Submitted by Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

pAIn Ahead?

Last weekend we published pAIn Ahead? which had two major problems:

It is a bad idea to start a title with a small letter, as our publishing system is designed to force Capital Letters in titles, including the first word of the report.

It is more than a little embarrassing to have a title “pAIn Ahead” out there as stocks opened strong and went higher throughout the next few days with the Nasdaq 100 closing up 790 points!

But, on the week, the index fell slightly, making last weekend’s report far less misplaced than where it started the week. If we hadn’t had a major “buy the dip” moment on Friday at its lows, the Nasdaq could have closed down 2% on the week.

Since we had a small loss on the week, a 4.4% pullback from its high on Monday to its low on Friday, it makes sense to revisit the points we made when expressing concern about the potential for an AI- driven pullback.

Bitcoin. Whether it is leading the market or just going along with the “momentum” stocks, crypto had a tough week, with Bitcoin dropping from $104k last Friday to $94k this Friday. It is rebounding a bit this weekend, and is worth watching as virtually every regulatory and administration headline remains positive, but it cannot seem to rally significantly. I think it is safe to say that everyone keeps an eye on Bitcoin as a barometer for risk assets, especially on weekends, when markets are closed, but the news flow doesn’t stop.

Retail Dip Buying. I remain suspicious that the longs are held by “pros” at this stage as I’ve seen evidence of profit taking by retail. Having said that, the “retail” favorite names and ETFs had a very volatile week (even more so than the market as a whole) and we did see some inflows into some of the most “beat up” names. Maybe it was retail that led the surge, but it could have also been pro traders getting “cute” and trying to anticipate positive weekend news (the admin has been quick to provide positive headlines, especially over the weekend and on Monday morning, when stocks stumble). We will see what happens, but I think the almost 1% late-day fade off of the highs is telling. Of late, dip buying isn’t always providing instant gratification.

Volatility. VIX inched higher on the week, while realized stock market volatility rose rather aggressively. The MOVE Index (a measure of bond market volatility) rose more rapidly than the VIX. Higher overall volatility can force some “risk parity” strategies to de-risk. Any shift in correlations between major asset classes can cause them to reduce as well. This could be happening already, but I doubt it has been meaningful. Another week like the past week (especially if the net result is more to the downside) could cause real de-risking.

Sentiment and Inflation. The admin is dialing back tariffs on many agricultural goods. Coffee is high on my list. I’m having difficulty wrapping my head around the fact that the admin is signaling that they are championing lower prices by eliminating these tariffs.

Hmmmm…this admin put the tariffs in place, so not sure how much credit they deserve for removing them. I think it is good that they are changing policy, but it always seemed weird to tariff things that we don’t grow or produce domestically (and have climate limitations to doing so).

Hmmmm…is this a low-key acknowledgement that on some goods, where there is no obvious replacement, tariffs get paid for by the consumer? This has been pretty clear since day 1, so it is good that it is being acknowledged, if only tacitly, but how many other tariffs are finding their way to the consumer? We suspect that number is still small, but growing over time.

There is a lot of rhetoric about affordability, and that is only increasing as both sides dig in to fight over costs and who is responsible.

Bonds and the Fed. The probability of a Fed cut has moved from over 60% to “only” 43% according to Bloomberg’s WIRP function. Now that the probability has dropped below 50% the Fed may lean towards not cutting, since the market isn’t “forcing” their hand. Yes, the Fed will make its own deliberations, but it does pay attention to the market. A lot could still happen between now and the December 10th meeting, but this is yet another indicator of dialing back cuts until the new year. I’m told much of the recent selling was triggered by the concern that the Fed could be less aggressive. I could see that being a part of the whole discussion, but we are susceptible in so many ways that it didn’t take much to shake our belief in the biggest momentum trades of the year. The “old” 10- year (August 2035 maturity) rose from 4.10% to close out the week at 4.14%, though it briefly got to 4.05% on Friday morning (around the timing of OPEX). I continue to expect more downside for Treasuries with the 10-year yield to approach 4.3%. That will weigh on stocks if it turns out to be correct.

