The U.S. economy shed 23,000 jobs in July. The forecasts were for a gain of 80,000. Some workers appeared despondent while investors were ebullient as the weaker data signaled less reason for the Fed to hike interest rates.

 

Employment figures for May and June were also revised lower, with a combined 103,000 job losses more than previously reported. Readers who have read my two-part columns on government data have been forewarned to take government numbers with a grain of salt.

 

It was a somewhat dismal report where the participation rate fell to 61.4 percent; it's the lowest since September 2021. The labor force participation rate measures the percentage of the civilian population age 16 and older that is either actively working or actively looking for work.

 

It is one of the best measures of the economy's labor supply. From the data, it appears clear that the labor pool is shrinking. In which case, employers must compete harder for workers, wages rise, and that can keep wage inflation elevated.

 

In any case, the 50+ percent expectations of an interest rate hike in September in the betting markets dropped immediately with the data release. Bond yields fell, along with the dollar, and guess what skyrocketed? Precious metals.

 

That's right, gold and silver are back from the dead! This week, gold rose 7.7  percent while silver notched an 11.6 percentgain. For the most part, gold has been trading in a range for months. As oil prices gained, gold lost value. Silver fared even worse. Add in the rise in interest rates and the dollar (both kryptonite for precious metals), and it was close to a perfect storm for that asset class.

 

Now we seem to be reversing those trends, at least in the short-term. The Fed is on hold or appears to be for now, given that the last two Consumer Price Index CPI) reports have been benign. A third CPI report next Wednesday, August 12th, looks to be weaker as well. Weaker inflation numbers and now weaker job data put rate hikes on hold and may even push yields and the dollar even lower.

 

In addition, Mainland China is hoping to establish Hong Kong as a major trading market for gold among other metals. Remember, gold is entirely outside the global credit system. It cannot be frozen, sanctioned, or inflated away by another government's choices. Russia knew that and amassed its own holdings before it invaded Ukraine.

 

The People's Bank of China has been building up physical gold inventories in Hong Kong over the past several months after launching its Precious Metals Central Clearing Company. In June, they added 14.93 tons of gold. That's their single largest purchase since 2023.

 

I suspect this is adding upward pressure to the price of precious metals. They have slowly been moving their own substantial gold holdings (2,346 tons) from where it is kept in the London Metals Exchange back home to support their efforts in Hong Kong. Bottom line, Beijing is stocking the exchange it built rather than deepening the one its geopolitical rivals dominate.

 

My fears that August would turn out to be a month to be cautious seem ill-advised as we close out the first week. My caution has and will continue to be dependent on the conflict in the Middle East. In the meantime, the rotation back into technology continues. However, it is not at the expense of other areas.

 

The three major averages had healthy gains to finish the week, with the NASDAQ the winner, up 4.90 percent. The S&P 500 and small-cap Russell indexes each gained more than 3 percent while the Dow finished just shy of that.

 

Earnings results were the lynchpin of these moves. It also helped that we have seen a 9 percent decline in the price of oil. The hope that the U.S. will somehow negotiate a successful opening of the Straits of Hormuz was the flavor of the week. This could change next week; otherwise, the S&P 500 Index seems destined to make a record high.

 

As if food prices aren't high enough, climate scientists around the world are concluding that the October-December El Niño period this year could see numerous droughts, floods, and other climate catastrophes. If so, the impact on the supply of agricultural commodities could be serious.

 

There have been 20 El Niños recorded over the past 75 years. For those who don't know, this climate pattern occurs when unusually warm sea surface temperatures spread across the central and eastern Pacific Ocean. This causes a shift in global weather patterns that affects different regions in different ways. Some areas experience heavy rains while others wither under severe droughts.

 

Right now, more than half of England is already in a drought. Overall, as we watch and read about record heat in Europe and forest fires in France and Spain, something even more insidious is occurring in the Pacific Ocean. Scientists are already recording above-average sea surface temperatures for this time of the year (2.0 degrees above average). The tropical Pacific is warmer right now than at any time over the 45 years of satellite record keeping.

