The world does not owe Trump's America a living
The US has a structural budget deficit of 7pc of GDP at the top of the cycle, at a time of full employment. This level implies a double-digit blow-out and a compound debt trap in the next recession.
'We're convinced that we're immortals, and we can just do whatever we want,' says Harvard professor Ken Rogoff, co-author of This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly.
He says a sudden and sustained rise in real interest rates – not nominal rates – is what brings down hedonist states through history, usually after a long era of bewitchingly cheap capital.
It is the retribution tale of the mid-2020s. The Federal Reserve's measure of 10-year real rates was pinned to the floor over the post-Lehman decade. It was negative five years ago.
It has been closer to 2pc since Covid violently reset the rules of the international financial system. This jump has played particular havoc with the US debt trajectory.
The Bank of America has pencilled in deficits of $2 trillion (£1.5 trillion) this fiscal year, $2.2 trillion in 2026, and $2.3 trillion in 2027, even if all goes well. Money raised from tariffs – $300bn at best, assuming there is no retaliation or offsetting damage – does not even slow the fiscal degradation.
These are gargantuan demands on global capital markets. The US treasury must refinance $7 trillion of debt this year alone. 'How did you go bankrupt?' goes the immortal line from Ernest Hemingway: 'Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.'
So what do Republicans on the House ways and means committee do at this treacherous moment? They feast on a 'big beautiful bill' that adds a putative $3.8 trillion to the debt mountain, but is in reality worse, once you adjust for sunset clauses and evasive gimmicks.
'The 10-year cost of the tax cuts is likely over $5 trillion,' said Matthew Aks, from Evercore ISI.
The American people cannot fund such debt issuance. Fed data shows that the net national savings rate has dropped from an average of 11pc of GDP in post-war era, to 7pc in the late 20th century, to 3pc over the 2010s, to 0.6pc today with the final breathtaking adventurism of Joe Biden and Donald Trump, the Tweedledum and Tweedledee of fiscal insouciance.
It is this excess consumption that sucks in imports and causes America's chronic trade deficits. Trump feigns not to understand. There is more advantage in railing at foreigners, or so he thinks.
Nothing is being done about the real cause of America's ruin: middle-class welfare. Why is the US still allowing a tax deduction on mortgages up to $750,000? The IMF says the projected long-term rise in spending on federal health schemes (mostly Medicare) and pensions is higher than for any other developed economy as a share of GDP.
Elon Musk's Doge cuts are mostly an ideological purge masquerading as an efficiency drive. Trump has his own Christmas tree of crowd-pleasers: no taxes on tips and overtime; a fresh bung for pensioners; and a tax deduction (another one) on car loans.
This has the makings of a Liz Truss episode, without the quick rectification made possible by Tory ruthlessness and Britain's parliamentary system.
Hedge funds are honing in on stress emerging in the US Treasury market. For aficionados, the 10-year 'break-even rate' spiked to 2.37pc on Wednesday. The 5y/5y forward swaps (don't ask) are flashing amber warnings. Levels are nearing no-go lines set by Scott Bessent, Trump's treasury secretary.
He has the 'Bessent Bond Put' up his sleeve. He can nudge banks into buying more treasury debt by raising the 'supplemental leverage ratio' in collusion with Fed, now that Trump has installed his acolyte as Fed vice-chairman in charge of supervision.
He can rotate debt issuance to short-term bills, but that is playing with fire. Average debt maturity is already down to 5.9 years, compared to 14.4 years for the UK. The lower the maturity, the faster the feed-through into debt dynamics. Bessent attacked Janet Yellen for doing exactly that.
Global bond vigilantes are not stupid. They can see that Trump is trying to bully the Fed's Jerome Powell into slashing rates and that he will stack the Fed board over time. He will pressure the institution to soak up the debt, and inflation be damned.
The clear risk is a stealth default via debasement, which the Fed already did once to pay for Covid and Bidenomics, tolerated only because it was (arguably) an innocent monetary error rather than deliberate theft.
Prof Rogoff says that episode was an amuse bouche. He fears inflation could reach 20pc to 25pc in the next wave, which may not be far away. No bondholder waits for that. Once in motion it becomes self-fulfilling.