Rotation

There is certainly a rotation trade and I think it will continue to work.

For this trade, I like the S&P 500 equal weight versus the Nasdaq 100. In the past year, QQQ (a Nasdaq 100 ETF), is up about 20% while RSP (a S&P 500 equal weight ETF) is up only 4.5%. There is room for significant outperformance on this relative value trade.

Bottom Line

Sticking to our ProSec (Production for Security) themes. See any of our recent reports at Academy Macro. Look for the “rotation” to continue.

Also, I think the pain continues. The Nasdaq 100 is down on the month and the issues facing it (discussed above and detailed last weekend), have not been resolved. If anything, the big move on Monday and then the fierce dip buying on Friday may well have left a lot of short-term “trading” longs exposed to a further pullback.

I don’t like Treasuries (targeting at least 4.25% on 10s).

We continue to think credit spreads will remain under a bit of pressure. Nothing major, but the combination of:

Some private credit “fiascos” (not sure what else you can call something that seemed to go from par to default almost overnight). Again, I don’t think there are a lot of “cockroaches” out there, but it is weighing on the market – and I believe this is making it more difficult for small companies to access credit – which is a real-world problem.

Increasing “concern” about how much debt needs to be raised to build out data centers, AI, and the electricity generation capacity to power those data centers. Not alarming and will play out over time, but this will weigh on credit spreads.

The low income consumer. Increasing concerns about delinquencies and the fact that the number of households having delinquencies may be set to rise.

It was a very memorable Veterans Day week here at Academy, and now we set our sights on Thanksgiving with friends and family! In the meantime:

Rotation? Yes.

pAIn Ahead? Likely

Smooth Sailing? Unlikely

This is a “normal” or even “run of the mill” adjustment to valuations, current conditions, and various outlooks. Certainly not alarming, but not yet time to fully reload into the momentum names.

Multigenerational living has surged to a record high, with 17% of 2024 buyers purchasing homes designed for multiple generations, according to the National Association of Realtors. 

Families are increasingly combining households to cope with elevated living costs, caregiving demands, and even the need to reconnect as a family unit. This trend is being fueled by a housing market that remains frozen for many first-time buyers – caught between high mortgage rates and record high prices – pushing more families to pool resources and live under one roof.

The multigenerational home trend is being fueled by a “Silver Tsunami” of Baby Boomers entering their 70s and 80s. As this cohort ages, millions will downsize, retire, move into multigenerational homes, require caregiving, or transition to assisted-living or aging-in-place arrangements.

Evidence of this trend recently surfaced in a quiet northern Virginia neighborhood, where a newly built home addition has sparked outrage, according to FOX 5’s Bob Barnard.

Another view.

Barnard said a three-story addition to a single-story home is set to house three generations of one family. He noted that the builders met all zoning requirements, but the neighborhood is outraged because the addition resembles a small multifamily apartment building.

This is wild.

Immigrants move into a suburban Virginia neighborhood, construct a 3-story monstrosity of an “addition” for 3 generations of family members to live in—nearly encroaching on their neighbor’s property line.

And people wonder why Americans can’t afford homes… pic.twitter.com/L134Du4MXr

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) November 15, 2025

Given that the Silver Tsunami is underway and much of the real estate industry isn’t prepared, additions like the one seen in the northern Virginia neighborhood will continue to startle communities.

Authored by Joe Sullivan-Bissett via BondVigiliantes.com,

Government debt levels continue to linger in uncomfortable territory across developed markets, with fiscal deficits stubbornly high despite reasonably resilient growth and employment – especially when compared to past norms. This is not a post-crisis or post-war moment, yet debt levels resemble those of an economy fighting its way out of recession.

Runaway levels of debt, and the question of how they can be contained, could well be the defining macro story of the next decade. This not only has implications for public finances, but also the trajectory of yields, inflation, and the credibility of future policy.

High debt is not new, with history being full of examples of governments facing daunting fiscal positions, and each era has found its own way out: sometimes through discipline, sometimes through inflation, and sometimes through quiet financial engineering. Earlier this year, Rob Burrows explored options for dealing with debt in this blog.