 

Consensus forecasts from scientists indicate this year's El Niño will peak at 3.6 degrees Celsius above normal. The record over 149 years of data is at most 2.75 degrees, which was set in 2015-2016. Throughout its history, only six El Niños reached the level of severity expected for this year's event.

 

Some are already calling it the "Super El Niño," which is expected to peak sometime this fall, at the very time of South America's planting season. As you might imagine, the weather could cause severe disruptions to planting cycles and to the harvest of food crops, including sugar, wheat, corn, soybeans, coffee, cocoa, and more.

 

How serious could it become? Back in 1877, the middle of the Pacific Ocean was hotter than anyone could recall. Rain did not come to India, Brazil, or China that year. The soil dried up as crops failed across five continents. Millions died, and it came down to governments deciding who starved and who ate. Fast forward to modern days.

 

You may remember the great run on the world's cocoa crop caused by El Niño a few years ago. The Ivory Coast, where 38% of the crop is grown, was deluged by heavy rains and extreme heat. Insects swarmed destroying the rest. Cocoa prices soared, hitting a record $10.97 a kilo in April 2024. That particular El Niño ranked fifth in modern record keeping. This one forming now is presently ranking number one.

 

In past El Niño events, wheat production in Australia fell dramatically and could again fall by 20-60 percent if drought becomes a factor. The same could be said for corn in Brazil, coffee in Vietnam, sugar in India, Thailand and Brazil, and grain supplies globally.

 

Compounding the weather threat is the impact of climate change, plus two wars at the same time, all of it disrupting the global food production system. The Strait of Hormuz has been shut to commercial traffic for five months. Aside from oil, much of the world's fertilizer production has also been choked off in the Strait, while Europe burns and crops wither. Russia and Ukraine together represent about 27-30 percent of the world's wheat crop. As their war drags on, both countries are aiming their missiles and drones at each other's wheat exports.

 

By this time, I think you are getting the picture. If there is a silver lining to this potential dark cloud, it is that El Niño may help grain production in the U.S. Warmer-than-normal weather conditions are expected across North America, which could benefit the growing cycle. At the same time, El Niño conditions might suppress Atlantic Ocean hurricanes. If farmers do not run out of fertilizer, the country could act as a buffer for grain markets worldwide, especially for corn and soybeans.

 

There is also a chance that between now and September, weather patterns change and the force of El Niño dissipates, along with rising temperatures in the Pacific waters. It is getting late in the day for that to occur, however. There could also be an end to Trump's war, and to the other war he promised to end on day one of his second term. If not, I expect that come winter, and just in time for the midterms, consumers will once again be hit with surging food prices on top of what we are already paying.

 

Late in the week after a further drubbing, the technology sector staged a rebound from a deeply oversold position. How long it lasts and how far it will go is debatable. In the meantime, long-dated yields in the bond world continue to rise.

 

You can blame the Fed for the continued backup in interest rates. Kevin Warsh's second FOMC meeting has come and gone with a big nothing done when it came to interest rate policy. He argued that the financial markets are doing the heavy lifting right now, and that is all right with him.

 

I could have entitled this column "Bond Vigilantes Ride Again" because that is exactly what the Fed chair is counting on. Readers haven't heard me mention these fixed income traders recently. This is the name markets give those who buy and sell bonds based on their forecasts for economic growth, inflation and geopolitics. Under the last Fed chair, Jerome Powell, the central bank bent over backward to inform the markets of what it was thinking and doing before it did it.

 

Those days are over. Chairman Warsh is determined to pull back on communication. Instead, he prefers to keep his cards close and watch how markets digest the ongoing data. Right now, the vigilantes are convinced that, thanks to the Iran war, tariffs, and government spending, inflation, after a month or two of reprieve, is set to rise again.