The vigilantes also know that Stephen Miran, head of the White House economic council, has talked of an outright default by means of a forced debt swap or a 'fee' on foreign holders of US treasuries, on the alleged grounds that America's foes have been buying US debt to suppress their currencies and snatch export share.
They have done no such thing for over a decade but never mind. The point is that this White House is already eyeing expropriation of your pension pot and mine.
An administration that has already shown its enthusiasm for smashing the global furniture on everything else – trade, alliances, borders, and the climate – would not hesitate to execute the Miran plan once it needs money.
Even before the beautiful Maga bill, Scope Ratings warned that US federal debt would reach 133pc of GDP by 2030, up from 99pc before Trump 1.0. It could rocket quickly from there to 150pc if interest rates misbehave.
Japan has muddled through with a higher debt ratio, but that tells America nothing. The Japanese people are the world's biggest external creditors. They have a net international investment position (NIIP) near 90pc of GDP.
The US is the world's biggest external debtor by far, with an NIIP of minus 90pc of GDP and net liabilities of $26 trillion.
Larry Summers, the former US treasury secretary, told the Bulwark that markets are no longer treating America as a 'bastion' economy. There are days when the dollar falls hard even though US bond yields are rising. Investors are buying gold instead of US treasuries as a safe haven. 'When that happens, it's a sign that people have stopped trusting you,' he said.
Summers compared the picture to Europe in 1914. The region had become brittle. Crises that had been contained a decade earlier were becoming harder to control. The margin of safety was wafer-thin.
'We've started making huge-scale errors in terms of our attitude towards the rest of the world ... Our potential hostility to investors in our currency,' he said.
Trump is behaving as if he is master of events, and nobody else has agency. Did he not calculate the risk that Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin would call his bluff, and leave him looking like a floundering amateur?
Does he think that foreign investors will wait to be robbed? He requires a constant inflow of fresh global capital to refinance America's $36 trillion debt and to fund new debt issuance.
What happens if inflows dry up? What happens after that if foreigners start to withdraw their $14.2 trillion holdings of US debt securities, and $17 trillion of US equities?
Summers says the denouement could come faster than we think – 'front-loaded', in his words – and this could set off a self-feeding spiral as markets rush to deleverage. 'Right now, I think we are in a moment of very substantial risk,' he said.
If Trump wants the world to keep buying his debt, he might be advised to stop punching the world in the face.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
a minute ago
- Newsweek
Real Reason Behind Birth Rate Decline
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Countries all over the world are facing declining birth rates, sparking fears there will one day be more elderly people than working-age people to support them. For example, in the United States, the fertility rate (the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime) is now projected to average 1.6 births per woman over the next three decades, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest forecast released this year. That is below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman required to maintain a stable population without immigration. Financial struggles are often cited as the reason for people having fewer or no children, but recent research has focused on cultural changes. Newsweek has pulled together the main reasons birth rates are declining to build a detailed picture of the issue many governments are trying to tackle. The Real Reason Behind The Birth Rate Decline The Real Reason Behind The Birth Rate Decline Newsweek Illustration/Canva/Getty Financial Worries The 2008 financial crisis and its impact on housing, inflation and pay is generally cited a major contributor to people's decisions to delay having children, to have fewer children or not to have them at all. In June, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) found that 39 percent of the 14,000 people across the 14 countries it surveyed said financial limitations prevented them from having their desired family size. "Young people overwhelmingly report worries and uncertainty about their futures. Many expect to experience worse outcomes than their parents did," the report said. "Their concerns about climate change, economic instability and rising global conflicts will be reflected in the choices they make about raising families." U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has taken steps to try to tackle the concerns, including the White House exploring giving women a "baby bonus" of $5,000, according to an April report in The New York Times. The country could also make childbirth free for privately insured families, with the bipartisan Supporting Healthy Moms and Babies Act, which would designate maternity care as an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act, which was introduced in the Senate in May. Family Policies Policies around child care and parental leave come up just as often as financial struggles—and the two are often connected. "Countries that