for much of 2026, and that climb accelerated over the summer.The 30-year yield reached about 5.31 percent on August 17, its highest level since 2007. A few days earlier, the Treasury sold 30-year bonds at a yield of 5.216%, the highest borrowing cost at one of those auctions since 2001.The 10-year yield briefly hit about 4.81% this past week, its highest level since early 2025, and ended Friday at about 4.78%. The two-year yield, which tends to track expectations about contemporary Fed policy more closely, ended at about 4.37%.There isn't one clean cut reason for these yield bumps. Instead, there are a bunch of forces pushing in roughly the same direction.The first is government borrowing. The Congressional Budget Office now expects a roughly 2.1 trillion dollar federal deficit this fiscal year, which is 200 billion dollars more than it projected in February. Covering that gap means issuing more debt, and more supply generally means the Treasury has to offer a better return to attract enough buyers.The second is competition from corporations, especially technology companies borrowing to build AI infrastructure and data centers.The Dallas Fed estimates that AI-related investment-grade bond issuance—these companies borrowing money, in the form of bonds, to help build more data centers and other AI-enabling stuff—could total around $300 billion this year, creating long-duration debt equivalent to about an eighth of what the Treasury is expected to issue. Some of the companies selling this debt have extremely strong balance sheets and high credit ratings, so investors who want safe-ish, long-term bonds suddenly have a lot more options, and the US government has to compete with that for a finite pool of investor resources.Third, oil prices have surged following renewed strikes and attacks around the Strait of Hormuz, with US benchmark prices recently climbing above $90 a barrel. More expensive energy can goose inflation across the economy, which makes locking in a fixed return for 10 or 30 years less appealing, because those yields might not keep up with the practical devaluation of the dollar.Fourth, that aforementioned term premium has risen as investors ask to be paid more for uncertainty related to inflation, deficits, geopolitics, and future Treasury issuance.And fifth, the pool of buyers is changing. Foreign investors still own trillions of dollars in Treasuries, but private foreign demand for notes and bonds fell sharply in June, even as corporate bonds attracted more of that finite sum of money.A big shift we seem to be seeing here is that some investors seem to be judging Treasuries less as a bet on the next Fed meeting, and more as a long-term bet on whether the US political system can manage its finances. And that shift is showing up at an awkward moment for the two institutions involved in the 1951 Accord.Kevin Warsh, who became Fed chair in May, used his August 28 speech at Jackson Hole to say that although inflation expectations remain anchored, the Fed still has work to do if underlying inflation is not moving toward its target quickly enough.Markets read that as a warning that a rate hike could be coming, and the unexpectedly strong August jobs report reinforced that interpretation: employers added 162,000 jobs, far more than economists anticipated, while estimates for June and July were revised upward.The Treasury Department, meanwhile, is moving in the opposite direction.On August 19, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that the government would at least double the size of its long-term bond buybacks, from a maximum of 2 billion dollars to at least 4 billion dollars per operation, beginning September 9 and continuing through November 4.The stated purpose is to improve liquidity, buying older, less frequently traded 10- to 30-year securities. But buying long-term bonds also reduces the supply available to investors, boosting prices and putting downward pressure on yields, which is why Bessent has referred to the approach as a “Treasury twist.”The scale is small in the context of a $40 trillion national debt, and analysts have described it as more signal than substance. It is nonetheless a striking signal: one Trump appointee is telling markets that higher short-term rates may be necessary to control inflation, while another is using the Treasury's balance sheet to push long-term rates in the other direction.These jobs, which again, were separated in 1951, are working against each other. And this matters, first, because long-term government debt is the foundation upon which a lot of other prices are built.When a 30-year Treasury yields more than 5%, companies refinancing debt have to pay more, commercial real estate becomes harder to finance, mortgages become more expensive, and investors have less reason to pay extremely high prices for stocks based on profits those companies might earn many years from now.It also matters because interest on the federal debt has become one of the government's largest expenses. Gross interest expense reached about $1.17 trillion during the first ten months of fiscal 2026, up about 15% from the same period last year. The somewhat narrower CBO measure of net interest reached $963 billion over that span, roughly level with Medicare spending and greater than defense spending.This creates a potentially self-reinforcing loop: higher yields increase the cost of servicing the debt, higher interest costs expand the deficit, larger deficits require more borrowing, and more borrowing can put further upward pressure on yields.Economists use the term fiscal dominance to describe the point at which government financing needs start to constrain monetary policy, pushing the central bank to keep rates lower than it otherwise would, or to buy government debt, even if doing so undermines its effort to control inflation.The US is not necessarily at that point, but this is exactly the kind of pressure the 1951 Accord was meant to prevent.As with everything government money-related, there's also a global dimension to this shift.For decades, Japanese banks, insurers, pension funds, and