43 Comments
User's avatar
John Watkins's avatar

Sam, fantastic content. I will definitely be in this for the long haul. I am an old retired CPA/Economist/ long-term investor and you just gave us one of the most complete summaries of our current situation that I have ever read. I follow a number of brilliant people and YOU are now one of them. Thank you and I look forward to seeing more of your work

AlwaysLostInArizona's avatar

As a grey beard to another, we’ll have to see if Sam includes matters of risk tolerance in his future discussions. Besides the cash risk problem of course.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Thank you John. Appreciate the kind words!

Lucas Allen | Cnonsensus's avatar

The part that resonates is not the usual “buy hard assets” conclusion, but the idea that the benchmark itself may be wrong.

If the unit of account is being steadily diluted, then nominal returns can create a false sense of progress. A portfolio can look successful in statement terms while failing in purchasing-power terms. That makes the debasement argument less about doom and more about measurement.

The multipolar fracture point adds another layer. If the old system was built around one reserve currency, one dominant security provider, and globally optimized supply chains, then a world of duplicated rails, regional blocs, reserve diversification, and strategic stockpiling is structurally more expensive. That cost has to show up somewhere.

The strongest caveat is timing. The secular theme can be right while the asset expression is wrong for long stretches. Gold, Bitcoin, commodities, defense, and infrastructure can all fit the story, but liquidity, rates, positioning, and valuation still decide when the trade actually works.

The key question is whether AI productivity becomes powerful enough to offset the debt and demographic drag. If not, the debasement/fracture framework becomes much harder to dismiss.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Yes 100% the debasement argument is about measurement.

it's like you got this massive conveyor belt going towards you and you got to get to the other side. If you're not moving faster than the conveyer belt, you're at best running on a treadmill, at worst falling off it.

Pallavi Arora's avatar

Very interesting read. Would love to know what you consider essential reading to dig deeper into these aforementioned issues.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

You just gave me an idea. I'll compile a list, and I will shamelessly plug in my upcoming book (I'm hoping September).

Do you want an early reader copy?

Jamie Morgan's avatar

Excellent article and looks promising for an actionable investment strategy. Not sure if I am alone in this but I will be looking for a few things to see if it is worth it for me as a potential very amateur retail investor who is familiar with this line of thinking.

What scale of investment would be worth actioning (Given I am a business owner with debt to pay off but a need to diversify)

What to look out for when investing from any particular country/currency (Australia in my case).

Will look forward to reading the free stuff and see where it goes.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

I mean from any scale people should be working towards the goal of proofing themselves from the upcoming regime.

But the basic idea is : generate a surplus, invest it. If the surplus is too small, that's the first thing to fix, not the investment rationale.

A $199 subscription at $20K is 1% per annum, and you can pay an awful lot of shit managers 1% for their services.

So I'd say the bar is pretty low.

Kirk’s Growth Stocks's avatar

Sam, I worry there is a catalyst for this to be massively understated. Not a what, but a who.

“You can default: simply refuse to pay. For the issuer of the world’s reserve currency, that isn’t a viable solution. The Treasury bond is the foundation under global trade, banking, and pensions. Choosing to default would be catapulting the US away from the global reserve currency and seriously undermine its position in the global world order. It isn’t happening because unlike Lehman Brothers, Uncle Sam has an ace up his sleeve: Debasement.”

One can hope we do not default, however, President Trump has openly floated this idea. Would Treasury Secretary Bessent cleverly navigate something akin to a default if asked? Or, would he rather support a 25th Amendment push? The Administration is already trying to perpetually roll debt into short durations, hence the fascination with artificially low Fed Funds rate.

If Trump tries a “default, but not really default” trickery, it’ll take the market minutes to panic sell. That reaction to another mercurial maniacal grift inspired Presidential move could throw us into a global depression. At that point, the wealth effect is gone, there is deep austerity and then, as the crisis spirals, we get the most inflationary currency debasements across the globe. We need to avoid thinking in lines or curves, but rather, cliffs.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Well fuck me Kirk, I was having a nice little sunday stroll along the boardwalk with my wife when I read your comment. Way to ruin the mood! lol.

More seriously, I think that the binding constraints on Trump are such that while he might talk about this it cannot be attempted.

I mean c'mon. He would TACO the second his beloved indices would falter at the hint of this.

Kirk’s Growth Stocks's avatar

but I bet there's someone close to him that could trade on the threat, un-threat, re-threat of default. Tacos are delicious.

Al_not_AI's avatar

This is great - thanks for contributing valuable thoughts to a wider audience

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Thanks for the kind words. have a great day.

Sam

Aldaron's avatar

Great read Sam, looking forward to future posts.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Thanks for the kind words.

Bill D's avatar

The dollar is a medium of exchange, not a store of wealth.

John Watkins's avatar

He is clearly a bright guy, I am hopeful. I'm in Tucson...Love AZ.

Debbie Resnick's avatar

Most people reject the idea of raising taxes. But what if we think outside the box. The tax base as it exists today primarily taxes wages and earnings generated in the Real Economy (roughly represented by GPP which is about $30 Trillion) So we extract about $5 Trillion annually from the Real Economy - about one sixth. But there is another Economy most people do not pay much attention to - the Monetary Economy, which is the financial layer. The massive monetary flows settled at, for example DTCC and CLS, total in the neighborhood of $5 Quadrillion in flows per year. A .1% (10 basis point) levy on those flows would net $5 Trillion - almost exactly the tax revenue that is collected currently. Maybe there are fundamental systems changes like this that would allow us to pay down debt, shift some of the tax burden off workers and provide new fiscal capacity to invest in American renewal

Jonesy's avatar

Thx! How will the service differ from the seeking alpha ?

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Seeking Alpha is US centric (although we do cover some non-US) dividend investing.

This is a global capital gains / resilience approach with the macro themes presented here.

Alan's avatar

What are the “few outlier currencies” ?

Sam Kovacs's avatar

If the measure is increase in M2 minus increase in real GDP (whihc I think should be the measure)

Swiss Franc is obvious pick.

Israeli Shekel been good since the 90s.

Singapore dollar since the 90s.

Alan's avatar

Thank you.

Rich Shipley's avatar

On austerity you said “At the scale required, that means cutting pensions, healthcare, and benefits that tens of millions of voters depend on.” Why is it always the little guy that gets the haircut? Why the hell can’t we reign in the bloated spending on our military? And how about cutting loopholes and taxing the hell out of billionaires?

Alan's avatar

I’d say the article revolves around what one can do for oneself. Your comment requires governments to act and act together. Taxing the billionaires won’t happen unless all governments co ordinate accordingly, and the first step as I see it is to abolish all offshore tax centres.

Rich Shipley's avatar

Still, as the article clearly states, the little guy is the one who gets a financial haircut. Why is that always the first assumption? Why do we always go there first? Cutting U.S. military spending would go further in affecting the deficit.

larry callahan's avatar

great chart of inflation- how difficult would it be to find out the increases in auto and homeowners insurance as well as property taxes and sales taxes?

Nathaniel Parker's avatar

outstanding work Sam! Glad I found you. doesn't read like AI.... Gundlach seems to think default or some type of yield curve control is more likely and perhaps should not be too quickly dismissed....

Looking forward to your book. - Maybe send an advanced copy to yearly subscribers? do you plan to host a chat for subscribers? Thanks

Sam Kovacs's avatar

Thanks. I sure hope it doesn't read like AI.

Everyone uses AI for research and data collection, myself included, but I enjoy writing my own reports.

Sam Kovacs's avatar

You're most welcome