By now, everyone understands rising beef prices are a never-ending story. Fewer consumers complain about seafood prices. That may change as sticker shock hits the fish counter.

 

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that fish and seafood prices increased by 3.89 percent so far in the first quarter of 2026 compared to prices in 2025. During the same period, the overall inflation rate was 1.19 percent. Of course, that was small potatoes compared to the price of beef, which surged 13 percent amid strong demand and tight supplies.

 

For the rest of this year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture expects seafood prices to rise faster than the historical average of 4.60 percent per year. For as long as I can remember, seafood in the U.S. has been a luxury item that, year after year, has climbed in price. Prices for fresh fish and seafood are 133.51 percent higher in 2026 than in 1997. In 2024, seafood had the highest average retail price among protein sources, surpassing beef and veal.

 

Beef, on the other hand, remained low and within the means of most Americans until recent years. Part of the price difference is attributable to growing demand for seafood in the U.S., one of the world's largest seafood markets. However, 90 percent of the seafood consumed is imported from other countries.

 

It was not until I began traveling the world in my teens that I realized that, in many countries, seafood was both cheap and plentiful. China, Indonesia, and Vietnam are the top suppliers of our fish, and all of them have been slapped with high tariffs thanks to Donald Trump. But don't just blame Donald Trump for the rising prices.

 

In recent years, consumers worldwide have begun paying more for fish. Climate change, despite deniers, has had a profound impact on the world's oceans. Rising temperatures and acidification are impacting the distribution and abundance of many underwater species. Just look at the Gulf of Maine as an example. The warmer water has led to a decline in the lobster population to the point where I paid $49 for a lobster roll last weekend in Martha's Vineyard.

 

Over the last six years, Maine's lobster catch has declined from 121 million pounds to 79 million. This drop reflects a broader regional shift, as the Gulf of Maine has been leading the oceans in warming driven by climate change. As a result, the codfish industry has been decimated, while shrimping has gone nowhere as marine life fled to cooler waters. Similarly, salmon populations in the Pacific Ocean are experiencing the same trend.

 

On a trip to visit relatives in Norway a few years ago, I also learned that many species are affected by pollutants such as plastics, pesticides, and industrial waste. Thanks to ocean currents, much of the world's ocean trash is winding up in the Scandinavian region. This has led to increasing regulation and certification as governments try to reverse this trend. The costs are passed on to consumers through higher prices and a smaller supply of fish.

 

Beyond production, the costs of catching fish are steep: harvesting is more labor-intensive, product spoilage occurs faster, and loss rates are higher at every stage from ocean to plate.

 

A pound of ground beef might cost $6.75 per pound, but a comparable portion of fresh salmon or cod will run you anywhere from $8 to $14 per pound. A whole chicken is even cheaper, about $2 a pound. The difference between catching fish and raising cattle, pigs, and chickens is that ranchers and farmers use a controlled environment to optimize feed, breeding, and growth timelines. Wild-caught fishing offers none of the above.

 

Commercial boats depart with a fully paid crew, fuel accounting for 5-10 percent of their earnings, ice, and refrigeration units, and face increasingly uncertain weather, shifting fish populations, regulations, and seasonal closures. There is no guarantee of a full catch, whereas a rancher can be certain of how many pounds of beef he will produce in a month.

 

At the supermarket, beef and chicken have much longer shelf lives as well. Fresh seafood is one of the most perishable items on a grocer's shelves. Anywhere from 8 to 20 percent of seafood is spoiled before it reaches consumers (the shrink rate). Supermarkets know this and mark up their fish to account for that spillage rate. Frozen seafood has a near-zero shrink rate, which is why it is much cheaper than fresh fish.

 

And keeping fish cold is expensive. Most commercial fishing takes place far from supermarkets. Many products, such as wild salmon, Atlantic cod, and imported shrimp, may travel thousands of miles by boat, truck, and air before hitting your local grocery shelf. At every step in the chain, keeping fish cold requires energy, specialized equipment, and speed. Unlike beef, which spoils more slowly, fish spoils quickly if it is not handled precisely.

