The power of the international bond markets calls into question the supposed 
relative autonomy from the ruling class of the Trump administration and other 
so-called"Bonapartist" governments. These would-be autocrats invariably 
capitulate in the face of higher public and private sector borrowing costs and 
the attendant threat of economic recession much as do the most timid social 
democratic governments.

The Trump administration is anxiously trying to stem rising bond yields as 
banks and insurance companies, pension and hedge funds, and other bond traders 
dump Treasuries in reaction to inflationary pressures precipitated by the Iran 
war and the amount of federal debt. A measure of their dissatisfaction with the 
performance of the economy is an increased willingness to publicly criticize 
the administration, as the Financial Times reports below.

*The mar­kets are break­ing their code of silence on Trump*

Financial Times
Katie Mar­tin
Sept 5 2026

This time last year, Wall Street ana­lysts and investors were hud­dling under a 
cone of silence, extremely reluct­ant to speak crit­ic­ally on the record about 
what the US admin­is­tra­tion was up to on tar­iffs or insti­tu­tional 
degrad­a­tion in the coun­try or any­thing else.

It was clear what was going on. The US pres­id­ent was blow­ing up 
geo­pol­it­ical alli­ances with seem­ingly ran­dom trade taxes. He was seek­ing 
to bend the per­son­nel and actions of the Fed­eral Reserve to his will. He had 
already fired Erika McEntar­fer, who ran the Bur­eau of Labor Stat­ist­ics, 
because he did not like the labour stat­ist­ics. He was pick­ing win­ners and 
losers out of lis­ted stocks while receiv­ing golden gifts from cor­por­ate 
big­wigs seek­ing to curry favour.

This is all before you even get to the crypto non­sense. It all stank, it 
under­mined Amer­ica’s dom­in­ance in global mar­kets, and every­one knew it. 
They just didn’t say it out loud.

Banks, invest­ment houses, think­tanks and every­one in between lived in fear 
of annoy­ing a pres­id­ent seem­ingly at the height of his powers or a 
Treas­ury sec­ret­ary who was still con­sidered to be a wise and sta­bil­ising 
force in an oth­er­wise dis­com­bob­u­lat­ing admin­is­tra­tion. Dir­ect 
cri­ti­cism of Don­ald Trump’s fin­an­cial lieu­ten­ants was kept very much 
behind closed doors.

In pub­lic, it was much easier, and hon­estly rational, for ana­lysts and 
investors to tread care­fully, speak politely if at all, and leave the hon­est 
assess­ments to the pub.

But something has shif­ted in the past few weeks, par­tic­u­larly since Scott 
Bes­sent’s Treas­ury depart­ment star­ted med­dling in the bond mar­ket. I mean 
no dis­respect to stocks spe­cial­ists here but in the hier­archy of mar­kets, 
stocks are not con­sidered the most cereb­ral of dis­cip­lines. Given stock 
pick­ing hardly ever works, it is always much bet­ter to buy an index and sit 
on it for a few years.

Bond investors, however, gen­er­ally make more humble returns but con­sider 
them­selves (again, rightly or wrongly) to be on a higher intel­lec­tual plane, 
banging on about things like swap spreads and con­vex­ity.

So when Trump interfered with the majesty of free price dis­cov­ery in the 
stock mar­ket — for example, when Intel “reached a his­toric agree­ment” to 
sella $9bn stake to his admin­is­tra­tion — equity investors shrugged it off. 
The mar­ket was broadly still on the up, so who cared? But when the Treas­ury 
depart­ment embarked on a series of actions in the bond mar­ket seem­ingly 
designed to tamp down the coun­try’s bor­row­ing costs, it poked a beast — a 
beast with an intel­lec­tual superi­or­ity com­plex.

Slowly, and some­times subtly, but surely, the voices call­ing out the 
admin­is­tra­tion’s incon­sist­en­cies and irra­tion­al­it­ies are get­ting 
louder. In part this is because they now enjoy air cover from Stan 
Druck­en­miller — macro hedge fund titan and mentor to the likes of Bes­sent 
him­self and also to Fed­eral Reserve chair Kevin Warsh.

In an opin­ion piece in The Wall Street Journal, Druck­en­miller called out 
Bes­sent’s decision to upsize his buy­backs of long-term US gov­ern­ment bonds, 
plead­ing for mar­kets to be allowed to give bad news to poli­cy­makers. 
“Gov­ern­ments defend­ing prices against fun­da­ment­als always lose,” he 
wrote. “Let the bond mar­ket speak.” Oof.

On the news pages of the FT, too, other mar­ket par­ti­cipants have been more 
dir­ect in cri­ti­cism. Bes­sent’s thinly dis­guised efforts to fluff up bond 
prices are, some told my col­leagues, “whim­sical”, “self-defeat­ing” and a 
“band-aid on a bul­let hole” that “reduces over­all cred­ib­il­ity”. It is very 
hard to ima­gine the use of this kind of lan­guage this time last year, when 
the pres­id­ent was call­ing for banks to fire ana­lysts hedid not like.

Now, mar­kets types are spot­ting swipes every­where. For instance, bond nerds 
winced at a recent blog from Tobias Adrian, a senior mar­kets offi­cial at the 
IMF, on almost his final day in his pos­i­tion. The blog dis­cussed in the 
IMF’s typ­ic­ally dry dip­lo­matic terms the chal­lenges of cent­ral bank 
com­mu­nic­a­tion in an uncer­tain world. It did not men­tion Bes­sent or Warsh 
or the Fed. But it did men­tion mar­kets’ “essen­tial pri­cedis­cov­ery 
func­tion” and the need for poli­cy­makers to speak “with humil­ity”. This 
quickly did the rounds in bond-mar­ket circles, annot­ated with reac­tions like 
“ouch”.

Was the Adrian blog cri­ti­cism of the Fed or of the Treas­ury depart­ment? 
Abso­lutely not. It is a thought­ful assess­ment of global chal­lenges to 
poli­cy­makers gen­er­ally. But some bond investors took it as 
cor­rob­or­a­tion of their unease at the admin­is­tra­tion’s garbled mes­sages 
and tinker­ing in debt mar­kets.

When politi­cians in, say, France or the UK, get into a tangle with mar­kets, 
fin­an­cial mar­ket ana­lysts crack their knuckles and give the politi­cians 
hell — a healthy back-and-forth that helps politi­cians and voters to 
under­stand tradeoffs. We are not quite at that point of bru­tal hon­esty with 
the US yet.

But for whatever reason — whether ana­lysts can sense blood in the water or 
they are learn­ing to live with the risk of intim­id­a­tion — they are fil­ing 
just a slightly sharper point on their ana­lysis.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#43302): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/43302
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/120796980/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to