 

If that's the verdict, why then did the Fed not simply raise interest rates at this meeting? For one thing, if the once-again spike in oil prices is fueling higher inflation expectations, how would raising interest rates change that? It wouldn't, nor would higher rates reduce the impact of Trump tariffs. Those are supply issues. In inflationary times, the Fed is focused on reducing demand for money by making borrowing costs higher via hikes in interest rates.

 

Remember, too, the Fed's bailiwick is the Fed funds rate, that is a short-term debt instrument. Raising that rate might impact the yields on short-term borrowing costs. It has little impact on longer-term maturities where all the corporate, mortgage, and auto loans occur. That's where the private sector comes in.

 

By the end of the FOMC Q&A session, the markets were left with uncertainty. There was no hint at a September hike, no guidance on what the FOMC members are thinking, only the assurance that inflation was too high. If you think about it, the Fed has been on hold for five meetings in a row and yet bond yields have risen substantially without them.

 

Markets were miffed with the outcome. While Warsh asserted the Fed's commitment in pursuing its 2 percent inflation target, he repeatedly declined to connect that commitment to any concrete action. As a result, traders took the indexes down hard and bond yields higher. To be fair, some of the sell-off at the end of the day on Wednesday was due to one fund manager who was forced to liquidate his holdings in many AI stocks after suffering steep losses over the last few weeks.

 

On the macroeconomic front, the first reading of second quarter GDP growth came in at 1.5 percent below the forecast of 2 percent. Weak, yes, but with the questionable accuracy of government data, traders ignored the result, preferring to wait for further revisions. The Fed's favorite inflation index, the Personal Consumer Expenditures Index (PCE) for June, was cooler. That was thanks to the decline in oil prices, but with oil back up, investors ignored that data point, expecting higher numbers this month and next.

 

Second-quarter earnings continue to separate the wheat from the chaff. Microsoft gave an upside surprise, while Meta did the opposite. Apple disappointed. Amazon gained 15 percent on its results. I did warn that investors would become more discriminating based on individual company results. That is what is happening.

 

As I counseled readers last week, August should see further volatility in the markets. We are already seeing that. Wednesday, the S&P 500 Index fell almost 1.5 percent; Thursday it gained back more than that. Friday it failed to follow through to the upside. While the week was volatile, the index ended essentially flat. The same could be said for the Nasdaq, although volatility was more than twice that of the other indexes.

 

Last week I wrote that I was watching two levels: "the first stop on the S&P would be 7,300 (testing a double bottom). If that fails to hold, we are looking at 7,200 (cycle lows). Technology would have an even bigger decline." The low this week was 7,313. From there it bounced, and we are once again back above 7,400.

 

I also explained there was a second alternative. "The S&P 500 Index, supported by the rotation I have discussed previously (that is out of tech and into sectors like healthcare, utilities, industrials, etc.), could remain at this 7,400 level." We did that as well. All in one week!  

 

You may have missed it given all the geopolitical turmoil, wildfires, and so on. Congress passed a bill this month that some call the most significant piece of housing legislation in almost 40 years. It is called the 21st Century Road to Housing Act.

 

It is remarkable for a variety of reasons. It is a bipartisan effort by both houses of Congress, which the president refused to support or sign. It became law anyway (a first). The legislation encompasses 50 measures, a hodgepodge of ideas from both sides of the aisle. The intent is to relieve the scarcity of affordable housing for a generation of low- and middle-income Americans.

 

Homeownership has long been a cornerstone of the American myth. For so many of the younger generations, it has become hopelessly out of reach. In many urban centers, a typical starter home can now command almost $1 million. Home prices have increased by 54 percent nationwide, and even if a young couple could scrape up enough for a down payment, the monthly costs of owning a home have also skyrocketed.

 

A report by the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard reveals that the monthly cost of a median-priced home was $3,120 in the fourth quarter of 2025. Today it has jumped to $3,200, including mortgage payments, thanks to inflation and a variety of other costs. From 2019 to 2025, property taxes gained 31 percent, insurance premiums rose 72  percent, and interest rates on mortgages are above 6 percent and continue to increase. Overall, monthly costs have risen 46 percent since 2019. No wonder the homeownership rate last year fell for the second year in a row! No surprise that the largest decrease was in those under the age of 35.