Following on from that, below I explore if there are any useful lessons in history which could provide a solution for today’s backdrop.

Financial repression: The silent partner in debt reduction

After World War II, both the US and the UK emerged with debt-to-GDP ratios well above 100%, with the latter at 250%. Yet over the following decades, those burdens shrank dramatically, and without large fiscal surpluses or deep austerity. The solution was financial repression.

Governments and central banks effectively capped interest rates while letting inflation run high. With capital controls in place and a banking system that was required to hold government paper, real interest rates stayed negative for years. Investors earned less than inflation, and debt quietly melted away in real terms.

Source: Bank of England’s Eight centuries of global real interest rates, R-G, and the ‘suprasecular’ decline, 1311–2018

By the mid-1970s, the UK’s debt ratio fell to roughly 50% of GDP. Much of that adjustment came not from paying debt down, but from the erosion of its real value.

Could it work today? Not easily. Financial repression relies on closed capital systems and willing domestic savers, both of which are in short supply today. In open markets with moveable capital, measures such as yield caps or mandated sovereign debt holding would likely require complex regulatory interventions or indirect support from central banks. Such policies would be difficult in a globalised, market-oriented system.

Growth as the denominator: Britain after the Napoleonic Wars

After the Napoleonic Wars, Britain’s public debt exceeded 200% of GDP. Over the next half-century, it fell steadily, not through inflation (the gold standard ruled that out) but through real growth and persistent, if modest, budget surpluses.

The Industrial Revolution transformed output and tax revenues, while the state held spending flat. The result was a slow but powerful denominator effect: GDP grew faster than the debt stock, even as prices remained stable or fell.

Source: https://ourworldindata.org/

* Definition of ‘International $’ on which this data set is based, can be found here:https://ourworldindata.org/international-dollars

Could governments grow themselves out of debt again? That depends on whether today’s economy can find an equivalent productivity revolution. Demographics, slower innovation diffusion, and lower investment all weigh against it. Unless of course, AI proves to be the answer…

Inflation: The blunt instrument

Inflation has historically been one of the fastest ways to reduce debt. Weimar Germany in the 1920s and Japan in the immediate post-war years both saw real debts wiped away by surging prices. Even moderate inflation, sustained over time, can do significant work: in the 1970s, UK debt ratios fell sharply again as inflation outpaced borrowing costs.

Could governments inflate their way out today? Using inflation to reduce debt today is less straightforward, given that central banks are independent and focused on keeping inflation close to 2%. The recent post-pandemic inflation spike showed how higher inflation can create economic and social pressures, and how institutions respond to keep it in check. If inflation stays above target for too long, it could affect the credibility of monetary policy. Still, a period of slightly higher inflation alongside nominal growth might be seen as a practical path if political constraints make fiscal tightening difficult.

So are there any useful lessons from history?

Perhaps not. Each historical escape route looks less accessible today:

Lowering debt through austerity is politically challenging, especially in societies already weary from years of spending restraint and rising inequality

Inflation is broadly constrained through central bank objectives

Growth remains elusive, unless technology delivers a genuine productivity revolution

Financial repression, while possible in partial form, risks distorting markets and undermining investor confidence.

That leaves a muddle-through scenario: persistent deficits, modestly higher inflation tolerance, and debt ratios that stabilise rather than fall. Markets may increasingly price this as the new normal: A world of structurally higher term premia and periodic fiscal scares.

History suggests that when governments can’t grow, tax, or inflate their way out, they simply wait it out: relying on time, moderate nominal growth, and the slow erosion of debt through steady, incremental policy.

It’s not a dramatic ending to this episode, but it may be the most realistic one.

Ford Motor Company CEO Jim Farley has sounded an alarm about the state of the US job market, saying Ford has been unable to fill 5,000 mechanic jobs paying $120,000 a year. Those $120,000 salaries are nearly double the US average. 

“We are in trouble in our country. We are not talking about this enough,” said Farley in an appearance last week on the Office Hours: Business Edition podcast. He said the shortage of qualified manual laborers isn’t confined to Ford, but is something businesses across the nation are struggling with. 