have sustained or moderately increased birth rates—like France or the Nordic nations—have done so by investing in affordable child care, paid parental leave, gender-equal workplaces and housing support," said Poonam Muttreja, executive director of the Population Foundation of India. "These create an enabling environment where people feel secure in having children," she told Newsweek. "Fertility decisions are shaped by long-term confidence, not one-off cash handouts." Similarly, Theodore Cosco, a research fellow at The Oxford Institute of Population Ageing, told Newsweek that "addressing declining birth rates would require comprehensive support mechanisms, such as affordable child care, paid parental leave, health care access and economic stability." Gender Inequality Another linked aspect to this is gender inequality—a cause often stressed by Muttreja. While speaking about the situation in India, where the fertility rate is 1.9, according to World Bank data, she called gender inequality a "critical challenge." "No country has become economically advanced without a substantial participation from women in the economy," she previously told Newsweek. "The burden of caregiving, whether for children or elderly family members, falls disproportionately on women, and policies must enable women to balance work and caregiving effectively." Tomas Sobotka, deputy director of the Vienna Institute of Demography, told Newsweek: "Recent research emphasizes that fertility tends to be higher where gender equality is stronger, and where institutional support helps reduce the cost and complexity of raising children." He cited France and Sweden as examples. While their fertility rates have still plummeted in the past decade (1.66 and 1.45, respectively, according to World Bank data), they are higher than the European Union (1.38). This is "partly thanks to generous family policies with affordable child care, well-paid parental leaves and generous financial benefits to families," he said. "These, together with high levels of gender equality, make it easier especially for the better educated women and couples to achieve the number of children they planned." Cultural Shifts Another major, albeit more difficult to measure, contributor is a shift in cultural values. A new study conducted by academics affiliated with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) published last month found that "short-term changes in income or prices cannot explain the widespread decline" in fertility but rather there has been a "broad reordering of adult priorities with parenthood occupying a diminished role." Authors Melissa Schettini Kearney, an economist from the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, and Phillip B. Levine, an economist from Wellesley College in Massachusetts, found there have been "changes in how much value people place on different life choices, generally reflecting a greater emphasis on personal fulfillment and career." These include the fact that most women in high-income countries now work, while it was previously "reasonable to consider having children as a widespread priority for women." But they do not attribute this to "whether women work at all after they are married or have had their first child" but rather "the tension between a lifetime career and the way motherhood interrupts or alters that lifetime career progression." Kearney and Levine also spoke about changes in preferences in general, citing several surveys they reviewed that showed that more people say having a career they enjoy and close friends is extremely or very important than those who say the same about having children. They also mentioned changes in parenting expectations, with it becoming "more resource- and time-intensive" than before, a reduction in marriages, access to effective contraception, abortion policies, fertility and infertility treatments. These reasons became clear when Newsweek looked at Norway, which is considered a global leader in parental leave and child care policies, with the United Nations International Children's Fund (UNICEF) ranking it among the top countries for family-friendly policies. Norway offers parents 12 months of shared paid leave for birth and an additional year each afterward. It also made kindergarten (similar to a U.S. day care) a statutory right for all children age 1 or older in 2008. Yet, Norway's fertility rate has dropped drastically from 1.98 in 2009 to 1.44 in 2024, according to official figures. The rate for 2023 (1.40) was the lowest recorded fertility rate in the country. Newsweek spoke with several local experts about Norway and all cited recent cultural changes, including lower rates of couple formation for those in their 20s, young adults being more likely to live alone and the demands of modern parenting. What Is The Solution? "The short answer is that there are no easy fixes," Kearney and Levine said in their report. "There is no single policy lever that will reliably boost fertility." Kearney and Levine's main call to action is to "widen our lens" when discussing fertility. "There is still so much more we need to know before we can provide something resembling a definitive answer," they said. "Policies like parental leave, child care subsidies, baby bonuses, etc., are much easier to implement and have the potential to affect fertility more rapidly, if they were effective," Levine told Newsweek. "Changing the social conditions that encourage family formation is more difficult and takes longer to accomplish.


