Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 25, 2025

The final reading on the second quarter GDP was revised up this morning, to a 3.8% annual rate.
 
Related to this, let's talk about some comments made by KKR's Henry McVey this morning, one of the most influential capital allocators in the world.
 
He said "productivity numbers are going to go through the roof." 
 
Why?
 
Trump policies are driving a boom in capex.  Meanwhile, the job growth numbers have just taken large downward revisions.  And this formula will result in a jump in output per worker (fewer workers/hours in the denominator) — higher productivity. 
 
On that note, back in July, one of Trump's Fed Chair candidates, Kevin Warsh, said "we are at the front end of a productivity boom."
 
And as we've discussed often in my daily notes, hot productivity gains promote wage growth, which is needed to reset wages to the increased level of prices (which restores quality of life). 
 
High productivity can fuel wage growth without stoking inflation.
 
And Jerome Powell himself presented back in 2016 at the Peterson Institute (here), that higher productivity growth is a driver of a higher long-term potential growth rate of the economy.
 
If we look back at the late 90s boom, which was fueled by a technology revolution (the internet), we were in a productivity boom.  Economic growth averaged 4.5% a year, stocks averaged 26% a year over a five-year period, and inflation averaged just 1.6%.  
 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 24, 2025

As we discussed yesterday, the metals complex is broadly leading global asset class performance for the year.  It's wartime behavior. 
 
It's also behavior that tends to be associated with global uncertainty about dollar liquidity
 
On that note, that topic has bubbled up in recent days.
 
In times of uncertainty, global banks tend to scramble for U.S. dollars, to meet dollar-denominated liabilities.  In Argentina, there's an economic and currency crisis underway.  The peso has lost about 40% of its value (vs. the dollar) since April, making foreign currency denominated debt more expensive. 
 
Scott Bessent said yesterday that the U.S. Treasury "stands ready to do what is needed within its mandate to support Argentina," which, importantly, includes providing access to U.S. dollars (via currency swaps).
 
South Korea is also asking for a currency agreement (currency swaps) with the U.S. to pair with its commitment to make significant dollar investments in the U.S., as part of a U.S./South Korea trade deal.  To do the deal, they need access to dollars, without taking risk on how the exchange rate might move. 
 
In the above, "access to dollars" becomes a bargaining chip for the Trump trade team.  In the case of Argentina, the Trump administration is supporting a leader they align with, one that's reversing the globalist agenda. 
 
It's leverage.
 
That said, dollar swap lines are typically the domain of the Fed (where the real firepower is), not the Treasury.
 
This dollar liquidity solution was a very key step in repairing stress in the global financial system back in the Global Financial Crisis.
 
By providing these currency swaps with other central banks, the Fed helped to inject dollar liquidity into banks around the world — shoring up solvency and confidence, and stabilizing the global banking system.
 
As we've discussed the past several months, major global central banks have done nearly everything in coordination for the better part of the past 15-years (since the Global Financial Crisis), which has included implicit, if not explicit Fed support (including access to dollars/swap lines when needed).
 
But the coming regime change at the Fed means the era of coordinated global monetary policy is likely over
 

With that, let's revisit an excerpt from my August 5th note:

 

"… the focus would quickly turn to Europe, where fragile sovereign debt markets have been explicitly backstopped by the European Central Bank since the summer of 2022.

 
If the Fed no longer has the European Central Bank's back, then the ability of the ECB to backstop European sovereign debt will be tested.
 
And it probably won't go well.  Remember, these EU member states have large scale deficit spending coming down the pike, to fund defense and AI commitments.  And the ECB will be, almost certainly, back in action to tame the bond yields of the fiscally vulnerable countries.  Without global coordination, they will lack the firepower.   

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 23, 2025

Trump's new appointee at the Fed made his case publicly yesterday for a much lower neutral rate and Fed Funds rate. 
 
If he had his way, he'd take policy there quickly. 
 
And it would do nothing to alter any tax effect of tariffs on end consumer prices.
 
That said, the current restrictive policy that has been vigorously defended by the Fed over the past eight months is also doing nothing to alter any tax effect of tariffs on end consumer prices.
 
It's only slowing the economy, most clearly harming the housing market, and now the job market. 
 
Both only make the cost burden for the consumer higher.  Meanwhile the Fed claims to be positioning policy to curb costs.
 
It doesn't add up.
 
