For the month of September 2023, the yield curve has flattened a bit from its severe inversion.  The long-term yields, notably the 10-year yield and 30-year yield, went up significantly, while the shorter-term yields barely moved.

The 10-year yield started at 4.18% on September 1.  It ended the month at 4.59%.

The 30-year yield started the month at 4.29%.  It ended the month at 4.73%.

So the yield curve is less inverted than before.  Some might see this as good news.  If an inverted yield is a predictor of a recession, shouldn’t it be good news that the yield curve is flattening and may soon return to normal?

A History Lesson

Let’s look at what happened prior to the financial crisis of 2008.  The yield curve was inverted at the beginning of 2007.  On January 2, 2007, the 3-month yield stood at 5.07%.  The 10-year and 30-year yields were 4.68% and 4.79%, respectively.

The 3-month yield finally fell below the long-term yields in May 2007.  The yield curve was normal for 2008, or at least normal in the sense that there was no inversion between the 3-month yield against the 10-year and 30-year yields.

The financial crisis did not hit crisis stage until September 2008.  That’s when the Fed dropped its target rate to near zero and started going ballistic with its money creation.  This was the beginning of QE1.  The Fed’s balance sheet was less than $1 trillion going into September 2008.  Ah, the good old days.

The recession officially began in December 2007.  But for most of 2008, most people didn’t know we were in a recession.  Housing prices had started to come down, and there were certainly many indications of economic problems.  But the major crisis didn’t become evident until September.  The backdating of the recession happened after the worst of the damage.

It took about 7 months (May to December 2007) from when the yield curve uninverted to the time of the start of the official recession.  It took about 16 months from the time the yield curve normalized to when the worst of the financial crisis hit.

Does that put some things into perspective of where we are now?  If you compare to then, we are still in early 2007.

This Time is Different

There is the famous saying that, “This time is different.”

I happen to agree here.  This time is different.  It is different because the yield curve has been inverted to a much greater degree in 2023 than it was in 2006/ 2007.

We still haven’t gone back to flat yet.  With the long-term yields rising, it seems we may finally get there soon enough.  There is still a ways to go though.  Even if the yield curve goes to “normal” by the end of the calendar year, that means we might not start a recession until around June or July of 2024.  And the worst of the crisis might not become evident until well into 2025.

I have predicted that we are likely going to be in a recession by the 2024 presidential election in November.  The only thing that isn’t clear is if everyone will know that we are in a recession.

A lot of people feel the pain now and are experiencing their own personal recession with lower real (inflation-adjusted) wages.  But the statistics still tell us that the economy is growing.

Conclusion

Even if the yield curve continues to flatten and eventually normalizes, it doesn’t mean we are out of the woods.  It doesn’t mean that we have avoided a recession.  It actually means that the recession is closer.  It is common for the yield curve to normalize before the recession begins.

If you hear anyone tout this as good news, be sure to ignore them.  The bond market is signaling a major recession ahead.  It is just a question of how soon at this point.

The big winner of the night was Donald Trump.  He didn’t show up, so he didn’t have to be part of the fiasco.

There were many losers, but perhaps the biggest losers were the “moderators” of the debate.  Don’t get me wrong; they were put in a tough situation with a bunch of obnoxious candidates trying to talk over each other.

There were a couple of times I was stunned at just how long it lasted.  When Vivek was trying to respond to criticisms from Tim Scott, Scott would not shut up.  Others were trying to chime in as well.  It seemed like this went on for 15 seconds or more, and it happened several times throughout the debate.

The so-called moderators lost complete control.  They probably should have threatened to cut off people’s microphones earlier.  I know they like arguing for the ratings, but I couldn’t understand what was being said by anybody.  It was just silly.

Doug Burgum was obnoxious as well, trying to interject when not asked.  It is understandable that he is the one with low name recognition and would probably be asked the least number of questions.  Still, there were 7 candidates on stage, and he didn’t just need to interject so often, especially when he had nothing really useful to say.

The Evil Nikki Haley

Nikki Haley was especially obnoxious.  She said that she gets dumber every time she listens to Vivek Ramaswamy speak.  Her role as a blood-thirsty war hawk showed up on stage and showed her true colors as a despicable human being.

Vivek defended his engagement with Tik Tok in trying to reach younger voters, and Haley thought it was so horrible that Tik Tok can gain access to people’s names and email addresses.  Even if the Chinese government was obtaining all of this information from Tik Tok, what would they do with it?  How does that compare to the NSA spying on all electronic communications of Americans?

The Chinese didn’t threaten to fire 100 million Americans if they didn’t get jabbed.  The Chinese government hasn’t declared parents as terrorists for speaking out at school board meetings.  The Chinese government hasn’t declared a large segment of the American population as potential terrorists for supporting a particular candidate.

Ron DeSantis

DeSantis was not horrible, but he didn’t exactly shine either.  From a libertarian standpoint, he was horrible when he talked about sending the military after Mexican drug cartels.  That seems to be the default position of these Republican candidates.