“We have over a million openings in critical jobs, emergency services, trucking, factory workers, plumbers, electricians and tradesmen. It’s a very serious thing. We do not have trade schools. We are not investing in educating a next generation of people like my grandfather who had nothing, who built a middle class life and a future for his family.

Those jobs are out there. Mechanics in a Ford dealership — as of this morning, we had 5,000 openings. A bay with a lift and tools and no one working in it. $120,000-a-year job, but it takes you five years to learn it. To take a diesel out of a Super Duty, it takes a lot of skill. You need to know what you’re doing.” 

“We are in trouble in our country,” said Ford CEO Jim Farley in his appearance on Office Hours: Business Edition. 

Rich Garrity, a National Association of Manufacturers board member, expanded on Farley’s lament about the country’s deficit in training programs, telling the New York Post:  

“We’re not just missing bodies, but we’re really missing … skill sets that can connect to 21st-century manufacturing needs. The community colleges, the career tech programs do a solid job in providing foundational training, but we often see that they’re out of date when it comes to keeping up with how fast things are moving from a technology standpoint.” 

Social media is awash in testimonials from young college grads bemoaning their inability to find jobs. Meanwhile, in August, BLS reported that America had over 400,000 available manufacturing jobs. There’s an obvious disconnect, but, on a bright note, the long-running over-emphasis on college education may finally be waning. Trade school enrollment soared 16% in 2024, while college enrollment growth has been negligible in recent years.  

This is grunt work. It is beneath you. You should be talking out $200k in students loans and then getting a teller job at a bank paying $16hr. That is dignity. https://t.co/nf1k88G6Bl

— B (@B__Daily) November 15, 2025

“For many years in the US, it was, you go to a four-year college and things are set up for you,” Farley said. “And the reality is, that path is not necessarily what it used to be. A more valuable path, in many cases, is getting a technical college or apprenticeship and starting to learn certain skills very early on.”

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Leftist media figures are increasingly walking on eggshells when discussing President Trump, hastily retracting or clarifying statements to avoid potential defamation lawsuits that could bankrupt their networks. 

In recent clips, MSNBC’s Jen Psaki and CNN anchors have been caught mid-sentence backpedaling on inflammatory remarks tying Trump to Jeffrey Epstein, signaling a broader chill in media rhetoric as Trump’s legal victories mount.

During a segment on MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki,” the host quickly corrected herself after implying Trump was among “predators” linked to Epstein. 

? LMAO! Jen Psaki sees a multi-MILLION dollar lawsuit flash before her very eyes and immediately retracts her defamatory statement about Donald Trump

“The other predators out there, in ADDITION to Trump! I mean, not, I’m not, not saying HE is…” pic.twitter.com/3wm9WLqIFF

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 13, 2025

Psaki stated, “The other predators out there, in addition to Trump! I mean, not, I’m not, not saying HE is…” This fumbling reversal came amid chyron headlines like “Trump White House Engulfed by New Epstein Bombshell,” highlighting how anchors are now second-guessing their words to evade legal scrutiny.

Similarly, CNN anchors went out of their way to absolve Trump during Epstein coverage, emphasising, “We wanna be clear. Trump didn’t receive or send any messages…he has not been accused of any wrongdoing with Epstein or Maxwell.”

This unsolicited clarification underscores the network’s caution, likely influenced by Trump’s aggressive litigation strategy against perceived smears.

? WOW! CNN is so PETRIFIED of a lawsuit that they are now fully exonerating President Trump of any wrongdoing RE: Epstein

“We wanna be clear. Trump didn’t receive or send any messages…he has not been accused of any wrongdoing with Epstein or Maxwell.” pic.twitter.com/66jDA8rxNa

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 14, 2025

These instances reflect a wider trend where media outlets are “tip-toeing” around Trump-related stories, fearing exposure and costly lawsuits. 

Critics argue this self-censorship stems from Trump’s track record of holding networks accountable, with legal experts noting that defamation laws are being weaponized to curb biased reporting. 

As one analyst put it, “The media is terrified of Trump’s legal team— they’re editing in real-time to avoid the next big payout.”