other institutions bought foreign bonds in part because yields at home were so low. On September 1, though, Japan's 10-year government bond yield touched 3% for the first time since 1996.Japan's government has more debt relative to the size of its economy than any other wealthy country, and it assumed a 3% long-term rate when calculating debt-service costs for its current budget. Rising above that level would strain its finances, but those higher yields also give Japanese investors more reason to keep their money at home.That doesn't mean Japanese institutions will dump all their Treasuries. Currency-hedging costs and the specific needs of different investors complicate that calculation. But when a major source of relatively steady demand becomes more price-sensitive, the marginal buyer of US debt has to be paid more to invest.Finally, the Treasury market itself has become somewhat more fragile.The amount of debt in circulation has grown far faster than the balance sheets of the dealers that traditionally absorb buying and selling. Hedge funds have filled some of that gap using highly leveraged strategies, including something called the cash-futures basis trade.Fed researchers estimate that these positions reached about $830 billion by September 2025, representing 35% of hedge funds' long Treasury exposure. These trades can provide useful liquidity when markets are calm, but because they rely on enormous amounts of borrowed money to capture tiny price differences, they can also unwind pretty quickly when volatility spikes.That sort of unwind contributed to the Treasury-market seizure in March of 2020, and a different leveraged hedge-fund strategy added to turbulence in April of 2025.The assets treated as the world's safest and most liquid can still become difficult to sell when everyone needs cash at the same time, in other words.The next few weeks should partially clarify what's actually driving this unusual market.The expanded Treasury buybacks begin the day after this episode goes live, September 9. Producer-price inflation data arrives on September 10, consumer-price data on September 11, and the Fed meets on September 15 and 16. The Bank of Japan follows on September 17 and 18, when it may increase its policy rate from 1% to around 1.25%.If the Fed hikes and long-term yields fall, that could indicate investors view the move as credible inflation-fighting: short-term borrowing becomes more expensive, but the term premium shrinks because the distant future seems less inflationary.If the Fed holds after a soft inflation report and short-term yields fall while the 30-year barely moves, that would suggest the long end is being driven by deficits, debt supply, oil prices, corporate competition, and global demand more than Fed policy.And if the buybacks begin but long-term yields continue to climb, that would demonstrate the limits of debt-management policy in a market this large. The Treasury could respond by issuing more short-term and less long-term debt, reducing immediate borrowing costs, though that would also mean refinancing more frequently and taking on the risk that rates remain high.It could also draw down some of the around $950 billion in its account at the Fed to fund larger buybacks, but that cash also serves as a buffer against the debt ceiling, which the government is currently expected to reach sometime in 2027. Spending the buffer now would mean rebuilding it later, and rebuilding it would require issuing even more debt.Back in 1951, the Treasury and the Fed reached an agreement that the central bank should not be required to make government borrowing cheap, and that the price of long-term debt should be allowed to reflect what the market believed that debt was worth.Right now, the market is rendering its verdict, and that verdict is that lending the United States money for 30 years has become substantially more expensive. Now we wait to see what Washington decides to do about it.Show Noteshttps://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/treasury-fed-accordhttps://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-the-treasury-fed-accord-of-1951-and-why-is-it-important/https://www.federalreserve.gov/data/three-factor-nominal-term-structure-model.htmhttps://www.freddiemac.com/pmmshttps://www.cbo.gov/publication/61983https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/interest-expense-on-the-public-debt-outstanding/interest-expense-on-the-public-debt-outstandinghttps://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/debt-to-the-penny/debt-to-the-pennyhttps://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2026/0210-searls-aifinancinghttps://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0606https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0607https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/warsh20260828a.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.htmhttps://apnews.com/article/1af16359af43eb8abc66445465f633c8https://apnews.com/article/775d7cf741349c7c8e689c0beb57f074https://apnews.com/article/a27a8d3651ff810b25c610d3e1b6259dhttps://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/decomposing-hedge-funds-u-s-treasury-exposures-20260622.htmlhttps://www.imf.org/en/publications/fandd/issues/2026/03/safeguarding-the-treasury-market-jeremy-steinhttps://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/japans-benchmark-bond-yield-rises-to-3-for-first-time-in-30-years-4883532https://www.boj.or.jp/en/mopo/mpmsche_minu/index.htmhttps://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/when-will-we-reach-the-debt-limit-again/https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financing-the-government/quarterly-refunding/most-recent-quarterly-refunding-documents/https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/schedule/2026/09_sched.htmhttps://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-markets-a975877a-ddce-4ea0-a735-4b460d37af90.htmlhttps://www.ft.com/content/c96c25c1-b27c-4c08-a2ba-21821b39dd78https://www.axios.com/2026/08/19/rates-treasury-borrowing-bessent This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