DeSantis had one good moment early on when he pointed out that the reckless spending from Trump in 2020 helped lead to our higher prices and economic problems of today.  That subject and COVID are the only two subjects where he can really beat Trump.

While DeSantis has not been one of the worst governors on economics, he hasn’t been great either.  It’s not as if DeSantis is slashing spending Florida.  Still, it isn’t hard to go after Trump on spending.

DeSantis has just not been an effective presidential candidate.  He never should have challenged Donald Trump.  He should have concentrated on being governor and waited until 2027.

Vivek

Vivek Ramaswamy was the least bad on the stage.  He was attacked by many people on the stage.  The fact that the evil people on the stage despise Vivek makes me like him a little more.

Vivek certainly has his problems.  He is not a libertarian.  But I appreciate the fact that he is there and speaking from a somewhat libertarian perspective on several issues.  It just shows that even when you get someone who mildly suggests peace and less foreign intervention, the war hawks get furious and their fangs come out.

Mike Pence, Chris Christie, Nikki Haley, and Tim Scott are all despicable human beings.  Sometimes they say some things that are rhetorically correct on economic issues, but it doesn’t matter.  They could never cut spending because they would always be building up the U.S. empire and creating more war.

The Winner

Congratulations to Donald Trump.  While Trump has many faults, at least he isn’t as horrific as many of these other candidates.  If Trump is alive and healthy and able to run, he will be the Republican nominee.  We should hope that he picks Vivek as his running mate and not any of these terrible people.

Trump was right in not showing up for the debate. He shouldn’t have to show up until someone proves that they are a formidable challenger.

Michael Rectenwald has announced that he is running for president in 2024 on the Libertarian Party ticket.  He is running as a Mises Caucus candidate, which is the more radical (and libertarian) wing of the Libertarian Party.

Rectenwald was born in January 1959.  As I write this in 2023, he is 64 years old (correction made).  He was a university professor and at one time considered himself to be a Marxist.

In 2016, he was attacked for his political incorrectness and put on paid leave.  He ended up suing New York University in 2018 for defamation.

It was during this time that Rectenwald began to examine his whole worldview.  Even though he had been a leftist himself, he found himself getting attacked from the left.  When he became a victim of cancel culture, he realized the authoritarianism on the political left.

Perhaps the most interesting thing is that he didn’t just become an opponent of the left.  He didn’t just become a civil libertarian.  He reexamined everything, including economics.  This is not common for someone in their 50s to do.  He is now a believer in the Austrian school of economics.

Dave Smith

I previously wrote about Dave Smith and his possible run for the presidency.  With Rectenwald’s entrance into the race, it is important to address the fact that Dave Smith isn’t running.

He has stated that it is for family reasons, and I take him at his word.  I think it goes a bit deeper than this.  Dave has two young children, so it would obviously take a toll on his wife and kids if he were away campaigning for a year or more.

But I think it goes beyond this.  Dave himself has openly talked about Robert Kennedy Jr. and the threat of assassination.

If Dave were to run, he would be on with Joe Rogan and some of the other big podcasters.  He would garner a lot of attention.  It isn’t hard to imagine that hypothetical polls including his name in the race would show him getting traction.

What if Dave started polling at 5 to 10%?  The establishment and its media only ignore you until they can’t.  When they can no longer ignore you, then they smear you.  And with the smears oftentimes come threats.

If you think the establishment has tried to smear and exile Donald Trump, what do you think they would do to an actual libertarian gaining traction?

Trump just talks about the possibility of peace with Russia and not starting wars.  He only talks about the fake news media.  He sometimes rhetorically criticizes the intelligence agencies.

Imagine someone gaining traction on a national scale who you know will attempt to end the U.S. empire, defund the intelligence agencies, and take on the administrative state?  Your life and the life of your family is at stake, and I think Dave understands this.  I believe that is the reason he is not running in the coming year.  It’s not to say that he will never run.

I wish Dave Smith were running for the good of the country and to spread the message of liberty far and wide.  He is principled, well-versed on the issues, and has the ability to deliver the message well.  I don’t blame him at all for choosing not to run.

Rectenwald – The Good and The Concerns

No matter who had been picked to run in place of Dave Smith for the Mises Caucus, I think it is a tough standard to go against.  So it might be unfair to say that Rectenwald is less charismatic than Dave.  It is true, but I think just about everyone is less charismatic than Dave.  Dave is a comedian and knows how to deliver to an audience.

Regarding threats and smears coming from the establishment, I think Rectenwald will be better able to handle it.  It’s not that Dave wouldn’t have been able to handle the smears personally, but Rectenwald is accustomed to being smeared and he is older.  He doesn’t have a young family to protect.

In standing up to criticism, I think Rectenwald will do very well.  This is an important aspect of running for office, especially as a libertarian.  You have to have the courage to stick to your convictions and not be apologetic for your views.