 

Another difference between fish and a steer is that you get a greater yield from the beef carcass. About 63 percent of its live weight is boneless beef. A whole fish yields far less. No more than 30-50 percent of the fish is edible. If demand for wild-caught fish picks up, you can't just catch more. Harvests are constrained by quotas, seasonal availability, and the sheer biological limits of fish populations.

 

It is the reason aquaculture has exploded worldwide, with fish farms popping up everywhere. Today, roughly half of all seafood consumed globally is farmed fish. Fish farms can scale up like livestock if demand rises. That's why tilapia and catfish, for example, are much cheaper than wild salmon, cod, and shrimp. 

 

When it comes down to it, you may have noticed that not all fish are expensive. Canned tuna is practically a loss leader, with cans going for a dollar or less. 

 

The price differential between fish and meat is really a gap between industrialized livestock production and wild-caught fresh seafood. The more you consume farmed fish that is frozen for transport or canned, the cheaper it becomes.

 

Trump's Iran war speech on Wednesday night was not the hit that he hoped it would be. It only lasted 19 minutes, but it was more than enough to send investors' hopes crashing and the price of oil higher by 11 percent. Yet hours later, on Thursday morning, Iran hinted at some progress toward opening the Straits of Hormuz. Stocks rallied back to even. Go figure.

 

It was a fitting ending to a wild holiday-shortened week for the markets. The S&P 500, after dropping 70 points on Monday, hit 6,343.72, down 9.1 percent from its record high made on Jan. 27. On Tuesday, the last day of the quarter, and Wednesday, markets gained more than 3.5 percent but then fell flat on its face on Thursday. A combination of events provided the triggers.

 

After five weeks of declines, markets were oversold and were stretched to the downside. We were within 1 percent of my 10 percent downside target. The indexes were flirting with a level that, if broken, would have led to a lot more downside. To me, markets seemed primed for a relief rally. All we needed was a couple of comments from the administration.

 

The tendency of professional money managers to "window dress" their clients' portfolios (by selling their losers and buying the quarter's winners) helped set the stage. In addition, the execution of a quarterly $30 billion hedging trade fueled the fire. And lastly, as I warned readers before, with the markets teetering on the edge, Donald Trump announced that the end of the war was all but over and the Straits of Hormuz was someone else's problem to fix. Markets roared higher.

 

It seemed to be all coming together for the bulls. Wall Street anticipated that the president, in his first wartime, primetime speech to America on Wednesday night, would further clarify his earlier comments. That was not to be. Instead, his words seemed to indicate additional short-term aggression and at least 2-3 weeks of further conflict. The president's key takeaways on Iran were his vow to "send them back to the Stone Age" and that the war would end soon.

 

Shortly thereafter, a U.S./Israeli airstrike launched a large-scale attack on Iranian infrastructure across Iran. Trump did not mention the Straits of Hormuz in his address, although the open passage of oil through that body of water is key to a return to global growth and to reining in inflation. Yet from the market's point of view, there was still no clear pathway to peace.

 

Overnight, futures plummeted, and markets were down by more than 1 percent Thursday morning. However, stocks recovered on reports that Iran and Oman are drafting a protocol to monitor transit through the Straits. That was old news, but in this market, the bulls were looking for any port in this storm. Traders used it as an excuse to bid up stocks anyway.

 

Equities ripped higher just before the Iranian public announcement was released on Thursday morning. Leading one to wonder if Iran was joining the ranks of the administration's insider traders, or did someone in the White House profit once again? We will never know.

 

The Iranian release did not specify which nations will be permitted passage, or at what cost. The statement reportedly originated from the Iranian state news agency. Oil, as I wrote at the onset of this conflict, is my primary indicator for predicting financial market direction. The Iranian news barely impacted the $11 surge, raising a barrel of oil to $110. For context, this translates to an overnight jump of 60 cents or more per gallon in gas prices.

 

For readers who may have missed it, and I assume most did, Iran's parliament approved a bill a week ago that imposes transit fees of up to $2 million on all ships passing through the Straits. It also bans vessels from countries imposing sanctions on their country and allows selective access to friendly states such as China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iraq, and Bangladesh. The monitoring and control of maritime traffic news was part of the same bill.

