$SPY $Q 🦇

The New Financial Paradigm: AI Growth, “Ghost Inflation,” and Controlled Debt Erosion
Executive Summary
The financial system is passing through a historic turning point in which high public debt and a technological productivity revolution are occurring at the same time. The main challenge facing the United States is no longer simply bringing inflation back down to 2%. The real issue is how to carry a public debt burden approaching $40 trillion without destabilizing the economy or the political system.
This problem cannot be solved through austerity alone. Aggressive tax increases and spending cuts could suppress growth and make the debt to GDP ratio even worse. Debt restructuring is also unrealistic because of the dollar’s reserve currency status. That leaves two more practical tools:
• Accelerating economic growth through AI and capital investment
• Keeping nominal interest rates below nominal growth and, during certain periods, below inflation in order to erode the real value of the debt
If these two mechanisms can operate together, the United States may be able to reduce its debt to GDP ratio without reducing the nominal amount of debt. The main macroeconomic strategy of the coming period may be less about repaying the debt and more about growing the economy faster than the debt itself.
This process may be accompanied by a changing emphasis in inflation measurement, stablecoins, and asset tokenization. The result may not be traditional hyperinflation, but rather a regime I call ghost inflation, in which consumer inflation remains relatively controlled while financial assets appreciate much more rapidly.
However, the transition into this regime will not be linear. U.S.-Iran tensions and energy risks surrounding the Strait of Hormuz could restrict the Fed’s room to maneuver and delay the asset inflation process. For this reason, the next market may look less like a traditional bull market and more like a selective upward regime driven by strong but narrow leadership.
1. Solving the Debt Problem: Growing the Economy Faster Than the Debt
The U.S. fiscal problem is not only the nominal size of the debt. The real risk is that debt grows faster than the economy while interest expenses continue to consume a larger share of the federal budget.
The CBO projects a federal budget deficit of approximately $1.9 trillion for fiscal year 2026. Federal debt held by the public is expected to rise from 101% of GDP in 2026 to 120% by 2036. Over the same period, rising net interest expenses are becoming one of the main sources of fiscal imbalance.
The nominal amount of debt does not have to decline for the debt to GDP ratio to fall. If nominal GDP grows faster than the debt stock, the ratio naturally declines. Therefore, in my view, the ideal policy combination for the United States is:
High real growth + controlled inflation + borrowing costs kept below nominal growth
The AI revolution represents the real growth side of this equation. If AI investment can increase productivity, corporate profits, wages, and tax revenue, the economy’s productive capacity will expand. Controlled inflation, meanwhile, increases nominal GDP and allows the denominator of the debt ratio to grow more quickly.
For this model to succeed, the average growth rate of the nominal economy must exceed the average financing cost of federal debt. In other words, instead of repaying the debt in the traditional sense, the United States will try to shrink its burden through time, growth, and inflation.
2. The Value of the Dollar and the Real Erosion of Debt
An important technical distinction needs to be made here. DXY is not the debt itself. DXY is an index that measures the value of the dollar against the euro, yen, pound, and other major currencies. U.S. public debt, on the other hand, consists of nominal liabilities denominated in dollars.
Therefore, a decline in DXY does not directly reduce the nominal amount of U.S. debt. However, controlled dollar weakness can reduce the real economic burden of the debt through several channels:
• It can increase import prices and nominal inflation
• It can support the competitiveness of U.S. exporters
• It can increase corporate revenue and nominal tax collections
• It can reduce the real purchasing power of fixed rate dollar claims
• It can help nominal GDP grow faster
The strategic goal is not an uncontrolled collapse in the dollar. Since the dollar is a fiat currency, such an outcome is not realistically necessary anyway. Excessive dollar weakness would cause foreign investors to demand higher yields, push bond yields higher, and increase debt servicing costs again. Therefore, what the system needs is neither an extremely strong dollar nor a collapsing dollar, but a dollar that maintains global demand while its real purchasing power gradually erodes over time.
This creates a striking paradox. While the United States gradually reduces the real value of the dollar, it may simultaneously try to expand the dollar’s global use through stablecoins and tokenized financial assets.
Holding stablecoin reserves in short term U.S. Treasuries could create a new and structural source of demand for Treasury bills. Initiatives such as Open USD may expand the dollar’s circulation within digital payment systems, while tokenization efforts by the NYSE and Nasdaq could make American assets more accessible to global investors.
Therefore, the goal of the new system may not be to reduce the use of the dollar, but to expand the dollar system while gradually reducing the real burden of each dollar over time.
3. The Warsh Era and the Monetary Policy Regime Shift
The first FOMC meeting under Kevin Warsh provided early signals of this new policy approach. At its June 17 meeting, the Fed kept the policy rate unchanged within the 3.50%-3.75% range. However, the real significance of the decision was not the interest rate itself, but the change in communication.