 

In past columns, I have written at length about the plight of our youngsters. They are strapped with student debt, a weaker job market (thanks to AI and other factors), and are still living with family in basement apartments or their old bedrooms. There is little affordable housing being built to answer the needs of our younger generations. The new bill aims to remedy that problem.

 

It does so mainly by loosening local building regulations while encouraging building. In some cases, it offers areas that build more housing to receive a bigger share of federal funding while cutting money from areas that don't. On the lending front, the act reduces regulations around rural community banks, where most lending occurs in the small mortgage market of less than $100,000.

 

It also discourages the practice of private equity firms that buy up huge swaths of single-family homes. Critics argue that practice reduces the housing stock and forces many would-be buyers to rent instead. It allows investors to hold onto houses they already own but prohibits any future purchases that would bring their holdings above 350 homes.

 

Ask any builder, and they will tell you regulations are the bane of their existence. Red tape, they complain, adds delays, unnecessary costs, and huge headaches for builders and buyers alike. It won't happen overnight, but the act will loosen federal regulations, making it easier and cheaper to build housing at lower prices. It also relaxes lending rules, but probably the most important change is just a tiny tweak to a 50-year-old law.

 

Until now, mobile homes or manufactured homes were required to have a permanent chassis — that's the under-frame that is used to transport the house and must be left attached. It no longer needs to be attached. Those steel chassis can now be reused, saving anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000 toward the price of the house. That may not seem like much, but it is in the world of manufactured housing.

 

Remember, the bill is addressing affordable starter homes for buyers priced out of the market. Manufactured housing can cost anywhere from 27 percent to 65 percent less than houses built on site. When you consider the average manufactured home costs about $135,000 to build, a $10,000 reduction in costs would go a long way if the builder passed that savings on to the first-time home buyer.

 

Now, before you hold up your hands in horror that America will soon become a nation of trailer parks, settle down. Let's take a closer look at manufactured housing. They are built in factories like automobiles, and as such, economies of scale are at work. They use standardized materials and centralized purchasing. Weather isn't an issue, nor is a shrinking labor supply (due to immigration policies).

 

Getting rid of a huge, cumbersome steel frame under the house both saves money and opens a whole new set of possibilities. We could see multi-story versions or houses that are designed to be lower to the ground. Basement installations would be possible and cheaper as well. It could radically change the whole stigmatized trailer park environment we grew up with. The act also provides grants to communities to repair some of those dismal parks that have become eyesores in many neighborhoods.

 

There are too many parts to this legislation to cover thoroughly in the space I have allotted. Is it a panacea for filling the multi-million home building gap we are experiencing today in the U.S.? Not entirely, but it helps. It does set up the conditions to increase the country's housing supply, expand home ownership, and bolster community development programs.

 

It is not an instant cure. Although federal regulations on home construction are being relaxed, there are a myriad of local zoning laws and building regulations that need to be addressed as well, especially in the manufactured-home segment. And the legislation does not address two of the largest issues in the real estate market right now. High mortgage rates and the 54 percent increase in home prices over the past five years.

 

President Trump refused to sign the bill, which automatically became law on July 11. He said he would only sign the bill, which he dismissed as "a big yawn" and "of minor importance," unless Congress passed his pet legislation, a strict voter ID bill, called the SAVE America Act. Even his most partisan allies in Congress could not muster the votes that, if passed, would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to cast a ballot. In a mid-term election year where affordability is of critical concern to voters, the president's decision on housing is right up there with his handling of the Iran war.

 

Oil spiked higher this week, regaining $90 a barrel as the dollar rose and U.S. Treasury bonds sold off. It is not hard to guess what the stock market did as a result. 

 

Down.