The Fed Chair was on a stage today with an opportunity to counter Miran's quantitative case for why the policy rate should be in the mid 2s.  It would be nice to hear a point-by-point rebuttal of Miran's speech yesterday, given it is so disconnected from where the rest of the Fed is.
 
It didn't happen.
 
He had five minutes of prepared remarks, and 35 minutes of Q&A — not one mention of Miran, his divergent views on the policy decision last week, nor the case for the (low) neutral rate he made yesterday. 
 
He reiterated much of the same stuff we've heard over the past month. 
 
Let's revisit the gold/silver ratio … 
 
 
As we've discussed in past notes, when this ratio is around these extreme levels, it has historically been associated with extreme moments of safe-haven demand.
 
And in the past cases, the gold safe-haven demand leads … pushing the ratio to extremes. 
 
Silver later follows (higher) on both industrial demand (in war time) and relative value (as a safe haven asset). 
 
And in these prior peaks, it's the outsized rise in silver that pushes the ratio back down.
 
The metals complex is broadly leading global asset class performance for the year.  It's wartime behavior (platinum up 58% ytd, silver up 44% ytd, gold up 36% ytd, palladium up 34% ytd).
 
With that, as the UN leaders are meeting in New York, the escalation rhetoric is heating up on Russia/Ukraine.      
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 22, 2025

Trump's Fed governor appointee, Stephen Miran, gave a detailed speech today at the Economic Club of New York.
 
As we discussed last week following the Fed decision, he was the lone dissenter, voting for a 50 basis point cut.  And he was obviously the low dot on the Fed's dot plot – which suggested he is pushing for a fast recalibration, to get the policy rate near the neutral level.
 
With that, today he laid out why he believes the appropriate Fed Funds rate is in the mid-2s — roughly 200 basis points lower
 
Up to last Wednesday, the Fed's pause in the easing cycle has been driven by Trump policies — specifically, the Fed's assumptions that tariffs would be inflationary
 
Miran's framework is also tied to Trump policies, but he makes the case that they are disinflationary.
 
On immigration, he thinks we could see net outflow of as many as 2 million illegal immigrants by year end.  Lower population growth leads to lower labor force growth which, as he says, has historically resulted in a low neutral rate (i.e. the policy rate that is neither restrictive nor stimulative).
 
On tariff revenue, which is tracking well north of $300 billion/year (representing about 1% of GDP), he cites a study that estimates each percentage point reduction in the deficit-to-GDP reduces the neutral rate by 4/10ths of a percent.   
 
So, the Fed has been marking UP its projection for the long-run neutral rate, since the post-covid inflationary spike — moving it up to the current 3% level this year.  Miran's view on a much lower neutral rate would mean the Fed policy is even tighter than they think.
 
On inflation, he ties in de-immigration to falling rents, which have already been in negative year-over-year growth since the summer of 2023 — orange line below (private market data).  It just hasn't caught up in the stale government data yet — the blue line.  When it does, given the heavy weighting it gets in the inflation data, it will slash a full percentage point from CPI
 
 
With all of the above in mind, we've talked about the coming regime change at the Fed for several months.  It's starting with a powerful dissenting voice inside the Fed. 
 
This public analysis from Miran should give comfort to market bulls, and discomfort to the (relative) hawks at the Fed.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 18, 2025

Elon Musk has been saying for the past year that with humanoid robots, there will be “no meaningful limit to the size of the economy.”

What does he mean?

If labor is no longer scarce… if every human can be matched with two or three autonomous robots doing physical work… then the economy’s productive capacity is virtually limitless.

He calls it the coming “age of abundance.”

And he thinks Tesla will dominate it.

Tesla has the most valuable proprietary data on real-world conditions, behaviors, environments, and scenarios (billions of miles driven). And it knows how to manufacture at scale. That’s why Elon sees Tesla as the leader in humanoid robots.

Now the board has put this vision into writing.

They just filed a proxy for shareholder vote on the boldest compensation package in corporate history.

It could make Elon a trillionaire

But he only gets paid if he delivers:

  • One million robotaxis in commercial operation.

  • One million humanoid robots.

  • Earnings nearly 30x higher than his last plan.

  • And a $7.5 trillion increase in Tesla’s market value.

Elon has already said Optimus, Tesla’s humanoid robot, could make Tesla worth $25 trillion.

This all lines up with what Nvidia’s Jensen Huang has been telling us. After generative AI and agentic AI, the next wave is physical AI: robots in the real world.