Even though he is an ex-Marxist and somewhat new to the libertarian movement, I do trust Rectenwald.  I have heard him interviewed by Tom Woods several times.  I do believe he has sincerely changed his views and is solid.  You can never be 100% sure how someone will be once they actually take office.  Of course, that probably won’t be the case here, but I do trust that Rectenwald is sincere in his beliefs and is willing to attempt to take on the establishment.

My concern with Rectenwald is two-fold.  One is on the wokeness stuff, and the other is on foreign policy.

Don’t get me wrong here.  He is correct on both issues.  My concern with foreign policy is that he is not as well-versed as someone like Dave, especially on Ukraine.  I may be completely wrong on this, and I hope I am.  But I haven’t heard him talk a lot about foreign policy, and that is one area where the president can have a major impact.  It is probably the primary starting point for taking on the deep state.

And this ties in to my other concern about woke politics.  While he is correct that the woke stuff is very concerning and just downright absurd, I don’t just want a president who is a cheerleader against wokeness.  This has been one of my criticisms of DeSantis.

I don’t want a campaign about taking on woke colleges and woke corporations at the expense of campaigning for a non-interventionist foreign policy and liberty in general.  Rectenwald’s personal experiences may sway him to focus too much on political correctness and not enough on the core evils of the deep state.

Again, I want to reiterate that I don’t know of any disagreements I have with him at this time.  I think he is a solid libertarian.  I am just a bit concerned about his focus when it comes to the campaign.  But time will tell.

My Support

As of now, I plan to vote for Michael Rectenwald in 2024, assuming he is the Libertarian Party nominee.  There is always the question of whether this is “wasting your vote”.

The only time I have ever voted for a major party candidate for president in the general election was in 2020. Since 2004, I have either voted third party, not voted, or written in Ron Paul.  I voted for Trump in 2020 even though he had been a complete disaster on COVID.  I did it because I had this really bad feeling about Biden and the people he associated with.  We were still in COVID hysteria, and the left had outwardly shown their authoritarianism.  I wasn’t wrong in this bad feeling.

I will pay close attention to the major party candidates.  It is nice that many people who question the establishment have gotten some traction.  This includes Trump and Vivek Ramaswamy and Robert Kennedy Jr.  I have issues with each of them, but at least they are questioning some of the official narratives.

It looks like it will be Trump against Biden or some other establishment candidate.  If this is the case, I see no point in voting for Trump from my standpoint.  It’s not like my vote will decide the election.  Anyway, I live in Florida, which is no longer a swing state.  It is far more red now.  If Florida is close, then Trump (or whoever the Republican candidate is) will lose.  Georgia is more of a swing state now.  So my vote won’t matter anyway.

If Trump picks a good running mate and gets better on the issue of COVID, then maybe I will consider voting for him.  I need some convincing that it won’t be 2017 through 2020 all over again.  I want to hear who some of his appointments will be because they were mostly disastrous the last time around.

If Vivek or RFK were to somehow miraculously get a nomination, then I will have to reassess at that time.  But as of now, it looks like it will be Trump against a Democratic establishment candidate.  If that is the case, I will most likely support and vote for Michael Rectenwald.  I will support him either way as long as he continues to be good on the issues.

The average American is not happy with the status quo.  More people are coming to the realization that they are getting the short end of the stick and that the ruling elite is not on their side.  I hope that Michael Rectenwald can capitalize on this discontent and run a populist and principled campaign.

The FOMC released its latest monetary policy statement.  As was expected, the Fed held its target federal funds rate between 5.25% and 5.5%.  However, the Fed does expect to have one more rate hike before the end of the year.

The Fed is also continuing to reduce its holdings of bonds.  The Fed’s balance sheet still has a long way to go to get anywhere close to its February 2020 level, and it will likely never get close to that again.  But it has come down nearly $900 billion now from its all-time high.

Jerome Powell held a press conference and continued his version of “Fed speak”.  It isn’t quite like how Alan Greenspan spoke.  It is much clearer.  At the same time, most of what he is saying is meaningless.  It is coming from a bureaucrat who believes in central planning.

Ben Bernanke 2005 – 2007

Ben Bernanke (aka Helicopter Ben) became chairman of the Fed in early 2006.  Even before he took that position, he was saying that there was no housing bubble.  By 2007, Bernanke was saying that any trouble should be limited to the sub-prime market.

He was amazingly wrong.  We then got a major financial crisis coupled with a massive bust of the housing market.  It was good for the people with money looking to buy a house around 2010 to 2012.  It was not good for those who could not afford their mortgage and went underwater.  It was not good for the American taxpayer bailing out the banks.

When the so-called expert scientists and doctors were talking about COVID in 2020, maybe people should have reflected on the expert economists who get the big things really wrong.  Bernanke was supposedly an expert on the Great Depression, and we ended up with the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Most of the damage was already done before Bernanke became Fed chair, but it’s not like he was warning about trouble.  He was trying to paint a rosy picture.  And then when everything went bad, he went on a wild money creation spree leading to where we are now.

Jerome Powell and the “Soft Landing”

In his press conference, Powell stated, “A soft landing is a primary objective.  That’s what we’ve been trying to achieve for all this time.”