 

I'm sure you are just as tired as I am watching this Kabuki show unfold in the Middle East. Not only is the Straits of Hormuz shut in, but now Iran's proxy, the Houthis, have opened a second front along the Red Sea. They have already attacked two Saudi oil tankers and have vowed to close that oil avenue off from any further shipment of oil from Saudi Arabia.

 

Brent crude is up more than 40 percent in three weeks. Readers only need to fill up at the pump this week to realize the cost of this ongoing travesty. The Ten-year U.S. Treasury bond is now yielding 4.67 percent. Traders are dumping U.S. Treasuries as well as stocks in anticipation that by August the inflation data will be rebounding substantially. That would put an interest rate hike back on the table by September by the Federal Reserve Bank.

 

It is a tangled web this administration has woven. There were reports on Friday that Pakistan, with support from China, was seeking to revive negotiations between the two adversaries. That dropped oil prices by 5 percent to around $88 a barrel. Hope springs eternal I guess when  dealing with this war.

 

Oh, in case I forget, the president has just slapped a whole host of new tariffs (10-12 percent) on world trade, manufacturing a new excuse (forced labor in 80 countries) as justification. This adds yet another layer of price increases consumers will be receiving in the months ahead since we now know you and I are paying most of these tariff costs.

 

All the goals of this administration's economic policies, touted by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — reduce budget deficits, boost growth and increase energy production — have remained pipe dreams. Instead, interest rates are reaching new highs, spending and deficits are off the charts, and oil, rather than declining, is skyrocketing.

 

The AI trade has faltered as well. The recurring worry that the large mega-cap tech companies are spending too much money plagues the markets. The fate of this area hinges on the outlook for 2027 capital expenditures growth from the hyperscalers like Google, Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft. Currently, Wall Street analysts are expecting capex to grow by 28 percent next year. That's up from 23 percent two weeks ago and before Google's second quarter earnings announcement on Wednesday night.

 

Google once again raised its estimate of how much more it is planning to spend on AI this year, from $190 billion to a range of $195 billion to $205 billion. The stock cratered on the news despite a blockbuster revenue growth of $119.8 billion, up 24 percent from a year earlier. And what Google is doing, its competitors will do too. By the end of the earnings period, we could see that number increase to 37 percent.

 

Given that all these companies have whittled down their cash due to this monumental spending, investors expect that the only way to increase spending further will be for these companies to sell more stock and raise debt, thereby diluting existing holders. Even if they succeed, there is still no guarantee anytime soon that these companies will see the kind of payoff that is necessary to the bottom line given the amount of money involved.

 

Tesla was another dud. Auto sales are falling, and capex in all his tomorrow ventures, including AI, is exploding higher. Combined with the 50 percent decline in the price of SpaceX, Elon Musk is keeping a low profile lately.

 

Regular readers know that I entered the July-August period rather cautiously. I believe we are in a normal mid-summer consolidation in a mid-term election year. It appears as if Donald Trump is working overtime to ensure Democrats win that contest. That adds even more uncertainty to an equation already burdened by the possibility of a "massive attack" in Iran and therefore further spikes in energy prices. So far, second-quarter earnings have been on target for the most part. Next week, Microsoft, Meta, Apple and Amazon report on Wednesday and Thursday. Their announcements will largely dictate which way technology goes in the short term.

 

I see two possible outcomes for the markets over the remainder of the summer. Both would bring with them high volatility. The first is that we chop around here. Since technology is leading this pullback, I see it trading in a range of a little above and below 680 as reflected in the main Technology ETF (QQQ).

 

The S&P 500 Index, supported by the rotation I have discussed previously (that is out of tech and into sectors like healthcare, utilities, industrials, etc.), could remain at this 7,400 level. Once again, you could still see 50-point swings weekly or even daily in the index.

 

If, on the other hand, Trump allows his emotions to play out with few in the White House willing to talk him down, a sudden escalation in the war might occur. Oil prices spike much higher as a result. In that case, the first stop on the S&P would be 7,300 (testing a double bottom). If that fails to hold, we are looking at 7,200 (cycle lows). Technology would have an even bigger decline.