He says it will reshape $100 trillion worth of global industry.

So let’s connect the dots: Elon says humanoid robots will remove the cap on economic growth. Jensen says robotics will be the biggest technology industry in history. And Tesla’s board has written a comp plan that only pays Elon if he makes it happen.

That’s why we own Tesla in our AI-Innovation Portfolio. Tesla isn’t just an EV company. It’s the company with the world’s largest fleet of AI-driven robots (its cars), the deepest proprietary data on real-world behavior, and the ability to manufacture at scale. 

Tesla is the bridge between digital AI and physical AI.

And remember, when we launched this portfolio in June 2023, we said AI would grow the economic pie. We said the age of multi-trillion-dollar companies was coming. Nvidia became one soon after. Tesla has now joined that club. More are coming.

If you have yet to join our AI-Innovation Portfolio, it’s still early.

Our AI-Innovation Portfolio has returned 31% annualized since inception. And this 25 stock portfolio is even better positioned now, than it has been over the past two years, because of the scale of this coming physical AI wave.

If you’ve been reading my notes over the years and waiting on the sidelines, now is the time to get involved. My AI-Innovation Portfolio is the easy way to do it — and you’ll be in good company. Our subscriber base spans from C-suite executives and entrepreneurs to hedge fund managers, financial advisors, engineers, doctors, lawyers, academics, and discerning individual investors.

👉 Click here, Sign Up and Get Full Access

to the AI-Innovation Portfolio

If Elon is right, the economy — and the markets — are about to get much bigger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 17, 2025

Let’s talk about two big takeaways from the Fed today.

Remember, two Fed governors (Waller and Bowman) voted to cut rates in the July meeting, dissenting from the majority vote.  Both made their cases in public speeches prior to the meeting. 

Chris Waller, who is on the list of candidates to become the next Fed Chair, went so far as to say that the Fed had not been following the data, instead had paused the easing cycle on assumptions about tariffs that were (his words) “counter to economic theory.”

And he used the analogy of walking on ice in describing the labor market — he said, “when you start hearing cracks … it’s too late.”

Still, the two dissenters couldn’t convince the rest of the committee, and the Fed held rates steady for a fifth straight meeting in July.

Days later, there was a big negative surprise in the jobs data, which included massive downward revisions to the two prior reports.

That same day, Waller released a statement saying “a host of data argues that monetary policy should now be close to neutral.” 

That’s a big statement.  Neutral (not restrictive, nor stimulative), based on the Fed’s consensus is 3% – roughly 130 basis points lower than the policy rate.

We’ve since had another bad jobs report, and the largest negative one-off adjustment to job growth (-911k) on record.

That brings us to today’s decision.

Remember, when the Fed started the easing cycle last year this time, with a surprise 50 basis point cut, Powell said the move should be taken “as a sign of [their] commitment not to get behind the curve.”

Trump’s newly appointed Fed governor, Stephen Miran, was at the table over the past two days.  As we know, the Trump administration thinks rates should be much lower.  Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, has argued to start with 50 in this September meeting, and to ultimately get to 150-175 basis points lower. 

When it came time to vote, Miran voted to cut rates today by 50 basis points

He was alone.

Where was Waller?  Where was Bowman?

The rest of the committee voted to cut by 25.

What’s the takeaway? 

Miran either didn’t make a convincing case to sway other voters to his camp, or the other voters were pressured by the existing Fed regime to show consensus and alignment with Powell, the Fed Chair. 

Still, regime change is coming at the Fed, and the market got a view of the policy path from Miran’s participation (i.e. the Trump camp) in the Fed’s Summary of Economic Projections ….

This is the Fed’s ‘dot plot’ — a visual representation of the individual projections from each of the 19 participants in the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meetings. Each ‘dot’ represents a single participant’s forecast for the appropriate level of the federal funds rate at the end of each of the next few years and over the longer run.

It’s safe to assume the lowest dots (circled in yellow) are Miran, which would suggest he is pushing for a fast recalibration, to get the policy rate near the neutral level.

Today, he was a lone dissenter. But the dots make clear how the Trump Fed wants to move.

Miran will be a good interview to watch for in the coming days. 

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 16, 2025

As we head into tomorrow's Fed meeting, the dollar traded to a four-year low against the euro. 
 
With Stephen Miran, Trump's top economic advisor, now on the Federal Open Market  Committee, the official regime change at the Fed is underway.
 