The problem for Powell and company is that they have to fight the inflation that they created.  That means a continuation of reducing the balance sheet with the possibility of more rate hikes.

The yield curve has been heavily inverted for quite some time.  It has been inverted for all of 2023.  The spread is almost unprecedented.  And the Fed expects yet another rate hike in the face of an inverted yield curve.

Powell is not being as bold as Bernanke.  He is being a bit more cautious.  But he isn’t exactly warning of a recession either.

But that’s exactly what we’re going to get.  Just because the stock market or real estate market haven’t tanked yet, it doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

Janet Yellen recently talked about lags in the economy.  She was trying to spin it in a good way, like consumer price inflation coming down.  She is right that there are lags.  And one of those lags is a major recession happening after the inverted yield curve.  The yield curve will probably return to “normal” before the worst of the recession appears.

If there is a soft landing, I may have to reassess my worldview on money and economics.  But I don’t think the Fed can keep this tight money policy and somehow engineer a soft landing for the economy.

The yield curve is flashing danger ahead while the Fed chair acts like everything is just fine.  They just need to make a few more tweaks to set everything straight.  The bond market has a different idea for what’s ahead.

If you think the establishment hates Donald Trump, you haven’t seen what may be coming for Robert Kennedy Jr.  They hate Trump for sometimes telling the truth and pointing out the evils of the ruling class.  But they still managed to somewhat control Trump and limit the damage (to them) from 2017 to 2021.

Kennedy is probably more anti establishment than Trump.  Kennedy is obviously not as bombastic as Trump.  He also doesn’t label people with childish names, which to Trump’s credit sometimes works.  It sure seemed to work against “Lyin’ Ted”, “Lil’ Marco”, and “Low-Energy Jeb”.

But Kennedy has a deeper understanding of foreign policy and the military-industrial complex.  He may or may not have a deeper understanding of the deep-rooted evil in the intelligence agencies.  He at least understands the dangers of elements of the intelligence agencies, as he believes that the CIA killed his uncle.

Trump is decent on the issue of Ukraine, at least in his rhetoric compared to most of the other candidates.  It is hard to say though if Trump would actually be able to stand up against the military-industrial complex and stop the proxy war against Russia.

Kennedy has a much deeper understanding of the conflict.  He understands the elected government in Ukraine was overthrown in 2014, likely with the help of the U.S. government.  He understands the broken promises of pushing NATO to the east towards Russia.  He understands the broken Minsk accords.  He understands that the Russia/ Ukraine war probably would never have happened if not for the involvement of the United States.

The establishment is afraid of Kennedy not just in telling the truth, but in actually following through and implementing policies that reflect his beliefs.  They are afraid he will be too much like his uncle (i.e., pro peace and anti intelligence agencies).  RFK Jr. could possibly even be better (or worse for the establishment) compared to John F. Kennedy.

What Won’t They Do to Stop Him?

The answer is not much.  As long as they don’t get caught, the powers-that-be will do just about anything.  They may even do it if they think they will be caught but still get away with it.

You saw what they have done to Trump.  They have smeared him since 2015.  They make up stories about colluding with Russia.  They impeached him twice.  If they didn’t outright steal the election, they certainly rigged it by having most of Hollywood and the corporate media continually attack him and make up stories. And now they have indicted the man four different times heading into the next election.

You can also look at what was done to Bernie Sanders.  They rigged the primaries against him.  Bernie had a few good things to say on foreign policy, but he was mostly establishment.  Most of his focus was on class warfare.  But Bernie fell right in line in the last two presidential election cycles.  In many ways, he was a stooge.  Even though the establishment could largely control Bernie, they still didn’t want to take a chance with him.

The establishment’s worst nightmare is a matchup between Trump and RFK Jr.  They just can’t let that happen.  So they are rigging the Democratic primaries, which was pointed out recently by Kennedy.

I think it goes beyond this.  They don’t ever want Kennedy on the debate stage.  Just the words he speaks are too dangerous to be seen by tens of millions of people.  He might actually educate them on Ukraine and other issues.

This is why they are keeping Joe Biden around.

Keep Dementia Joe, Until It’s Time to Go

Joe Biden is a very evil man.  It just so happens that he also has some form of dementia or, at the very least, some mental issues.  He is 80 years old, but not all people his age act like that.  He is an old 80.

Everyone knows this, but some people won’t say it.  The people who hate Trump don’t want to say it in case Biden is the only option to defeat Trump.  But between Biden’s mental issues and some of his many criminal acts that are coming to light, the establishment knows that he can’t go against Trump in 2024.

Admittedly, I thought this was the case in 2020, but they managed to use virus hysteria to keep Biden off the campaign trail while doing everything they could to make Trump hated.

Anyway, I really don’t think the establishment wants to take a chance with Biden in 2024 unless they really think he has the best chance at beating Trump.  At the same time, if they pull the plug on Biden now, then it opens up the Democratic nomination.  This also means it would open things up for debates.