 

Based on statements from over 40 European leaders and ministers, forcing passage through the Straits is no longer an option, regardless of Donald Trump's wishes. They would rather pay a toll or negotiate with Iran than join Trump's war. None were consulted before the attack, but after the fact, they were expected to participate in a decision made without their input.

 

On Friday, the March non-farm payroll showed 178,000 new jobs added. Although this exceeded expectations, as I've noted before, don't accept this figure at face value. Typically, at least 60,000 jobs are overstated each month. Furthermore, revisions are large, for instance, last month's loss of 133,000 jobs was revised downward by 41,000, while January saw an upward revision of 34,000.

 

Year-to-date, the S&P 500 is only down 6 percent after gaining more than 3 percent in two days this week. That is encouraging given the noise and destruction of the past weeks. This is also a holy week for much of the world, which may invite more violence. In addition, weekends, especially three-day weekends, have become too risky for most traders to hold longs.

 

Are we out of the woods? Not yet. We need to see oil and the dollar both drop substantially next week before calling a bottom in the market. In the meantime, to those who celebrate, Happy Easter, and for those who don't, bless you anyway!

 

Airlines and passengers alike are buffeted by everything from weather to war. Long lines at the security gates, cancelled or delayed flights, war, weather, and the stock market have hurt both commercial carriers and their human cargoes.

 

March had not been good for either airline or its passengers. More than 12,500 U.S. flights were delayed by storms in some cases on. Daily basis as storms buffeted the East Coast and other locales. American Airlines, Southwest, and Delta delayed or canceled 45 percent of flights in a recent week. This is nothing out of the ordinary. Severe weather this winter has become just another liability for both carriers and passengers.

 

As the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran began, conflict forced the cancellation of more than 52,000 flights to and from the Middle East. Since then, airlines that once relied on flying over Iran and other Gulf states must find alternative routes to their destinations. Geopolitical strife seems to be cropping up wherever you look (or fly over). What was once an efficient and finely tuned worldwide aviation travel network is now at risk of becoming a patchwork of fragmenting connections and workarounds.

 

As a result, not only are airplanes burning more fuel since they are forced to travel longer distances, but flights are getting longer and longer to get from point A to point B. Not only does this eat into carriers' profitability, but it also adds to the woes of your typical passengers. The price of flights is rising along with oil, making it harder to travel long distances, even if one is lucky enough to catch a flight.

 

Geopolitical conflicts have become a nightmare for travelers. Thousands have been stranded in the Middle East, and before that by the Venezuela/U.S. raids, and let's not forget the past four years of ongoing conflict between the Russia and Ukraine war.

 

Adding insult to injury, depending upon the airport, air travelers were encountering long airport security lines, some of which snaked out to the sidewalks surrounding the airport. Many major airports were experiencing nearly 3 hours in TSA lines, causing massive delays and missed flights during peak hours. Delays of at least 1 hour were reported in Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte, and Houston.

 

The culprit was the partial federal shutdown of Homeland Security funding, which had led to staffing difficulties at the Transportation Security Administration. Security personnel, until this week, had not received a paycheck for weeks. The U.S. Senate is still squabbling over funding.

 

The president sent his ICE agents to help but reports were that they were simply making matters worse. Finally, Trump ordered the head of Homeland Security to find the money and pay the TSA workers. He did. Readers might wonder why Trump had not simply done that in the first place. 

 

Like consumers, airlines are also grappling with higher energy prices. A sharp spike in jet fuel costs have decimated profits. Since the start of the war, the global average price of jet fuel has soared 58 percent, based on International Air Transport Association data. Since then, it has almost doubled. Fuel accounts for 20-25 percent of airline operating costs, and average prices have risen from $2.50 before the crisis to $4.57 per gallon now. Although some airlines hedge, many do not, and hedging often covers only part of their fuel needs.

 

Advance purchase fares more than doubled for transcontinental flights in the first week of the war. Fares to the Caribbean jumped 58 percent and 43 percent to Florida. Several airlines, mostly in the Asia-Pacific region, have either increased fares or announced fuel surcharges. Air India, for example, tacked on a $50 ticket charge for all flights to Europe, North America, and Australia. Cathay Pacific doubled fuel surcharges starting March 18.