NBC News
a minute ago
- NBC News
U.S. envoy Witkoff's visit to Gaza criticized as a publicity stunt
Weeks of rising anger over Palestinians starving due to Israel 's offensive and aid restrictions had reached all the way to the White House, with President Donald Trump lamenting the sight of emaciated children on the brink of starvation. On Friday, his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, entered Gaza in a rare visit by high-level U.S. officials to the besieged enclave. Accompanied by the Israeli military, Witkoff visited an aid distribution site in southern Gaza run by the U.S. and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, where hundreds of Palestinians waited desperately behind barbed wire for food. 'Incredible feat!' Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, who accompanied Witkoff, said in a post on X on Friday, after touring GHF's operations and speaking to "folks on the ground." Palestinians and others inside Gaza have criticized the visit as a public relations stunt for GHF, whose aid distribution process has been marked by chaos, looting and deadly shootings, often by Israeli soldiers, that have killed hundreds of hungry Palestinians seeking aid. 'It was a PR stunt, a controlled visit supervised and dictated by the Israeli military,' Ellie Burgos, an American critical care nurse volunteering at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, told the NBC News crew. 'What they saw was not the reality.' Burgos had earlier called for Witkoff to visit Gaza, urging him to witness the conditions on the ground for himself, but felt his limited tour did little to change the situation on the ground. 'Food is still incredibly difficult to find, people are still being shot at aid distribution sites, and violence continues,' she said. On the day of the visit, at least 92 people were killed on Friday across Gaza, including 51 people who were seeking aid, Dr. Mohammed Saqr, Director of Nursing at Nasser Hospital, told NBC News. Mohamed Saddak, 47, who was hoping to collect food for his family of nine, told a NBC News' crew on the ground that tanks had advanced toward him and others as they sought to receive our aid. 'They are constantly shooting at us,' he said, 'firing from tanks, and sometimes by drones.' The IDF did not immediately respond to a request for comment from NBC News on the shootings at aid sites following Witkoff's visit. Israeli officials continued to deny claims of widespread hunger inside Gaza, though in a sign of shifting discourse, top U.S. officials have begun to acknowledge the crisis. 'You've got little kids who are clearly starving to death,' Vice President JD Vance told reporters on Monday. In a post on X, Witkoff said the visit's purpose was to give Trump a "clear understanding of the humanitarian situation and help craft a plan to deliver food and medical aid to the people of Gaza." After Gaza, Witkoff on Saturday visited Hostages Square in Tel Aviv, where families of Israeli hostages held captive by Hamas were demanding that the Israeli government secure a deal to release the remaining hostages. Fifty hostages remain in Gaza, about 20 of whom are believed to be alive. According to a statement by the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, Witkoff told them, 'We will get your children home and hold Hamas responsible for any bad acts on their part.' He added, 'We will do what's right for the Gazan people.' The protests came after a video of an Israeli hostage in Gaza, Rom Braslavski, was released by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad on Thursday. A day later, Hamas released a video of another Israeli hostage, Evyatar David, showing him alive but frail. It is unclear when the videos were filmed. 'We cannot endure even one more minute without bringing him home,' Braslavski's cousin Adam Hajaj said in a statement. 'This video tore my family apart!' Huckabee, meanwhile, hailed GHF's distribution of over a million meals a day, which at Gaza's population of roughly 2 million people, averages to half a meal per person per day. GHF stepped in to distribute food in the weeks after Israel lifted its nearly three-month total blockade on all food and supplies entering the enclave. But the aid GHF distributed, alongside some limited quantities by other international organizations, fell far short of the needs of the population. On Sunday, Israel said it was expanding aid access into Gaza after outrage mounted over the widespread starvation and surging deaths from malnutrition. GHF runs four aid sites in Gaza and even though it claims independence from any government, it runs the sites inside Israel's militarized zone with the backing of the Israeli military. Witnesses and aid agencies have decried the aid delivery process, which, according to the U.N., has resulted in deaths of nearly 1,400 people while collecting aid, including 859 in the vicinity of the GHF sites. The Israeli military and the GHF have acknowledged that some shots have been fired but said only as warnings. 'US-backed Israeli forces and private contractors have put in place a flawed, militarized aid distribution system that has turned aid distributions into regular bloodbaths,' New York-based Human Rights Watch said Friday. Burgos's colleague, Dr. Tom Adamekiewicz, urged the diplomats to see "what's happening to the children, the families, to these young boys and women and men that are being basically shot at like rabbits."