Democrats too have been forced to delete a previous completely unfounded claim that Trump spent Thanksgiving with Jeffrey Epstein in 2017, a remarkably stupid accusation given that Trump was serving as President at that time and Epstein was a known pedophile.

? BREAKING: The official X account of the Democrat Party has DELETED their post claiming President Trump spent Thanksgiving with Jeffrey Epstein in 2017

He was literally the President, dumbasses. You don’t think someone would’ve noticed?!

Trump should BANKRUPT the DNC for this… pic.twitter.com/dXiyOg4MYy

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) November 13, 2025

Tying into this caution is the ongoing BBC controversy over a deceptively edited video in their Panorama documentary, which spliced Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech to misleadingly suggest incitement. 

After the President issued an ultimatum, the BBC apologized, admitting an “error of judgment” and agreeing not to rebroadcast the episode, but rejected demands for compensation, stating there’s “no basis for a defamation claim.” 

Trump, however, brutally rejected the apology, vowing to proceed with a threatened $1 billion lawsuit, calling it insufficient and demanding full accountability. 

This scandal exemplifies how international media is also treading carefully, with the BBC’s partial concession highlighting fears of U.S. legal repercussions. 

President Trump’s successful suits against major networks are fueling this media restraint. In July 2025, CBS/Paramount settled for $16 million over deceptively edited “60 Minutes” footage of Kamala Harris, marking a major win against manipulative reporting.

Similarly, ABC agreed to a $15 million donation to Trump’s presidential library in December 2024 to resolve defamation claims from George Stephanopoulos’s on-air accusations. 

These settlements expose the leftist media’s agenda of biased editing and smears, forcing outlets to rethink their anti-Trump narratives or face financial ruin. 

Beyond these, recent cases abound. Trump filed a $15 billion suit against The New York Times in September for alleged defamation, prompting the paper to issue clarifications in subsequent stories.

In July, he sued The Wall Street Journal for $10 billion over similar claims, leading to heightened editorial scrutiny. 

NPR and PBS have also faced threats, with insiders reporting “tiptoeing” in coverage to avoid litigation. 

Critics note this wave of suits—tying records for 2025—reveals how media giants are now prioritizing legal safety over aggressive reporting.

These developments underscore how Trump’s legal offensives are dismantling the leftist media’s unchecked bias, forcing accountability and exposing their agenda of manufactured scandals to undermine America First policies.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Published at UtilityDive and authored by Amanda Simonian of TerraFlow Energy, a Texas-based developer of long-duration energy storage solutions.

I spent most of September on the road, from RE+ in Las Vegas to Climate Week NYC, Houston Energy and Climate Week and Data Center World Power in San Antonio. Four different audiences, four very different rooms, but one conversation that always found its way to the surface: power. Not just how much we need, but what kind. The quality, the stability and the very real stress being placed on a grid that was never built for what is coming next.

It is the problem no one planned for. As the next wave of data centers energizes, operators are discovering that the real challenge is not just finding enough megawatts. It is what happens when those megawatts do not stay still.

AI workloads do not draw power the way traditional computing does. They surge. They idle. They fluctuate thousands of times a second, driving load profiles that look less like a flat demand curve and more like an EKG. For utilities and transmission operators, that volatility is more than an inconvenience. It is a destabilizing force on local feeders and substations that were never designed to handle such rapid swings.

Industry experts have been warning about this for more than a year. Recent reliability assessments have pointed to the rise of emerging large loads such as AI campuses, crypto miners and hydrogen plants that are reshaping how the grid behaves. The North American Electric Reliability Corp. has noted similar concerns in its discussions on these new load types, including their unpredictable growth, extreme ramp rates and the coordination challenges they create for utilities and grid operators.

The grid can handle large loads. What it can’t handle, at least not yet, is a 300-MW campus that behaves like a strobe light, pulling hard one second and backing off the next. Transformers trip. Frequency control tightens. Backup generation spins when it shouldn’t. And the more facilities come online, the more that volatility compounds.