I believe the plan is to keep Biden around deep into the primary process.  You can see some establishment figures starting to hint that maybe Biden is too old and that some of these allegations could be problematic.  But for the most part, they are still protecting Biden.

They just have to keep him around until most of the primaries are over.  Then, if they can find a better replacement, they will dump Biden.  Biden will have no choice in the matter.  The media can turn on him in a second.  But Biden’s handlers will just tell him to quietly go into the night.  He can just make up a story about a medical issue and drop out of the race.  He lies about everything else, so that won’t be a problem for him.

By then, it will be the spring or summer of 2024.  The primaries will have already happened.  There will be no time left for debates.  So the Democratic establishment will get to decide on the next nominee at the convention.

We don’t know who that nominee will be, but we know who it won’t be.  It won’t be Robert Kennedy Jr.  They simply cannot allow that to happen, as he is a direct threat to their power.

I don’t know for sure who I will support and/or vote for in the 2024 presidential election.  I do know that one key marker will be how much the establishment hates the person.  Out of the major party candidates right now, it looks like the establishment hates and fears Kennedy even more than Trump.

The August 2023 CPI report came out showing that the CPI was up 0.6% in the last month.  The year-over-year CPI rose at 3.7%.

The less volatile median CPI came in at 0.3% for the month.  The year-over-year median fell from previous months and is now at “just” 5.7%.

Much of the increase in consumer prices last month is attributed to the price of gasoline.  So if you don’t drive much, then maybe you are doing better than others.

If you go to the grocery store, you are probably still noticing that some prices are going higher.  They are just not going up as fast as they were last year.  But the more modest increases now are on top of the already high prices from last year.

Another Rate Hike?

The FOMC has its next meeting on September 20, 2023.  Jerome Powell has said that another rate hike might be necessary to achieve the Fed’s goal of 2% inflation.

The market is betting that the Fed will not change its target rate at the September meeting.  So if any further rate increases come, it will have to happen near the end of 2023 or in 2024.

But there will come a certain point where the Fed won’t consider a rate hike.  The discussion will be whether to decrease its target rate.  Or perhaps the discussion will be how far to drop rates.

The Fed is in “fighting inflation” mode right now, but we know how quickly things can change.  Things did briefly change earlier this year when Silicon Valley Bank failed.

As soon as a major recession hits or a financial crisis hits (likely both), the Fed will all of a sudden shift course and no longer be too concerned with price inflation.  They will go back to monetary easing to save the major banks and to attempt to stop the economy from imploding.

We are in this position because of massive government spending and the Fed’s willingness to finance the deficits by creating money out of thin air.  There is going to be trouble ahead no matter what.  It is just a question of timing and how the Fed deals with the problem.

Not Too Hot, Not Too Cold

I think the Fed likes the consumer price inflation report.  They want price inflation to come down slowly towards their 2% target.  But they also don’t want it to happen too quickly because of what it signals.

If price inflation all of a sudden comes in very low, or even below zero, it will be a sign of reduced consumer demand.  It means that people are tight with their money and a recession is likely coming.

Zero price inflation would be better for most of us because a recession is coming anyway.  The yield curve is, amazingly, still inverted.  It has been all year long.  At least we could start benefitting from not paying higher prices than what we are already paying.

So maybe the Fed likes this Goldilocks scenario, but it isn’t going to last.  We are going to get a hard recession anyway.  So it would be better if we start the correction sooner rather than later, and it would be better to start paying prices for consumer goods that aren’t continually rising.

Stock investors seem to be immune to any financial news these days.  Stocks keep doing well for the bulls.  It is easy to get complacent during these times and think that everything will just keep on humming along.

The bond market is telling a different story, and it has been for all of 2023.  The higher short-term yields against lower long-term yields are telling us that this isn’t going to last.  I am still looking at a recession starting before the 2024 election.

Novak Djokovic won the 2023 U.S. Open. He has now won 24 major titles, the most ever for a man.

Djokovic was unable to play in the 2022 U.S. Open because of Joe Biden and the COVID tyrants. He was not allowed to enter the United States because he did not receive a so-called COVID vaccine.

Djokovic was always up front about not wanting to get jabbed. He didn’t try to pretend otherwise. With his money, I’m sure he could have found someone to give him a saline shot and give him a vaccine passport. He never went down that road.

He also was never political about it other than just saying that he didn’t want to take the jab. He wanted to be able to travel and play in tennis tournaments, but not at the expense of putting a foreign object in his body.

Djokovic was asked whether he was mad over missing last year. He graciously said that he wasn’t mad and was just focusing on the tournament this year.

Taking Care of Your Body

I watched some of the finals. The commentators were praising him when it was looking like he would win. They referenced his age and basically how he is in great shape for being 36 years old.

It is no coincidence that Djokovic takes great care of his body and also didn’t want to get the COVID jab. I have pointed out that the people not getting jabbed tend to be on different extremes. Some people aren’t really health conscious but don’t want to bother getting jabbed or just don’t want the government telling them to do it.

Then you have people who take their health very seriously (for various reasons) and just do not want to take an experimental jab.