BREAKING: The Trump administration has unveiled a sweeping new proposal that could put the federal tax-exempt status of as many as 18,000 private schools, colleges, universities, professional schools, and trade schools on the line.Under the proposed Treasury Department and IRS regulations, private educational institutions could lose their 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status if they maintain policies or programs that discriminate or provide preferences based on race, color, or national or ethnic origin.The proposal reaches far beyond college admissions. It could apply to scholarships, financial assistance, athletics, educational programs, facilities, and other school-supported activities.The administration says this is about enforcing one uniform standard: racial discrimination does not become acceptable simply because it is called diversity, equity, or inclusion.Schools would still be allowed to help disadvantaged students using race-neutral criteria—including family income, geography, first-generation status, individual hardship, military-family status, and academic achievement.But there is an important distinction: this is currently a proposed regulation, not a completed mass revocation of schools' tax exemptions. If finalized, it would apply to tax years beginning on or after May 31, 2027.In this episode of The Nez Report, Professor Nez breaks down what Trump has proposed, why tax-exempt status gives the administration enormous leverage, which institutions could be affected, and what happens next.Do you support ending tax-exempt status for schools that use race-based preferences? Let me know in the comments.Subscribe and turn on notifications for breaking political news, America First commentary, and straightforward analysis without the mainstream-media spin.Sources:U.S. Treasury: https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0621Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/tax-exempt-status-colleges-schools-trump-f8556ba3d94099df3c8aaa06fc13105fWATCH THIS NEXT: https://youtube.com/live/4NLWhCT1bKkFor free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (656) 218-0931 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/nez✅ Reach out to me: https://bio.site/professornez✅ ORIGINAL MADE IN U.S.A 250TH AMERICA DESIGNS: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/✅ Check out our Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@professornezclips▶ Support the Channel and Buy us a Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/professornez