Some assume this regime change includes a view toward a weaker dollar, to support trade policy. 
 
Devaluing the dollar inflates away the debt and makes U.S. exports more competitive (both useful), but it reduces global purchasing power and real wealth (not acceptable).
 
The actual U.S. playbook at work is quite different. 
 
Solutions to the debt problem:  Getting the economy on a 3%+ growth path and creating new Treasury demand through regulated dollar stablecoins.  On the former, better growth will drive down the debt-to-GDP.  On the latter, fresh global demand for Treasuries will put downward pressure on market interest rates.
 
Solutions to the trade imbalance problem:  Use tariffs to incentivize domestic capacity building and export competitiveness.
 
So, the dollar isn't the lever the Trump administration is looking to pull to solve problems.
 
In fact, as Miran said in his paper on restructuring global trade, tariffs don’t hit consumers if the exporting country's currency absorbs the blow (i.e. a weaker currency). 

 

China did this in Trump's first term.  They devalued the yuan almost one-for-one with the tariffs.  It keeps their businesses competitive, but the hit comes to their global purchasing power and real wealth.

 

With this framework, realigning the world and rebalancing global trade should come with a stable, to stronger dollar (not weaker)

 

  
 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 15, 2025

We get the Fed's decision on monetary policy on Wednesday.
 
The market is pricing in a quarter point cut in each of the three remaining meetings this year.
 
If we look back at conditions this time last year, when the Fed surprised markets with a half point cut in its September meeting, inflation was running 2.3%, GDP was running 3%, and unemployment had ticked up to three-year highs at 4.2%
 
The three months average on payrolls (job creation) had dipped below 100k for the first time since the depths of the covid lockdowns.   Add to all of this, the BLS had just made the largest negative one-off adjustment to job growth (-818k) since 2009 (the depths of the financial crisis).
 
With the risks "balanced" between inflation and the labor market, the Fed decided to cut by 50 basis points — with the stock market on record highs.  
 
Here's what Powell said about that decision when asked directly in the press conference:  He said the annual revisions to jobs "suggest that the payroll report numbers that we're getting may be artificially high and will be revised down."
 
Fast forward to this week, and conditions heading into this Fed meeting look similar.   
 
The stock market is on record highs. While inflation has ticked up a few tenths from last year this time, with PCE running 2.7%, inflation expectations are steady.  GDP is running 3% and unemployment has ticked up to a new three-year high at 4.3%
 
And this time, three-month average job creation is running below 100k  — for four straight months.  And the BLS just made the largest negative one-off adjustment to job growth (-911k) on record.    
 
This time, instead of "balanced risks," Jerome Powell told us at Jackson Hole that the balance has "shifted," meaning the labor market risk now outweighs the inflation risk.
 
With that, the Fed has explicitly said that "cracks in the labor market" are a condition that warrants action.
 
When they moved 50 last year, Powell said the move should be taken "as a sign of [their] commitment not to get behind the curve."
 
He was talking about the job market.  
 
And at that time, Atlanta Fed President Bostic said "if the labor market deteriorates" it's a reason "for a faster pace to neutral."  Fed Governor Waller said he would support moving in 50s to get to "where they want to go," which is the neutral rate (which is at least 130 basis points lower than the current Fed Funds rate). 
 
As we head into this Wednesday's meeting, Trump's new Fed appointee, Stephen Miran, was just confirmed by the Senate.  He will not just be a vote, but a significant voice in the room.
 
Still, the market is pricing in almost no chance of a half point cut tomorrow.     
 
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 11, 2025

Of the many moving tributes to Charlie Kirk, this one sticks out …

I’ll start.

Charlie was a seeker of the truth in a world where truth has been inverted. He was a man of courage. A man of God. And he was targeted for it — because he was effective.

If we look at the numbers, among 18–29 year-old men, voter preference swung from +26 Democrat in 2023 to +18 Republican in 2025. That’s a 44-point swing in two years. Charlie was the force behind that change.

He was effective resistance to the “progressives‘” ongoing cultural revolution, and he was silenced.

Yet as Scripture shows, persecution never silences truth — it amplifies it.

That brings me to the bigger picture — the “why” behind so much of the disruption and chaos we’ve all lived through over the past five years.

We’ve talked often in these notes about the strategy behind the Trump tariffs/ “trade war.”