Atlantic
a minute ago
- Atlantic
Republicans Might Regret Putting Emil Bove on the Bench
Donald Trump got his man. On Tuesday, the Senate voted to confirm Emil Bove, the president's former criminal-defense lawyer, to a lifetime appointment as a federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. During his brief tenure as a top Justice Department official, Bove behaved like someone who still believed that the president was his client: directing political purges, pushing out employees who refused to carry out unethical orders, and allegedly urging subordinates to defy court rulings that constrained Trump's agenda. But Trump and his allies might come to regret appointing such a transparent partisan to the federal bench. A few weeks ago, a group of former Justice Department lawyers, including me, asked to meet with Republican senators to discuss the Bove nomination. We all had worked on prosecutions related to January 6; several members of the group were among the roughly two dozen lawyers whom Bove had fired for precisely that reason. Our argument was that even Republican senators eager to push the judiciary to the right should, out of their own self-interest, vote against confirming Bove. Unfortunately, staff for just one senator, Chuck Grassley, agreed to meet with us. Most offices never even responded. Because they were unwilling to hear us in private, I will make our argument in public. Quinta Jurecic: Emil Bove is a sign of the times Since he first took office, in 2017, Trump has maintained the support of Senate Republicans in part through a simple bargain: They put up with his obvious unfitness for office, and in exchange, he appoints reliably conservative judges to the federal courts. But by appointing Bove—whose only apparent loyalty is to his own ambition, not to any particular legal philosophy—the GOP might have limited its own ability to appoint judges in the future. This is because the president typically gets to appoint new judges only when old ones die, retire, or move into the quasi-retirement position of 'senior status.' And some judges, even conservative ones who would otherwise be happy to let a Republican president pick their replacement, are likely to delay their retirement rather than hand Trump the opportunity to make more Bove-style appointments. The evidence suggests that this is already happening. Many federal judges time their retirement based on which party is in power: Democrat-appointed judges are likelier to retire when a Democrat is president, Republican-appointed judges when a Republican is. So far through Trump's second term, however, conservative judges aren't retiring at the pace they typically do. An analysis by Bloomberg Law found that 26 judicial seats opened up from the beginning of the year through the first five months of Trump's first term, as did 57 judicial seats during the same period of Joe Biden's presidency. By contrast, through June 1 of his second term, Trump gained just 16 vacancies to fill. Ursula Ungaro, a retired judge appointed by George W. Bush, told Bloomberg Law that she'd heard a 'hint or two' that her former peers 'would stay beyond their eligibility for senior status to see what happens toward the end of the Trump administration.' From the October 2024 issue: The judges who serve at Trump's pleasure Even before Bove's appointment, then, judges seem to have been worried about the type of person Trump would appoint to replace them. During Trump's first term, they had likely been assuaged by the fact that the president relied on leaders of the conservative legal movement, especially the Federalist Society's Leonard Leo, to help make his judicial picks. No longer. Frustrated that judges he appointed have occasionally ruled against his administration, Trump now calls Leo a 'real 'sleazebag'' who 'probably hates America.' The president evidently feels free to pick his own judges, and he is picking people like Bove. Bove is not the kind of lawyer that a traditionally conservative judge would want to be replaced by. He oversaw a purge of January 6 prosecutors despite the fact that he had once eagerly worked on January 6 cases himself. He pushed out career lawyers who refused to go along with an obviously unethical order to drop the corruption prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams. And, according to two whistleblowers, he urged government lawyers to ignore a federal court order halting deportation flights. Bove allegedly told subordinates that they would need to consider telling judges 'fuck you' if courts ordered the government to stop. As a practicing lawyer and former prosecutor, I find this astonishing. I have never heard a colleague or opposing counsel propose to ignore a court order; it runs counter to our entire profession. For judges who care about the rule of law, even very conservative ones, Bove's conduct offers a reason to reconsider retirement. Senate Republicans should keep that in mind the next time Trump nominates someone like him to the federal bench.