Ed. Note-Five years ago, I looked back on 9/11 in a 20 year retrospective. This week is the 25th anniversary of that event. I am rerunning this award winning podcast so that we never forget.  On the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attack, Tom Fox and guests look back on the tragic event and what it meant for them personally, as well as how it impacted the world of compliance. Juan Zarate is the Global co-Managing Partner and Chief Strategy Officer at K2 integrity. On 9/11 he was a prosecutor at the Treasury Department working on international enforcement issues, anti money laundering, anti-corruption and anti-terrorist financing. He joins Tom Fox to commemorate the 20th anniversary of 9/11. They discuss how his role changed, the Treasury Department response and what the tragic event means for him. A Change of Mission 9/11 changed the mission of the Treasury Department. Juan tells Tom, “We went after terrorist financing to try to disrupt and dismantle Al-Qaeda's terrorist networks and infrastructure, and disrupt how illicit financing was flowing through the international system.” He recalls where he was on the fateful day and how seeing the smoke from the Towers and the Pentagon affected him emotionally. Something very different was happening, he recalls; the country was under attack. He outlines the strategic, departmental and tactical changes implemented after 9/11 to fight terrorism. The President declared that we were now at war. “The attitude and the strategic direction of the government was [that] we now have to prevent terrorist attacks,” Juan recalls. “We have to disrupt and dismantle terrorist networks. And that led to an entire preventative paradigm for the counter-terrorism approach to the government.” The new mission of the Treasury Department was the following areas, Juan remarks: “How do you use financial information more aggressively? How do we think about the use of tools and authorities that the Treasury has, like sanctions, anti money laundering rules? How do we think about the relationships internationally with central banks, finance ministries? How do we get the world on board to disrupt terrorist financing, to rip these organizations out of the legitimate financial commercial world?” The Patriot Act was one tactical change, among others, that was implemented to achieve the new mission of fighting terrorism. What 9/11 Means Tom asks Juan, “What are your reflections now as we come up on the 20th anniversary of the day of 9/11, and really what it meant for America and for you 20 years later?” Juan responds that he has mixed emotions. He thinks about the victims and their families first of all. That day changed history, he says. “It changed the way that the U S government viewed the world. It changed the way that we operated our strategy. And it changed the sense of our vulnerability.” The recent events in Afghanistan make the 20th anniversary even more difficult for Juan. “I have very mixed emotions coming on the 20th anniversary of 9/11,” he concludes, “but I'm very proud of the work that we did. I'm proud of the people I served with and my sympathies go out to the victims and their families.” Resources Juan Zarate at ⁠K2 Integrity⁠    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We've launched Minimum Competence CLE, and our first course is now available completely free. Researching Federal Tax Issues After Loper Bright looks at how the Supreme Court's decision ending Chevron deference changes the way lawyers should research and evaluate Treasury regulations, IRS guidance, and other federal tax authorities.Take the course and earn CLE credit at cle.minimumcomp.com.This Day in Legal History: The Little Rock NineOn September 4, 1957, nine Black teenagers tried to walk into Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas—and were turned away at the doors by soldiers of the Arkansas National Guard, deployed by Governor Orval Faubus specifically to keep them out. The image of Elizabeth Eckford, one of the nine, walking alone through a jeering white mob, became one of the defining photographs of the civil rights era. And the confrontation it began became one of the most important tests of whether the rule of law actually means anything.The legal backdrop was Brown v. Board of Education, decided three years earlier, in which the Supreme Court held that segregated public schools are unconstitutional. Little Rock had a desegregation plan; the Little Rock Nine were supposed to be its first students. Governor Faubus decided to defy the federal courts, using state troops to block integration. The standoff escalated until President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent in the 101st Airborne Division to escort the nine students into the school—federal soldiers enforcing a federal court order against a state government determined to resist it.The significance of September 4, 1957 crystallized the following year in the Supreme Court's decision in Cooper v. Aaron, which arose directly from the Little Rock crisis. There, in an opinion signed personally by all nine justices—a rare show of unanimity—the Court declared that state officials cannot nullify a federal court's interpretation of the Constitution, and that “the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution.” It's a principle that echoes through so much of what we cover: that a court order is not a suggestion, and that no official, however powerful, gets to decide for himself which parts of the Constitution to obey. It's also a fitting anniversary for today, because our second story is, at bottom, another chapter in the long, unfinished American argument about race and education.The Trump administration has taken its mail-in voting fight back to the Supreme Court, filing to have the justices clear away the last judicial obstacle to its executive order. Longtime listeners know this saga well. The order would create a federal list of eligible voters and restrict how the Postal Service delivers ballots. Back in late August, the Supreme Court, on its emergency docket, lifted one of two injunctions—but left the Postal Service piece blocked nationwide. The administration then went to the appeals court to try to clear that remaining block, and now it's gone straight back to the Supreme Court to finish the job. So the whole thing is back in front of the justices, again on an emergency basis. Here's what makes this significant and, frankly, uncomfortable. We are now two months out from the November midterms, and the fundamental legal question—whether the president actually has the authority to reshape how Americans vote by mail—still has not been decided on the merits. Everything so far has happened through emergency orders and stays, the “shadow docket,” with no full briefing, no argument, and no written opinion explaining the Court's reasoning. Election administrators need settled rules to run an election; voters need to know how to cast a ballot. Instead, the rules are being rewritten in real time, in emergency filings, weeks before people vote. The significance is that the Supreme Court is now positioned to shape the mechanics of a national election through its emergency process—and whichever way it rules, doing it this way, this close to the election, on this thin a record, is itself a serious concern for the stability and predictability that election law is supposed to provide. Trump administration takes mail-in ballot fight to US Supreme Court | ReutersNPR · The HillNow the biggest legal story of the day: the Treasury Department and the IRS have proposed regulations to strip federal tax-exempt status from private schools and colleges that consider race in admissions, scholarships, or policies. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent framed it bluntly, saying that schools rebranding race-based preferences as “equitable” or “diversity-enhancing” doesn't change what he called their discriminatory nature. To understand how significant—and how legally aggressive—this is, you need to know a case called Bob Jones University v. United States. In 1983, the Supreme Court upheld the IRS's power to deny tax-exempt status to a school that racially discriminated—there, a university that banned interracial dating—on the theory that tax exemption is reserved for organizations that serve a public purpose, and that racial discrimination in education violates fundamental public policy. That doctrine was forged to punish schools that discriminated against Black students. What the administration is doing now is taking that exact doctrine and inverting it: arguing that after the Supreme Court's 2023 SFFA decision ended race-conscious admissions, it's race-conscious programs—the ones designed to help underrepresented minorities—that constitute the illegal discrimination violating public policy. So the anti-discrimination tax weapon built to dismantle segregation is being turned against diversity programs. A few crucial caveats: this is a proposed regulation, not a final rule—it goes through notice-and-comment and will absolutely be litigated—and it pointedly exempts schools that select based on religion. The significance is enormous. Tax-exempt status is existential for schools; losing it means donations stop being deductible and the institution owes taxes. We've tracked this administration's campaign against DEI—Harvard, Columbia, William & Mary, the Deloitte settlement—and this is the most powerful lever yet: using the tax code, and a civil-rights-era precedent, to force schools to abandon any consideration of race. Trump moves to strip tax-exempt status from schools that consider race | ReutersWashington Post · CNBCAnd finally, a story that should make every lawyer check their firm's cybersecurity: data from two elite law firms, Quinn Emanuel and McDermott Will & Emery, has been exposed in a wave of cyber breaches hitting the legal industry. Law firms are, in a sense, the perfect target. Think about what they hold: their clients' most sensitive secrets—merger plans, litigation strategy, trade secrets, personal financial and health information, government investigations. A single big firm is a one-stop shop for confidential data across dozens of major companies and individuals. That makes firms enormously attractive to criminal hackers and nation-state actors alike, and this latest wave—part of a broader surge of attacks on the legal sector—shows the threat is intensifying. Here's the professional-responsibility dimension, because this isn't just an IT problem. Lawyers have an ethical duty to protect client confidences—the ABA's Model Rules require attorneys to make reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized disclosure of client information, which in the modern world squarely includes cybersecurity. When a firm gets breached, it can face not only regulatory and contractual liability and breach-notification obligations, but also questions about whether it met its ethical duty of competence in safeguarding the data in the first place. The significance is a wake-up call for a profession that runs on confidentiality. As firms rush to adopt powerful new tools—we covered Google bringing Gemini AI into Big Law just last week—they're accumulating and centralizing ever more sensitive client data, which raises the stakes on protecting it. The duty of confidentiality is as old as the profession; the threat surface is brand new, and growing. Data of law firms Quinn Emanuel, McDermott exposed in cyber breaches | ReutersBloomberg Law · The Record This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