This wasn’t an unknown risk, just an underestimated one. Engineers warned of harmonic distortion and ramp-rate limits long before “AI” became a utility buzzword. But the pace of construction outstripped the pace of adaptation. What was once a handful of hyperscale sites has become a nationwide build-out measured in gigawatts, each carrying a microgrid worth of volatility.

The truth is simple: every data center is about to play a role in grid stability, whether it wants to or not. Power quality, inertia and ramp control are no longer the grid’s problems alone. They are the new operating parameters for digital infrastructure.

The thing is, that shift doesn’t have to be a burden. In fact, it is an opportunity to turn what was once a point of stress into a stabilizing resource to the grid. But meeting that challenge requires technology built for continuous cycling and endurance. Lithium-ion, optimized for short discharges and limited duty cycles, was never designed to chase a data center’s power curve all day. Flow batteries, on the other hand, can. They operate like engines with fuel tanks — steady, durable and capable of near-infinite cycling without degradation.

Long-duration flow systems can sit quietly at the DC link, absorbing or releasing power in milliseconds to smooth out spikes before they ever reach the grid. They bridge the gap between UPS and energy storage, conditioning power in real time and sustaining it for hours when needed.

That is the next evolution of resilience: not just keeping servers online, but keeping the power around them steady. It is a design choice, an engineering discipline and, increasingly, a responsibility.

The grid of the future will not be built around data centers. It will be built with them. And the ones that understand that first will define how the next decade of digital growth actually stays online.

Chaos erupted in front of Mexico’s National Palace in Mexico City on Saturday after anti-corruption protests turned violent following the recent cartel murder of Uruapan Mayor Carlos Manzo. Protesters are furious with leftist President Claudia Sheinbaum, while the government blames right-wing business interests for stoking the unrest.

Reuters reports that 120 people and 100 police officers were injured outside the National Palace when a large group of anti-government protesters led by Gen Zers clashed with Sheinbaum’s security forces.

The National Palace in Mexico is under siege by its citizens amid discontentment with Claudia Sheinbaum.

Follow: @AFpost

pic.twitter.com/X2mwM0eZnQ

— AF Post (@AFpost) November 15, 2025

Public outrage has grown over the recent assassination of Uruapan Mayor Carlos Manzo, a critic of cartel violence in the crime-ridden third-world country just south of the U.S. southern border. 

Footage on X shows demonstrators ripping down parts of a giant steel barrier around the National Palace, prompting police to deploy tear gas and other non-lethal weapons. 

Mexico is experiencing a populist revolt against its narco-state government. Sheinbaum and her socialist party have allowed many elected officials to be k*lled by the cartels. Is this the beginning of a revolution?
pic.twitter.com/AcTHBYQqYX

— Carlos Turcios (@Carlos__Turcios) November 15, 2025

This video is shocking!

This is the National Palace in Mexico City.

It’s the Mexican equivalent of the White House AND Capitol.

The severely outnumbered police are blocking the main entrance…but the crowd is growing.

The people of Mexico are rising up against the… pic.twitter.com/YZaRdzwmer

— Jordan Crowder (@digijordan) November 16, 2025

The populist revolt against far-left leaders continues, with some folks calling Sheinbaum a “WEF puppet.”

More footage:  

🚨🚨: Anti-Sheinbaum crowd TEARS down one section of the security wall protecting the National Palace.

Both sides are throwing chucks of concrete at each other. pic.twitter.com/tgRrOkmTua

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) November 15, 2025

🚨🇲🇽 “JEWISH WHORE” SCRAWLED ON MEXICO’S NATIONAL PALACE AS GEN Z RAGES AGAINST PRESIDENT

Protesters have straight-up trespassed barriers, storming the National Palace gates and slapping on vile graffiti calling President Claudia Sheinbaum a “Jewish whore”.

Massive fury over… https://t.co/35a6EdBbMI pic.twitter.com/kaCgxvJn8c

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) November 16, 2025

Sheinbaum is a member of Morena (Movimiento de Regeneración Nacional), a left-wing political party in Mexico that aligns ideologically with far-left U.S. politicians through Democratic Socialists of America. DSA supports unhinged leftists, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani. 