The Committee removed the easing bias from its statement that had previously implied the next move could be a rate cut. I had mentioned on Patreon and X Subscriptions that the Fed could do this. The main message was the bond vigilantes. The Fed shifted its policy into a more neutral, data dependent, and meeting by meeting framework. It also stated that, when necessary, short term Treasury securities could be purchased to maintain enough reserves within the banking system.
At first glance, this approach may appear contradictory. The Fed is maintaining a hawkish interest rate stance while supporting system liquidity through short term Treasury purchases. However, this is exactly where the core of the new regime lies. The Fed may keep the policy rate elevated to preserve inflation credibility while preventing liquidity shortages from disrupting market functioning.
This creates a model that differs from traditional monetary easing:
• Interest rates are not reduced rapidly
• The composition of the Fed’s balance sheet is changed
• Long term and mortgage linked assets are reduced
• Reserve sufficiency is maintained through short term Treasury bills
• A less visible liquidity floor is maintained within the financial system
This structure is consistent with financial repression. The goal is not to reduce interest rates to zero, but to keep the average borrowing cost below nominal economic growth.
4. “Ghost Inflation”: Which Inflation Measure Will Guide Monetary Policy?
The most controversial aspect of the new regime is which inflation measure the Fed will emphasize in its policy communication.
As of May 2026, headline PCE stands at 4.1%, Core PCE excluding food and energy is 3.4%, and the Dallas Fed Trimmed Mean PCE is 2.4%. The Trimmed Mean measure attempts to capture the underlying inflation trend by excluding 24% of the weight from the lower end of the price distribution and 31% from the upper end.
Trimmed Mean PCE is not a new indicator and has not replaced the Fed’s official inflation target. The Fed’s long term target remains 2% based on headline PCE. However, greater use of alternative measures such as Trimmed Mean in policy communication could support the argument that the underlying inflation trend remains under control despite elevated headline inflation caused by energy prices.
This approach could provide the Fed with greater policy flexibility. However, it also creates a serious credibility risk. While consumers experience higher inflation through gasoline, food, housing, and insurance costs, the Fed emphasizing a lower inflation measure could widen the gap between official inflation and experienced inflation.
This divergence lies at the center of my ghost inflation concept. Inflation may appear more manageable statistically while purchasing power continues to erode and financial assets continue to appreciate in nominal terms.
5. The Battle Between AI Growth and US10Y Pressure
The main tension in the U.S. equity market is being shaped by two powerful forces:
AI growth is the main positive factor keeping the market supported.
The energy and inflation shock is the main negative factor preventing the rally from broadening across the market.
A stock’s price is simply the combination of future earnings and the multiple the market is willing to assign to those earnings:
Stock price = Future earnings per share × Valuation multiple
AI increases future revenue, productivity, and earnings per share. That is the positive effect. In contrast, elevated 10 year Treasury yields and inflation risk reduce the multiple the market is willing to assign to the same earnings.
This is why a company can report results above expectations and still see its stock decline. The market may effectively be saying, “Your earnings are good, but I am now willing to assign a lower valuation multiple to those earnings.”
A rise in US10Y does not automatically mean the equity market will collapse. The source of the increase in yields is what matters.
If bond yields rise because of stronger productivity, higher real growth, and increasing investment demand, growth in corporate earnings may offset the valuation pressure. This would be a growth driven increase in yields.
However, if yields rise because of an energy shock, persistent inflation, fiscal deficits, or bond investors demanding a higher risk premium, the same move becomes much more negative for the market. In that case, rising yields represent inflation driven financial tightening rather than economic strength.
AI can save the index. However, investors can still lose money while the index rises if they are positioned in the wrong basket. The key question in the coming period is not whether the index will rise, but which companies will participate in that rise.
6. U.S.-Iran Tensions and the Decisive Role of Hormuz
U.S.-Iran tensions are no longer simply a geopolitical development. Through energy prices, inflation expectations, Fed policy, and bond yields, they have become a systemic variable determining the direction of global markets.
The transmission mechanism into the market is as follows:
Hormuz risk → higher oil and freight costs → higher headline inflation → reduced room for Fed rate cuts → upward pressure on US10Y and DXY → valuation multiple compression
For this reason, resolving the Hormuz issue is critical not only for the energy market, but also for the beginning of a broad based market rally.
Controlled Normalization
If oil loses its geopolitical risk premium and settles below $82, AI driven earnings growth would once again become the dominant factor. The Fed would not be forced into a more hawkish position, bond yields could stabilize, and market leadership could broaden from mega cap companies toward high quality SMid-cap stocks.
In this scenario, technology, AI infrastructure, semiconductors, industrial automation, electrification, and growth companies with strong cash flow could outperform.
Prolonged but Limited Conflict
In a scenario where oil remains elevated and volatile but the global supply system is not completely disrupted, controlled high interest rates and a selective bull market would continue.