CAPTION 1907 PERSIATreasury Targets Iranian Sanctions EvasionMax Meizlish explains how the Treasury Department's FinCEN is penalizing five branches of an Egyptian bank in Dubai to curb illicit financial flows. FinCEN identified $1.8 billion in suspicious transactions linked to the Iranianregime. To effectively dismantle Iran's financial network, Maizlish argues the US must target Chinese institutions, as China purchases over 90% of Iran's crude oil. Specifically, he advocates for blacklisting the Bank of Kunlun—a state-owned Chinese entity heavily involved in Iranian sanctions evasion. Maizlish asserts that CNPC officials are fully aware of these illicit transactions, making decisive sanctions necessary. (6)

CAPTION: 1955.CONTENTS THE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 9-2-2026Saudi Arabia Seeks Nuclear EnrichmentAndrea Stricker discusses the Trump administration's submission of a Section 123 nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia to Congress. This agreement could grant Saudi Arabia dual-use uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing capabilities, potentially enabling nuclear weapon development. A major concern is Saudi Arabia's refusal to sign the IAEA's Additional Protocol, which permits inspections of undeclared nuclear sites. Although Congress has 90 days to review and potentially block the accord, overcoming a presidential veto would require an unlikely two-thirds majority. Stricker notes the administration's claims about Chinese and Russian competition lack evidence. (1)China Rejects Global Trade ConsensusKamran Bokhari and Gordon Chang discuss China's refusal to sign a G20 finance ministers' consensus document, objecting to language targeting non-market policies that cause trade imbalances. Chang attributes this defiance to Xi Jinping's arrogance and belief in US decline. Bokhari explains that China is posturing ahead of a summit with Trump, utilizing command capitalism to flood global markets. Bokhari highlights a shifting security architecture in Asia, including Tokyo deploying fighter jets to India and Jakarta arming itself, driven by expectations of US retrenchment. Additionally, Xi Jinping maintains absolute control domestically through extensive military purges while building ties with Egypt. (2)Steve Yates Warns Of ConflictSteve Yates and Gordon Chang address China's refusal to sign the G20 finance ministers' statement, which criticized "non-market" policies. Yates views this as an honest admission that Beijing has no intention of conforming to international trade standards. He praises Treasury Secretary Bessent for maintaining a firm stance alongside allies. Anticipating the September 24th summit between Trump and Xi Jinping, Yates notes that Washington has delayed a $14 billion arms sale to Taiwan to preserve positive "mood music." Finally, Yates warns of the "CRINK" axis—comprising China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea—collaborating on military supply chains and conflicts. (3)Global Energy And Food CrisisMichael Bernstam outlines a compounding global energy and food crisis. Tensions between the US and Iran have halted critical oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, driving Brent crude prices up. Meanwhile, European winter natural gas prices have tripled due to storages being filled only to 62%. High gas prices also restrict fertilizer production, which, coupled with Black Sea port bombings by Russia and Ukraine, has caused a spike in global grain prices. Finally, despite US interest in Venezuelan heavy crude to produce diesel, decades of local mismanagement limit production. (4)Young Conservatives Embrace Nixon MaxingRyan Bangert explores the Gen Z trend of "Nixon maxing," where young conservatives view Richard Nixon as a heroic avatar resisting 1970s extremism. Bangert argues this aesthetic misinterprets Nixon as a revolutionary. In reality, Nixon was a counterrevolutionary who sought to preserve and revitalize established institutions based on the values of the American founding. Contrastingly, Bangert highlights the philosophical division between the destructive, post-Christian French Revolution and the enduring American Revolution. Ultimately, he urges young conservatives to appreciate Nixon's true legacy: conserving institutional checks and balances to temper flawed human nature. (5)Treasury Targets Iranian Sanctions EvasionMax Maizlish explains how the Treasury Department's FinCEN is penalizing five branches of an Egyptian bank in Dubai to curb illicit financial flows. FinCEN identified $1.8 billion in suspicious transactions linked to the Iranianregime. To effectively dismantle Iran's financial network, Maizlish argues the US must target Chinese institutions, as China purchases over 90% of Iran's crude oil. Specifically, he advocates for blacklisting the Bank of Kunlun—a state-owned Chinese entity heavily involved in Iranian sanctions evasion. Maizlish asserts that CNPC officials are fully aware of these illicit transactions, making decisive sanctions necessary. (6)El Niño Defies Weather ForecastsJeremy Zakis reports on the unpredictable impacts of the current super El Niño on Australian weather. Contrary to long-term dry forecasts, Sydney is experiencing unseasonable, rolling rain showers, while Western Australia faces extreme heat exceeding 100°F. Zakis warns that if droughts strike in late September rather than mid-October, Australia faces a catastrophic, extended bushfire season fueled by rapid undergrowth. Beyond Australia, extreme weather anomalies like French tornadoes and Southern California hurricane warnings are linked to historically high Pacific sea temperatures. Additionally, warm temperatures have caused dangerous eastern brown snakes to begin moving early. (7)brown snakes to begin moving early. (7)Axis Cooperates On Advanced WeaponryBradley Bowman and Mark Montgomery, authors of Axis of Aggressors, analyze the rising military coordination detailed in their book. They reveal a secret Russian program helping Iran build supersonic cruise missiles using ramjet engines, which pose a severe threat to US and merchant vessels in the Gulf. Furthermore, China assists Iran with chemical precursors and satellite targeting data. Beyond the Middle East, Russia engages in hybrid warfare in Europe, including attempted drone attacks in Germany. In response, Germany is significantly increasing defense spending and deploying a combat brigade to Lithuania to bolster deterrence. (8)Commodity Prices Spike Amid UnrestSimon Constable discusses recent extreme weather, including an unprecedented tornado in the south of France that damaged 300 homes. This disruption mirrors severe instability in the commodity markets, where Brent crude has surged to $94 a barrel, European gas has jumped 26%, and Black Sea grain prices have spiked up to 16%. Constable also critiques the new UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham for focusing on minor local issues rather than global crises. Finally, he reviews public backlash against data centers, which consume substantial water and over 4% of total US electricity. (9)SpaceX Builds Massive Private SpaceportBob Zimmerman highlights SpaceX's purchase of a massive plot in Louisiana to establish a private spaceport capable of hosting dozens of Starship flights daily. Zimmerman argues that SpaceX's market-driven approach ensures success, whereas state-sponsored space programs in the UK and Canada often flounder due to bureaucracy. He outlines SpaceX's progress, including recovering the prototype 13 Starship and preparing for flight 14. Finally, Zimmerman notes the successful, on-budget launch of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, upgrades to NASA's Deep Space Network, and the upcoming nuclear-powered Skyfall mission to Mars. (10)