Remember the name of Mexico’s new president Claudia Sheinbaum. She is another Marxist authoritarian and is going to cause America endless headaches. https://t.co/LZ88dtNarx

— Ben Kew (@ben_kew) October 3, 2024

More broadly across Latin America, Argentine President Javier Milei’s recent midterm victory, alongside right-wing populist movements gaining ground across Europe and President Trump’s 2024 win, signal that voters are increasingly rejecting corrupt globalist Marxists who have squandered the inheritance of nations through failed policies (climate crisis hoax) that only enrich the globalist elite. 

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The Romanian Defense Minister recently confirmed that the US will withdraw around half of its 2,000 troops as part of its plans to reprioritize Asia, which could include drawdowns from other countries as well.

It was assessed last February that “Trump Is Unlikely To Pull All US Troops Out Of Central Europe Or Abandon NATO’s Article 5” since retaining a minimal presence in this region is psychologically reassuring for those countries that fear Russia and can also function as “a tripwire for deterring aggression”.

This is especially true for aspiring regional leader Poland. Trump said in early September that the US might even deploy more troops there upon request, and while that hasn’t yet happened, Poland’s Defense Ministry confirmed that US troop numbers remain stable amidst the latest news from Romania. Those two and the Baltic States also host multiple other allies’ forces, including nuclear-armed France’s and the UK’s, whose roles complement the US’ previously mentioned “deterrence” one.

Western, Central, and Eastern Europe are also being knit together through the “military Schengen”, which refers to the initiative for facilitating the flow of troops and equipment between members, while the last two regions are becoming more integrated through the “Three Seas Initiative”. Poland, which commands NATO’s third-largest army, plays a crucial role in both by connecting “mainland Europe” with the Baltic States. This explains why it’s tipped to become the US’ top European partner in the future.

From the US’ evolving perspective after the past 3.5 years of proxy warfare, its European junior partners are finally shouldering more of the burden for containing Russia, so the presence of so many of its troops on the continent is no longer required except for “deterrence” purposes. They’re much better put to use in Asia, as policy planners now seem to believe, for encouraging its junior partners there to replicate their European counterparts by shouldering more of the burden for containing China.

So long as nuclear-armed France and the UK retain their own military presences in the countries from which the US draws down its troops, then the US can expect them to “Lead From the Front” in a crisis while the US would only need to “Lead From Behind”. Those two and Poland would play the foremost roles in future tensions with Russia while the US would provide back-end support through logistics and intelligence. It could also directly escalate on its own if the going gets tough for its junior partners.

Minimal US troops along NATO’s eastern flank would draw lines that Russian troops would be deterred from crossing on pain of drawing America directly into the conflict. The direct involvement of French and UK troops in the region would complement that role by reminding Russia that the conflict could go nuclear so all sides should keep it conventional. If the crisis further worsens, then they could rattle their nuclear sabers, especially if they by then transferred some of their nukes to Germany and/or Poland.

The evolving geopolitical, military, and strategic situation in Europe is therefore such that the US is offloading most of the responsibilities for containing Russia onto Poland, the UK, France, and Germany. Of these four, Poland is the lynchpin upon which the success of this EU-fronted but US-backed containment plan is dependent for military logistical reasons, thus meaning that its ties with Russia will greatly determine the future of war and peace in Europe after the Ukrainian Conflict finally ends.

Conversations around the housing market this week revolved around Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte floating the idea of 50-year mortgages, pitched by the Trump administration as a clever way to make homes more “affordable” by lowering monthly payments, expanding access, and attracting more buyers. But stretching mortgages out for roughly 65% of the average U.S. life expectancy is not affordable in the long run.

Our conversations with readers this week focused on the deepening downturn in the home improvement industry. This slide could deepen into a sharper contraction and may signal continued cooling in the housing market:

Consumer Squeeze Hits Home Renovation Spending As Leading Deck-Maker Shares Collapse

Home Improvement Downturn Flashes Red For Housing Market

For more color on the housing market, we turn to Goldman Sachs Managing Director Kate McShane, who told clients Thursday the housing backdrop is set to improve in 2026, with mortgage rates drifting toward 6.15% and pent-up demand helping home-price appreciation recover.