Aaron Rodgers was not as upfront about not getting jabbed, but he was not afraid to talk about it once it was widely known. He is 39 years old and still playing at a high level in the NFL. He obviously takes care of his body well too.

When you combine curiosity with caring for your own health, it is a natural conclusion to not wanting to put a foreign substance in your body that the government is pushing so hard.

An Ambassador for the Non-Vaccinated and Anti-Tyrants

It seemed like the crowd in New York was generally cheering for Djokovic, or at least appreciating great tennis.

I really wanted Djokovic to win this one for several reasons. First, he was denied the ability to play last year, and he would have had a good chance of winning that one. I also wanted him to pull farther ahead of Rafael Nadal, who was not kind at first to Djokovic about the vaccination issue. But most importantly, it brought some attention to the issue.

At first, I was thinking that Djokovic was representing the non-vaccinated. He was a skeptic who stood firm against the pressures.

But then I thought some more about it and realized that Djokovic was really representing the anti-tyrants. It isn’t just a question of whether someone is vaccinated or not. It is a question of whether they believe in mandates or if they believe in medical freedom and individual rights.

Djokovic was the gracious person who stood firm against the mandates without speaking out politically. I am glad he took this route.

I’m sure some people wish he had taken up the cause of the non-vaccinated by speaking against Biden and his thugs. But the way Djokovic handled it was actually probably for the best.

He was gracious and didn’t show any anger. He stood his ground and led by example. He got the New York crowd on his side, which tends to not be a liberty loving bunch.

There are probably many more people now than a year ago who were vaccinated but don’t think there should be any government mandates for it.

There is something to be said for showing grace and persuasion without preaching. I think Novak Djokovic did a good job of representing the non-vaccinated and the anti-tyrants at the U.S. Open in 2023.

1. Some libertarians are very cynical about voting, and understandably so.  But then there are some libertarians who think it is just stupid to follow any of the presidential politics or to bother voting at all.  They say all the candidates are the same, and nothing would change anyway.  If you take this position, it means you think there would be no difference between RFK Jr. and Joe Biden.  It means you think that a Vivek Ramaswamy administration would be the same as a Nikki Haley or Mike Pence administration.
2. Even if you think voting is futile, it is still interesting to watch the presidential race because it is an indication of where public opinion lies.  The top three Republicans in the polls are Trump, DeSantis, and Ramaswamy.  Combined, they make up over 75% in most polls.  Everyone else is in single digits, with some barely showing a percentage point.  When it comes to foreign policy, these are the three least hawkish candidates, at least in rhetoric.  This is a great sign for the Republican Party.  The Republican Party of the Bush years is not coming back any time soon.  This is reason for great optimism.
3. Aside from being evil, Biden also has some form of dementia or something like it.  He is 80 years old, but he is an old 80.  It’s hard to imagine Trump acting like this when he turns 80 in a few years.  The Democrats know this is a problem, but so is Kamala Harris.  They need someone to run against Trump.  I didn’t think Biden would be the nominee in 2020, but I was wrong.  The establishment needed someone to defeat Trump, so they put up Biden while keeping him mostly hidden during the campaign.
4. The Democrats and the establishment in general have a problem with RFK Jr. in the race.  They cannot have a televised debate that includes RFK.  So even if they want to dump Biden off the ticket, they can’t do it now because it will open up a reason for debates.  They don’t want Gavin Newsom or someone else up there with RFK either.  If the Democratic establishment decides to dump Biden, they will wait until the last minute to make it public.  Then they don’t have to have any debates and can just crown the successor.  I believe that RFK is an even scarier prospect for the establishment than Trump.
5. One major factor in the 2024 election that is not much discussed is the economy.  Sure, you can hear about “Bidenomics” and unemployment and inflation, but there is not a lot of talk about how a deep recession would play into the race.  It is obviously hard to predict, but the yield curve has been highly inverted for most of 2023, which is a predictor of recession.  If the Everything Bubble pops before the 2024 election, this will have a big impact.  Biden is already disliked by a majority of people.  This will make it far worse for him and the Democrats.
6. The only hope of Biden legitimately beating Trump is because Trump is so disliked that people hold their nose and vote for Biden anyway.  But there comes a point where if Biden is really terrible too in people’s eyes, some of them might just not vote or vote for a third party.
7. The powers-that-be are trying to make it a crime just to question the authenticity of an election.  I believe there was fraud in 2020, just as there is fraud in every national election.  The biggest thing that makes me question the 2020 election is that the vote counting stopped in the big cities in the swing states all around the same time on election night.  By early the next morning, the vote counting resumed and Biden was being declared the likely winner.
8. One way to eliminate the power of election fraud is for an overwhelming victory.  If the election is close, fraud is much easier to implement.  If Trump overwhelmingly beats Biden or some other candidate in 2024, it makes it much harder to add or change enough votes to make a difference in the outcome.  If the margin is in the hundreds of thousands in the swing states, fraud becomes difficult to get away with.