Reverend James Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. They are saving lives in places like Buffalo, Rochester, Bronx, Brooklyn and Staten Island, New York. He's a dedicated pro-life advocate that became a victim of an ANTIFA off-shoot's firebomb attack in 2022 in wake of the Dobbs decision. Last week, the U.S. State Department and the Treasury Department corroborated key findings that Rev. Harden has advanced since his pro-life center was firebombed in 2022. It was discovered that Jane's Revenge is basically a front-group for an international Marxist insurgency known as ANTIFA. This was learned only because CompassCare had to hire private investigators to do the job that the Biden era FBI and DOJ refused to do. According to Reverend Harden, ANTIFA stands for "anti-facism." However, the definition of facism that they employ is based on a Marxist one. In other words, they're anti-capitalist and anti-free market, but they're also atheistic with the ultimate goal of destroying the current nation-state system. So what does this have to do with abortion? Reverend Harden noted that ANTIFA doesn't actually care about left-wing causes, but they do like to "piggyback" off of them. One of those causes is abortion. They will use this debate to "gin up the grassroots base and then engage in what they call direct action targeting to destabilize society." The result of their efforts has been a "prairie fire of violence against pro-life Christian pregnancy centers and churches."

Reverend James Harden is president and CEO of CompassCare Pregnancy Services in New York. They are saving lives in places like Buffalo, Rochester, Bronx, Brooklyn and Staten Island, New York. He's a dedicated pro-life advocate that became a victim of an ANTIFA off-shoot's firebomb attack in 2022 in wake of the Dobbs decision. Last week, the U.S. State Department and the Treasury Department corroborated key findings that Rev. Harden has advanced since his pro-life center was firebombed in 2022. It was discovered that Jane's Revenge is basically a front-group for an international Marxist insurgency known as ANTIFA. This was learned only because CompassCare had to hire private investigators to do the job that the Biden era FBI and DOJ refused to do. According to Reverend Harden, ANTIFA stands for "anti-facism." However, the definition of facism that they employ is based on a Marxist one. In other words, they're anti-capitalist and anti-free market, but they're also atheistic with the ultimate goal of destroying the current nation-state system. So what does this have to do with abortion? Reverend Harden noted that ANTIFA doesn't actually care about left-wing causes, but they do like to "piggyback" off of them. One of those causes is abortion. They will use this debate to "gin up the grassroots base and then engage in what they call direct action targeting to destabilize society." The result of their efforts has been a "prairie fire of violence against pro-life Christian pregnancy centers and churches."

In this episode of Grow Money Business Grant covers what happened in the stock and bond markets in August.  He reviews what led to stocks' strong month, what's pushing up long term bond and mortgage rates, and what the Fed and the Treasury Department are doing about it.  He also covers an article on the pushback against AI and tech companies. RESOURCES: Big Tech faces Big Resistance axios.com/2026/08/27/meta-settlement-big-tech-ai-backlash-data-centers   

Steve Forbes explains how Fed Chair Kevin Warsh and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent can save the U.S. economy—and the world's—by shifting the core missions of both the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department to achieving a stable value for the dollar. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The national debt exceeds $40 trillion, U.S. long-term Treasury yields are at 19-year highs, the U.S. Treasury Department is intervening in currency and bond markets. We unpack it all in this episode and show you how to position your investment portfolio to lock in higher yields and protect yourself from falling bond prices.SponsorsTry NetSuite for FreeDelete Me – Use code David20 to get 20% offOur Premium ProductsAsset CampMoney for the Rest of Us PlusShow NotesEpisode 563 Slide DeckDebt to the Penny - U.S. TreasuryHistorical debt and budget tables - U.S. White HouseAverage U.S. national debt interest rate - U.S. TreasuryTreasury Announces Increased Sizes of Nominal Long-End Liquidity Support Buybacks Beginning September 9 - U.S TreasuryAmerica's Risky Debt: What Markets See That Policymakers Don't - Hanno LustigRelated Episodes525: No More AAA – What the U.S. Debt Downgrade Means for Investors463: How to Lock in Higher Yields464: More Ways to Lock in Higher YieldsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Carbon credits. Regenerative agriculture. CI scores. 45Z. If you've been hearing these terms but still aren't sure what they actually mean for your farm, this episode is for you. Tanner, Corey, and Dave sit down with Kelly Garrett of XtremeAg and Mike Busing of Windy Ridge Ag to unpack one of the most talked-about opportunities facing corn growers today: 45Z. The conversation begins by looking back at the rise and fall of carbon markets. Mike shares his experience helping build one of the country's largest carbon programs through Regenerative Roots, while Kelly explains why the lack of standardized rules ultimately slowed the market's momentum. Together, they discuss why voluntary carbon programs struggled, how international demand still exists, and what lessons were learned from the "Wild West" days of carbon credits. From there, the discussion shifts to 45Z—a federal clean fuel production tax credit that could fundamentally change how ethanol plants value grain. Kelly and Mike explain how carbon intensity (CI) scores work, why low-CI corn could become increasingly valuable, and how competition between ethanol plants may create new revenue opportunities for farmers. They also discuss why the Treasury Department's final guidance is so critical and how regional differences could determine who benefits the most. The group also explores larger questions surrounding government incentives, environmental policy, and whether 45Z is simply another subsidy or a meaningful shift toward rewarding more efficient farming practices. Along the way, they debate whether the current program represents a "carrot" that encourages voluntary change—or whether future regulations could eventually become the "stick" if agriculture doesn't continue improving on its own. Whether you're skeptical, optimistic, or simply trying to understand what everyone is talking about, this episode delivers one of the most practical conversations we've had on the future of carbon markets and the role 45Z could play in improving farm profitability. Want Farm4Profit Merch? Custom order your favorite items today!https://farmfocused.com/farm-4profit/ Don't forget to like the podcast on all platforms and leave a review where ever you listen! Website: www.Farm4Profit.comShareable episode link: https://intro-to-farm4profit.simplecast.comEmail address: Farm4profitllc@gmail.comCall/Text: 515.207.9640Subscribe to YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSR8c1BrCjNDDI_Acku5XqwFollow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@farm4profitllc Connect with us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Farm4ProfitLLC/Farm4Profit Media is not a financial, legal, or tax advisor. Content is provided for informational purposes only, and we serve solely as a platform for third-party opinions. Any actions taken based on this content are at your own risk. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