Here is McShane’s view on the housing market, based on her upgrade of flooring company Floor & Décor from “Sell” to “Neutral” as she sees a better 2026 environment: slightly improving housing turnover, stabilizing comps, margin recovery, and potential market-share gains as competitive pressures ease: 

The housing market is anticipated to experience a more favorable environment in FY26 and our economists forecast mortgage rates at year-end 2025 and 2026 to be 6.25% and 6.15%, respectively. Our economists noted if mortgage rates remain around 6.15% (in line with their expectation), the pace of home price appreciation is likely to start to recover in 2026 due to pent-up housing demand. Our economists expect housing turnover to be flat to marginally higher in FY25 and projects a +5-7% increase in 2026 compared to 2025. Floor & Décor’s comparable store sales (comps) are highly correlated to housing turnover, as replacing floors is one of the first improvements many new or existing home purchasers undertake. The company’s focus on a growing Pro customer base and high-margin design services also provides growth opportunities as the market recovers.

Our economists have noted that HELOC deal issuance has increased since 2023, with YTD 2025 (until 10/8/25) volume reaching post-GFC highs. The seemingly renewed interest in HELOC securitization is likely a function of both increased HELOC usage by homeowners and greater demand from investors in the securitization market. Our economists now suggest potential for significant further growth in HELOC in the coming years and expect home equity debt outstanding growth rate to tick-up slightly to around $15-17 bn/quarter in 2026 (vs. $14bn/quarter over the past 5 quarters), driven by lower financing rates and increased demand for tapping into equity. In spite of this higher activity level however, the company continues to see homeowners favor smaller-scope projects amid affordability constraints. However, we believe FND is positioned to capture potential HELOC-driven upside as macro transmission improves.

GS economists forecast 30 year fixed mortgage rate at year-end 2025 and 2026 to be 6.25% and 6.15%, respectively

Mortgage rates have started to show a declining trend

Housing turnover remains at historic low levels but could grow in FY26

Housing Affordability Index (Monthly NSA) vs. FND com

Remodeling activity picked up sequentially in 3Q

McShane’s view gives readers her framework for what to expect in the spring selling season, which begins in 3 to 4 months. 

ZeroHedge Pro subscribers can access the full note and the complete chart pack in the usual place.

Authored by Helen Partz via CoinTelegraph.com,

French authorities have reportedly lifted Telegram CEO Pavel Durov’s travel ban amid an ongoing investigation into the messaging platform.

Durov had been ordered to remain in France following his arrest in Paris in August last year, facing multiple charges related to his operation of Telegram.

Durov was previously granted temporary exemptions, and French authorities have now fully lifted restrictions on his travel, Bloomberg reported on Thursday.

As part of the latest decision, dated Monday, officials also removed the requirement for Durov to regularly check in at a local police station, the report said, citing a person familiar with the matter.

Investigation still ongoing

The report did not mention any details regarding the French investigation into Telegram, hinting that the case is still active.

According to a statement on preliminary charges by France’s Prosecutor’s Office, Durov was last year accused of facilitating a platform that enables illicit transactions. The prosecutors said the Telegram CEO is facing up to 10 years in prison, in addition to a fine of $550,000.

Pavel Durov met with Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev at the Digital Bridge 2025 forum in October. Source: Press office of the President of Kazakhstan (Aqorda)

Telegram and Durov have repeatedly denied the accusations, highlighting the messenger’s compliance with industry standards and the laws of the European Union.

While denying the accusations, Durov has consistently criticized the French government, including French President Emmanuel Macron, regarding what Durov has described as the country’s political trajectory around censorship.

“Emmanuel Macron isn’t making the right choices. I’m very disappointed. France is getting weaker and weaker,” Durov said in an interview with French outlet Le Point in June.

In October, Durov warned of the potential consequences of the EU’s Chat Control proposal, urging the world to fight against the “dystopian” measures proposed by the EU.

“Germany is persecuting anyone who dares to criticize officials on the Internet. The UK is imprisoning thousands for their tweets. France is criminally investigating tech leaders who defend freedom and privacy,” Durov wrote in an X post on Oct. 9.