My Picks

I don’t expect any president to tear down the deep state, but there is no question that a president could make a difference.  The president can at least try to take on the deep state at some level, which includes the military-industrial complex.  I don’t expect anything close to a balanced budget or fiscal sanity, but there is always hope that a president could scale back the U.S. empire overseas and stop fighting these terrible wars.

As it stands now, here is my preference list for the next president.

1. The Libertarian Party candidate (assuming it is someone from the Mises Caucus)
2. Robert Kennedy Jr.
3. Vivek Ramaswamy
4. Donald Trump
5. Ron DeSantis

Everyone else is absolutely terrible.  I have my doubts about everyone on my list too.  They all have major faults, and I can’t fully trust any of them.  I strongly disagree with Kennedy on some social and economic issues, but I think he is honest.  I will take an old-school Democrat who still supports a welfare state if he can scale back the warfare state.

Ironically, RFK could end up being the best one on economics only because he has the best chance of reducing military/ war spending.

We have no idea what we would get with Vivek.  He seems to have a different message sometimes for different crowds, which scares me a bit.  He is not a libertarian, but he is probably the most libertarian with his rhetoric, and there is hope that he is evolving (in a good way) on some issues.

We already saw four years of Trump, but there is always hope that he might be a little bit better next time.  Assuming he gets the Republican nomination, it will tell a lot who he picks as his running mate.

DeSantis has been a disappointment in the presidential race.  He looks very weak and unable to take bold positions that actually mean anything.  I don’t need a bold position on Disney being “woke”.  DeSantis would be unlikely to take on the foreign policy establishment, although he probably wouldn’t be as bad as the other war hawks in the race.  Anyway, I would rather DeSantis stay as my governor in Florida.

All of the other candidates are terrible.  Some of them talk a good game on economics, but it doesn’t matter.  They care more about fighting wars and maintaining the U.S. empire.  There won’t be any spending cuts coming from these people, so the economics doesn’t matter anyway.

Since 2008, the Federal Reserve has been paying banks interest on their reserves. This sets a floor on the overnight lending rate for banks.

In other words, the Fed pays banks interest on their reserves in order to control the federal funds rate. When you hear about the Fed raising rates or lowering rates or not changing rates, it is in reference to the federal funds rate.

Before 2008, the Fed controlled the federal funds rate essentially by increasing or decreasing its balance sheet. There was a direct correlation with the money supply.

While there is still a correlation between the two, the Fed is less dependent on the balance sheet for controlling interest rates. You can technically have a balance sheet that is increasing while the Fed is hiking rates. This might be difficult to sustain, but you can see how the Fed has more flexibility with its balance sheet now.

Bank Bailouts

The banking system of today in the United States does not resemble anything close to a free market system. Just the existence of the Fed and the FDIC make it so, but it goes far beyond that as well.

The Fed is still paying banks not to lend money. So anything a bank lends would logically be at a higher rate than what they can get for free from the Fed.

If there is any significant risk to a loan, a bank would have to demand a much higher interest rate. If you can automatically get 5% from the Fed, why would you lend to a risky borrower for only, say, 6%?

The interest paid by the Fed is a subsidy. You could say it is a bank bailout. The bailouts from 2008 never ended.

You can read the FOMC monetary policy statements. In the Implementation Note, it directs the Fed to pay a certain amount in interest to the banks. Whenever the Fed “raises rates”, it is really this rate that it is hiking.

Deficits Matter

With rates having gone up from near zero, it means the Fed is paying out a much greater amount these days to the banks as compared to a few years ago.

At the end of each fiscal year, the Fed remits money back to the Treasury if it made a “profit”.

I know, the Fed doesn’t actually produce any useful goods or services that it sells. It is only profitable in the sense that it has the power to create money out of thin air. When it creates money to buy up U.S. government bonds and mortgage-backed securities, it gets paid the interest on those securities.

After the Fed pays for its buildings and computers and workforce, along with any other expenses, it doesn’t get to keep the difference. It is sent back to the Treasury.

With the Fed currently paying higher interest rates to banks, it means less money is left over, or perhaps no money at all. This means that with the Fed paying banks more, it is indirectly causing the deficit to rise even faster than it otherwise would have.

It means that the national debt will just keep going up. And if the Fed is essentially forced to keep rates at a higher level compared to before, this will just help explode the national debt even more, as if a profligate Congress and president weren’t enough.

Why Would the Fed Policy Change?

I see no reason that the Fed would change its policy at this point. It is what they call a “monetary tool” they use to control the economy. They can more easily manipulate interest rates.

Congress doesn’t seem too concerned about spending trillions of dollars that it doesn’t have. So why should the Fed worry about tens of billions of dollars?

The Fed’s main reasons for existence are to support the major banks and to control the economy. Paying interest on bank reserves help both of those goals.

So the only way the Fed would change this policy is if the debt became so terrible that Congress were forced to tighten its belt and wanted the Fed to do the same.

We have found out the last couple of years that there are limits to the insanity. It has shown up as higher consumer price inflation, and it did force the Fed to increase interest rates and to stop expanding its balance sheet, at least for now.