At its core, it has always been about China.

For decades, China has manipulated its currency to undercut global competitors, corner export markets, and build the world’s largest war chest of foreign currency reserves.

What did they do with that capital?

They used it to buy global influence (including inside the U.S.) — in politics, academia, corporations, media, and medicine.

And they expanded economic warfare into what is now “hybrid warfare”: economic, psychological, biological, informational, political, and cyber.

It’s no secret that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has an explicit goal of global dominance. Against that backdrop, it’s not difficult to connect the dots and see their fingerprints on the societal deterioration of the West.

It’s the Mao Zedong playbook.

Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) was built on the idea that revolution must be continuous, that culture itself had to be torn down to make room for the Party’s control. It meant erasing traditions, mobilizing youth against authority, dividing society into oppressors and oppressed, and keeping the population in constant turmoil.

Here’s how ChatGPT maps it against events we’ve seen in the U.S. since COVID:

Mao’s Playbook U.S. Since COVID (2020–present)
Continuous Revolution: Mao promoted never-ending campaigns to destabilize society and prevent consolidation of alternative power bases. Perpetual Crisis Atmosphere: COVID, racial protests, election disputes, climate urgency — each framed as existential, requiring constant mobilization and policy upheaval.
Youth Mobilization: Red Guards targeted teachers, officials, even family; youth seen as vanguard of disruption. Youth-Led Movements: Large student/activist protests (BLM, climate strikes, campus demonstrations), often aimed at challenging authority, history, and institutions.
Class Struggle: Society split between “the people” vs. “class enemies.” Guilt by background, not actions. Identity/Ideological Divides: Sharp polarization into oppressed vs. oppressors; individuals judged by group identity (race, gender, privilege) rather than individual actions.
Destroy the “Four Olds”: Old ideas, culture, customs, habits targeted — temples destroyed, texts burned, names changed. Statue Takedowns & Renaming: Historical monuments (Washington, Jefferson, Columbus, Confederate leaders) removed; schools, streets, teams renamed to purge “offensive” legacies.
Control Through Chaos: Mao encouraged factional struggles and uncertainty so people turned to him as arbiter. Social Division & Uncertainty: Conflicting rules on lockdowns, masks, vaccines, protests; shifting definitions of misinformation; frequent policy reversals keeping people unsettled.
Propaganda & Personality Cult: Mao’s slogans, images, and Little Red Book saturated society; dissent equaled disloyalty. Media/Big Tech Messaging: Unified narratives around COVID protocols, racial equity, election legitimacy; dissent deplatformed, censored, or stigmatized as dangerous.
Re-education & Labor: Intellectuals, “class enemies” sent to countryside for re-education through labor. Cancel Culture & Sensitivity Training: Individuals losing jobs for misaligned views; mandatory diversity/equity training; reputational punishment functioning as ideological correction.
Erasing Tradition to Reshape Identity: Goal was to sever ties with past so only Party ideology remained. Historical Revisionism: Projects reframing U.S. founding (e.g., 1619 Project); debates over whether America is fundamentally good/evil; push to redefine national identity around equity.

Mao engineered chaos and cultural destruction to centralize control and remake identity.

In the U.S., post-COVID, while the context and severity differ (no mass famine, labor camps, or Mao-level death toll), many tactics are similar: reliance on perpetual crisis, use of youth activism, identity-based division, removal of monuments, ideological conformity enforced via social and corporate pressure, and historical revisionism to reshape collective memory.

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please add bryan@newsletter.billionairesportfolio.com to your safe senders list or address book to ensure delivery.

September 09, 2025

The jobs picture took another blow this morning.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revealed a huge downward adjustment to the job growth that was reported over the March 2024 to March 2025 period.

In this scheduled annual revision 911,000 jobs were erased from the records.

If we distribute that equally across the already twice revised job growth data for the twelve months through March of this year, we get the chart below … 

 

From this chart, we can see the initially reported nonfarm payroll series of data in blue (and the 12-month average).  And after all revisions (including this morning’s adjustment), we get the red line (and the adjusted 12-month average).

In short, the initial payroll numbers were overstated by an average of 113,000 jobs a month.

Worse, if we look back at this report from last year, it was also a huge downward revision (the deepest since 2009) that revealed jobs were overstated by 100,000 a month.

That means, from March 2023 to March 2025, the BLS initially presented data to key decision makers in our economy that was overstated by 2.5 million jobs.