The index may remain resilient, but internal market divergence would increase. Mega cap AI, defense, energy infrastructure, industrial companies, and high quality cash flow businesses could remain strong. Meanwhile, fintech, BNPL, unprofitable technology, highly leveraged small caps, and long duration growth stocks expected to generate profits far into the future would remain more vulnerable.
Closure of Hormuz and Regional War
A sustained move in oil above $100 could destabilize inflation expectations and prevent the Fed from cutting rates. If US10Y settles in the 4.60%-4.80% range, even strong corporate results may struggle to offset valuation compression.
In this scenario, DXY could strengthen because of geopolitical safe haven demand. As VIX and credit spreads rise, high beta stocks, weak balance sheets, and long duration growth companies could face the most severe pressure.
The Fed would then face a stagflation dilemma. Inflation would prevent rate cuts while deteriorating growth would require them. The first phase would be risk off for the market. However, if economic pressure deepens, the monetary and fiscal support introduced later could create the foundation for an even stronger wave of asset inflation.
7. Market Outlook: Controlled High Rates and a Selective Bull Market
We are currently in a controlled high rate and selective bull market environment.
In this scenario, inflation remains uncomfortable but does not move completely out of control. The Fed does not rush to cut rates. AI driven earnings growth continues to support the index. While the index remains strong or grinds higher, internal market divergence may continue to increase.
Groups that may outperform:
• Mega cap AI and semiconductor infrastructure
• Technology companies generating strong free cash flow
• Defense and cybersecurity
• Energy and electrical infrastructure
• Data centers, cooling, and energy management
• Industrial automation and strategic manufacturing
• High quality SMid-cap companies with strong balance sheets
Groups that may remain under pressure:
• Companies requiring constant financing
• AI stories with negative free cash flow
• Highly leveraged small cap companies
• Long duration growth stocks whose profitability is delayed far into the future
• Companies priced only around short squeeze expectations
Abundant liquidity can accelerate multiple expansion in strong companies, but it cannot permanently transform weak balance sheets into strong businesses.
8. Strategic Asset Allocation
During a ghost inflation regime, the goal of portfolio management should not simply be generating nominal returns. It should be preserving purchasing power while growing real wealth.
The portfolio approach should be built around the following main pillars:
Strategic Growth
Within secular themes such as AI, semiconductors, electrification, power grids, data centers, and defense, investors should focus on strong balance sheets, pricing power, and sustainable cash flow.
Precious metals can help preserve portfolio purchasing power against negative real interest rates and controlled dollar erosion.
Tactical Liquidity
Cash may lose real value over the long term, but it creates option value during market corrections. Therefore, it is not appropriate to keep the entire portfolio continuously exposed to risk. Enough liquidity should be maintained to rotate into high quality assets during sharp pullbacks.
DCA is an important tool in this regime, but it should not mean automatically buying every decline. Gradual purchases should be supported by balance sheet quality, technical bottom confirmation, institutional capital flows, and macroeconomic conditions.
Conclusion
The coming period may not be a traditional linear bull market. It may instead become a selective upward regime in which AI driven earnings growth keeps the index supported while elevated bond yields, the energy shock, and geopolitical uncertainty restrict market breadth. This may only change if tensions between the United States and Iran come to an end.
A lasting resolution of the Hormuz issue could bring oil and headline inflation lower, giving the Fed more room to act. Such a development would not represent only short term relief. It could mark the beginning of a new risk on cycle in which market leadership broadens toward high quality SMid-cap companies.
In contrast, if the energy shock becomes persistent, a growth driven rise in yields could turn into inflation driven tightening. In that environment, the index may not completely collapse, but investors positioned in the wrong basket could still suffer significant losses.
Over the long term, this is how I interpret the main U.S. strategy: increase productivity through AI, grow the nominal economy faster than the debt, expand the dollar’s global use while gradually reducing its real value, and reduce the purchasing power burden of the debt over time.
If managed correctly, this policy combination could create a long cycle of growth and asset inflation. If it moves out of control, it could turn into a valuation bubble reminiscent of the dot-com era and potentially even exceed it in nominal size.
Therefore, the correct strategy for the new era is neither surrendering to doomsday scenarios nor taking uncontrolled risk based on the expectation of future liquidity. The rational investment model I follow requires combining the macro regime, institutional capital flows, balance sheet quality, valuation, and technical confirmation within the same decision making process.
Because this market can generate wealth, but not for everyone. The issue is not simply whether the index rises. The issue is being positioned in the right basket.
Important note: None of this is investment advice. I am simply an economist, and you should not make investment decisions based on my views.
I continuously share this type of analysis on Patreon and X Subscriptions to explain the macroeconomic conditions we are currently experiencing. I will now also open a section called Maestro’s Take on MackAI and share these analyses there as well.