Even though the Fed probably feels like it has more “monetary tools” to fight the next financial crisis, it doesn’t mean that there won’t be another financial crisis.

While there were some interesting moments from the first Republican presidential debate of the 2023/ 2024 election season, there was one notable topic that didn’t come up. The moderators did not ask a single question about vaccines or COVID vaccine mandates.

What’s worse is that none of the Republican contenders on stage addressed the topic. You get an opening and closing statement. And just because a question isn’t asked, it doesn’t mean you can’t address it.

To be sure, I think the most populist message to sell for Republicans is that of the average American family that is struggling. Wages are not keeping up with the cost of living, and a majority of people are feeling it in some form or another.

This is not all Joe Biden’s fault, but he and his administration have certainly contributed to the bad economy. There was already a bubble economy when he entered office in January 2021, but he has only made it worse.

And while previous Federal Reserve policy is largely to blame, along with high government spending, there has been a lot of chaos in the economy because of COVID lockdowns and mandates. That also includes vaccine mandates that forced many employers into a situation of mandating a medical procedure for their employees.

Some people got the jab because they simply didn’t want to lose their job. Some people didn’t get the jab and were fired from their job. Some people managed to escape with an exemption but still had to go through the pain of the process.

Never Forget

For those who didn’t get a COVID shot or got one because of feeling like you had no other good choice, you should never forget what the evil Biden did to you. It was also the evil Fauci and the supporting cast. It was also the evil establishment media that didn’t treat this like the revolting evil that it was.

These people lied, and they have blood on their hands. They kept saying it was “safe and effective”. Both parts of that are a lie, and they knew it too.

Biden said multiple times that if you get the shot, then you can’t die. This is both utterly stupid and vicious at the same time. Wouldn’t he have at least said that if you get the shot then you can’t die of COVID? It would still be a lie, but at least it wouldn’t sound completely non-sensical.

Biden and his handlers caused complete chaos and destruction in our economy, and they put millions of people through pain. People were compelled to take a jab they didn’t want with the threat of their job.

Biden should be in prison just for this act alone. Forget all of the bribery and money laundering stuff. Even if the so-called vaccines were safe and effective, Biden should still go to prison for implementing his mandates.

Just like his order to forgive student loans, the Supreme Court ruled the mandate for employers with 100 or more employees to be unconstitutional. But there are no consequences for evil Biden and his evil handlers who cause chaos and destruction. They just say, “Oh well, the courts struck that one down. What should we try next?”

An Issue That Matters

There were many millions of people who were impacted by these vaccine mandates. About 25 to 30 percent of the population didn’t get a COVID jab. And you know there is a significant minority that felt compelled to get it, whether or not it involved their job or going to college.

Just by looking at the number of people getting boosters, a significant majority of people don’t want more COVID shots. So certainly they would be against vaccine mandates.

So you can’t tell me that this isn’t a popular issue.

And for the people who were actually vaccine injured or have a loved one who was vaccine injured and know it, they are going to be incredibly passionate about this issue.

They probably feel forgotten, and the feeling may not be wrong. They want an advocate who is not just going to pledge “no mandates”, but someone who will also try to serve some justice for those who were harmed.

They would ideally like to see Fauci and Biden and pharmaceutical executives and others behind bars for their crimes, but at the very least they would like to be recognized. They would like acknowledgement that the vaccines weren’t safe and effective and some people continue to live (or not live) with the consequences to this day.

Where is DeSantis?

Back to the political aspect of this, why is no Republican talking about this? I have heard Trump (Mr. Operation Warp Speed) say he would never issue mandates. He has heard his supporters on this one and would generally prefer not to talk about it.

But where is Ron DeSantis? This should be his issue. Although he locked down Florida in April 2020, he became something of a hero to the anti COVID hysterics. He was fighting against vaccine mandates in Florida. The surgeon general of Florida, Joseph Ladapo, has said that probably nobody should be getting these vaccines.

With DeSantis losing badly to Trump in the polls, it is amazing that he isn’t talking about this issue. He brought up the COVID lockdowns briefly in the debate, but he didn’t touch on the vaccines or vaccine mandates. He is missing a big opportunity. He could be a voice for millions of people out there who do still remember what was done to them in 2021 and 2022.

These politicians lie or exaggerate all the time. Why are none of them taking up the cause of the vaccine injured and those who are simply against vaccine mandates? They are letting the media dictate what they talk about.

Although Vivek Ramaswamy has done a pretty good job of setting his own agenda, he did not bring up vaccine mandates either. Of course, all of the others on the debate stage are horrible and too busy worrying about sending off more money to Ukraine than worrying about what happened to Americans a couple of short years ago.

Let’s hope that Robert Kennedy Jr. does not run away from this issue. His enemies already like to smear him by calling him anti-vax. Since he has that reputation anyway, he can empathize with those who were forced to take the jab.

It is not a losing issue. There are a lot of people who haven’t forgotten what was done to them, and they want an advocate.