August 25, 2026: 8am — Bessent threatens new sanctions against Iran  To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The US promises to squeeze Iran by targeting anyone who does business with Tehran - but Washington has so far announced only limited sanctions. Our correspondent says the US wants to put even more economic pressure on Iran. Also: fire crews in Nevada say they've brought under control about a quarter of the wildfire outside Reno. Health workers helping to tackle the Ebola outbreak are attacked in the Democratic Republic of Congo. There's been an explosion of gambling in Brazil. Retired international cricketers are trying to help the former Pakistan captain - and ex-prime minister - Imran Khan, who's currently in prison. And there's been an apparent leak of footage from the new edition of the game, Grand Theft Auto.The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.ukPhoto: U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at a press conference to outline further sanctions against Iran, at the Treasury Department in Washington. Credit: Reuters

A.M. Edition for Aug. 25. Two lawmakers detail their bipartisan bill to end personalized dynamic pricing in grocery stores, where AI is increasingly deciding whether Shopper A should pay more for the same product than Shopper B. Plus, the Supreme Court helps clear the way for President Trump's restrictions on mail-in voting. WSJ supreme court reporter James Romoser explains what it could mean for the midterms. And, more companies are preparing to join Wall Street's IPO bonanza. And Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

On Tuesday, August 18, the Treasury Department announced that the debt held by the U.S. government surpassed $40 trillion, a record high. The national debt has more than doubled since 2017, and it increased from $39 trillion to $40 trillion in roughly the past five months. In response to the latest milestone, lawmakers from both parties called for new initiatives to reduce the debt. Ad-free podcasts are here!Get 20% off your first year of ad-free episodes, exclusive interviews, and deep dives with Tangle's podcast membership!Applications are open.For the past three years, Tangle has run a college ambassador program, offering current college students the chance to serve as Tangle's liaison on their campus, organizing speaking events, clubs, class talks, and more. Applications are now open for the fall semester program. If you (or someone you know) is interested in applying, you can do so here. We are accepting applications until Wednesday, September 2 at 11:59 PM ET. Please email Will Kaback at will@readtangle.com with any questions.You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠ and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: How would you address the national debt and deficit? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast written by: Ari Weitzman and audio engineered and edited by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Audrey Moorehead, and Carina Pacheco. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Secretary Bessent announced that the Treasury Department was going to intervene in the bond market last week because “market fundamentals were not working.”  In today's Capital Record, David explains what was done, why it was done, what to expect, and most of all, why it is so, so sad to see this happening. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Carl Quintanilla, Jim Cramer and David Faber discussed the chip sector rebounding from Monday's weakness, as well as Nvidia looking to snap a seven-day-losing streak — its longest such streak since 2022 — ahead of the chip giant's much-anticipated earnings due out after Wednesday's close of trading. The anchors reacted to Stanley Druckenmiller's op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, in which the legendary hedge fund manager called the Treasury Department's bond intervention a "mistake," adding that the government needs to "let the bond market speak." Shares of Dick's Sporting Goods plunged on lowered guidance: Hear Jim compare the retailer's challenges with Nike's woes. Also in focus: U.S.-Canada trade war intensifies, SpaceX's morning launch, Elon Musk's AI vision, Cramer on beaten-down Netflix shares.   Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Ben Harris is vice president and director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution and previously served in senior economic policy roles at the Treasury Department and Council of Economic Advisers. Ben returns to the program to discuss why recent economic shocks have been less damaging than expected, the outlook for inflation and energy markets, whether AI can improve the U.S. fiscal outlook, why we should temper our AI optimism, how longer lifespans and higher interest rates could complicate the fiscal picture, and much more. Watch the full length video on our new YouTube Channel! Check out the transcript for this week's episode, now with links. Recorded on July 20th, 2026 Subscribe to David's Substack: Macroeconomic Policy Nexus Follow David Beckworth on X: @DavidBeckworth Follow the show on X: @Macro_Musings Follow Ben on X: @econ_harris Check out our Macro Musings merch! Timestamps 00:00:00 - Intro 00:00:55 - Reasons We Were Wrong 00:11:58 - Stubborn Inflation 00:14:57 - Crude Is Not Really the Problem 00:20:12 - A Novel Sanctions Regime 00:30:35 - Temper Your AI Optimism 00:39:34 - Longer Lives, But Larger Debt 00:45:00 - AI and the Future of Interest Rates 00:49:24 - Policy Implications 00:56:26 - Outro

While John is on vacation somewhere in Europe - Here's a special presentation of John's OTHER podcast - The Oath and the Office.Donald Trump is being sued over a service offering paying customers early access to his Truth Social posts, including market-moving announcements, for as much as $100,000 a month. Is official presidential information becoming a private commodity?Then Trump goes back to the Supreme Court after two lower court losses, asking the justices to revive his plan to impose new conditions on mail ballots ahead of the midterms. Professor Corey Brettschneider and John Fugelsang break down what the fight means for presidential power over elections.They also look at ICE's reported plan to spend millions on electric shock gloves and the Treasury Department's decision to dismantle major beneficial ownership disclosure rules designed to expose anonymous shell companies, rules originally championed by Marco Rubio as a weapon against money laundering, trafficking, and terrorism.From presidential self-enrichment to elections, immigration enforcement, and financial secrecy, the question is the same: who is left to constrain executive power?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A.M. Edition for Aug. 21. WSJ's Alex Frangos explains the combination of factors that fueled a multi-day bond selloff and what to watch for in the weeks to come. Plus, the Trump administration targets the Bar Association's ability to accredit law schools. And James Rundle from the Dow Jones Risk Journal podcast looks at a White House initiative that could see private companies join the fight against foreign criminal groups. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Plus: Crypto stocks gain as bitcoin heads for best week in over two years. And Swedish heating company Nibe Industrier sees sales growth from heat pumps and data centers. Julie Chang hosts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In case you missed it, investor jitters about borrowing, geopolitical conflict, and inflation drove the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield up to a nearly two-decade high. Then, the Treasury Department announced it would spend $4 billion on longer-term government bonds. There was some relief, and bond yields began to fall. We'll explain market reactions and why this is all about confidence in the long-term financial stability of the U.S. Plus, we'll learn about the current landscape for psychedelic therapy drugs.Every story has an economic angle. Want some in your inbox? Subscribe to our daily or weekly newsletter.Marketplace Morning Report is more than a radio show. Check out our original reporting and financial literacy content at marketplace.org — and consider making an investment in our future.

Mary and Andrew begin this week by addressing Todd Blanche's “Meet the Press” interview with Kristen Welker, where, among other things, the newly appointed Attorney General proclaimed that “no attorney general should ever pledge” to act independently of the White House, despite decades of post-Watergate reforms. Keeping in the Blanche vicinity, the co-hosts detail a complaint filed by former Michigan AUSA Sunita Doddamani, who alleged she was fired without cause simply for doing her job prosecuting FACE Act violations. Then, a dive into revelations of undercover agents targeting Minnesota nonprofit organizations as part of an investigation that led to indictments of protestors that, in Mary's view, included “a whole lot of First Amendment protected activity.” Plus, Trump changes a Treasury Department rule making it harder to find fraud and illegal activity and asks the Supreme Court to let him keep building the ballroom while they appeal a lower court block. Last up, an unsatisfying end to litigation against the administration over their use of the Alien Enemies Act after the 5th Circuit en banc panel dismissed the case. Further Reading:  Here is the filing in the case Sunita Doddamani brought to challenge her firing. Doddamani v Blanche Here is the Main Justice episode that Sunita Doddamani appeared on earlier this year. Friends and Foes: The Fate of Prosecutors and Proud Boys Here is the chart Mary and Andrew referenced around the Minnesota grand jury “Association” conspiracy: HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS The Conspiracy A Note to Listeners: As the 2026 midterm elections heat up, MS NOW is headed to the Lone Star State. Join more than a dozen of your favorite hosts - including Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Jen Psaki, Michael Steele, Ali Velshi and more - in Arlington, Texas on September 26 for a day of community and conversation about the issues that matter most to you. Get your tickets at ms.now/together. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

August 15, 2026Todd Blanche took the oath of office as attorney general on August 10, He immediately issued a  memo dramatically expanding executive privilege, This expansion will hinder efforts to investigate Trump's corruption, Independent journalist Katie Phang has filed a suit to force the Department of Justice to produce unredacted documents from the Epstein Files, The Department of Justice has not turned over those documents, The judge has warned the Department of Justice that he has held prosecutors in contempt of court in the past, The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ended the registry that makes shell companies identify their owners, The Treasury Department will not collect information required by the Corporate Transparency Act that is intended to undercut shell companies that enable money laundering, In doing so, the Trump administration may be openly refusing to implement a law. Watch today's recording here: https://www.youtube.com/live/g9TUa1Rwd6U?si=T8_KKcHQZElhpnZ-Get full, free access to Letters from an American here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribeYou can also find me: Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hcrichardson.bsky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heathercoxrichardson/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson Get full access to Letters from an American at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribe

This week: The Treasury Department announced it's killing an anti-corruption measure that requires shell companies to identify their beneficiaries. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck explain how a key aspect of the bipartisan Corporate Transparency Act ended up on the chopping block—and what lobbyists and the Trump administration stand to gain from its elimination. Then, the hosts discuss the billionaires who are buying themselves fun little treats like the L.A. Lakers and Broadway theaters. And later: how Italian bank vaults full of Parmigiano-Reggiano cheese are dealing with the extreme heat.In the Slate Plus episode: What's $6 Million Between Friends?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.