 

U.S. airlines on domestic flights are prohibited from levying a separate fuel surcharge. Instead, they include fuel costs in the overall ticket price. Flyers can expect ticket prices to increase this summer unless oil prices drop back to pre-war levels in the next week or so. In the meantime, expect premium add-ons like seat upgrades, extra legroom seats, checked bags, or priority boarding to be adjusted upward.

 

Airline stocks have dropped sharply since the Iran war, driven by higher fuel costs and flight disruptions. U.S. airlines have generally underperformed the market this year, reflecting persistent concerns about weaker demand and limited pricing power. The industry also faces elevated labor costs and ongoing pilot shortages.

 

However, in recent days, some brave-hearted traders have been buying the dip in this area. Airline management says revenues are still increasing in both international and domestic travel, despite the challenges they face. Delta Airlines, American Airlines, and United Airlines all raised their revenue outlooks for the year. Consumer demand is still robust, they say, despite the long lines, added expense, and frustration.

 

Some airlines are now warning that they will be cutting back flights on less travelled and therefore less profitable routes. Analysts are warning that the higher oil prices climb and the longer they remain elevated, the greater the risk that flyers will pull back, and with them, the airlines' stock prices.

 

Diesel fuel is now above $5 per gallon. You might think that doesn't matter to you, but that would be an erroneous and costly assumption. That's because diesel fuels the main engine of our economy, commercial transportation.

 

If you think gas prices are soaring due to Donald Trump's invasion of Iran, consider diesel. Diesel is rising faster because its price reacts more quickly and sharply to global shipping risks. Diesel supply was already tight before the war because winter increased demand for heating oil, which is nearly identical to diesel.

 

Almost 70 percent of all goods moving across the U.S. travel by freight. Trains and trucks are the most common methods of transportation. Anything powered by diesel engines, which provide more useful energy per unit of volume, is subject to immediate price increases. That means most construction, farming, boats, barges, buses, and military vehicles, as well as equipment, are diesel-powered. In 2023, Diesel fuel accounts for 23 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S. transportation sector and 6 percent of total primary consumption, according to the U.S. Energy Administration.

 

The rising costs of diesel are jacking up the operating costs of major companies as you read this. In a short time, those costs will be passed on to consumers, affecting everything from retail goods and groceries to construction costs and commodities. FedEx and UPS are already raising prices.

 

Let me give you a taste of what's to come. The Producer Price Index for February 2026, announced mid-week, rose 0.7 percent — twice the 0.3 percent economists expected. The Bureau of Labor Statistics said 30 percent of the increase in processed goods was due to a 13.9 percent rise in diesel fuel. That was in February, before the war started!

 

Iran understands that keeping the Straits of Hormuz closed to the U.S. and its allies drives up shipping risks and, consequently, oil prices. This dynamic is a key reason oil prices remain elevated.

 

This week, Donald Trump's demand that America's allies work with him to create an international convoy of warships to perform escort duty through the straits was met with silence. Oil prices rose again as his request was ignored and/or simply rejected. Why not do it ourselves?

 

The naval experts say it is too dangerous. Swarms of Iranian drones would overwhelm the vessel's defenses. My own opinion is that the U.S. simply does not have the ships to perform both security and escort duties simultaneously, and the Iranians know that. I suggest readers read my February column, "What is gunboat diplomacy without boats?" on the sad shape of shipping in the U.S., for further understanding of that issue.

 

On Wednesday, the president announced he would temporarily waive the long-standing Jones Act, which requires that goods be transported between U.S. ports by U.S. vessels. With fewer than 100 Jones Act-compliant vessels, the hope is that the decision would enable the U.S. to move fuel more easily.

 

The temporary suspension (for 60 days) of this requirement would allow non-U.S. international tankers to carry fuel, natural gas, fertilizer, and other goods to the U.S. Given that there are fewer than 100 Jones Act-compliant vessels, the hope is that the decision would help the U.S. move fuel more efficiently. But wait, you might ask, isn't the U.S. self-sufficient in energy?

 

Yes and no. While the U.S. produces enough energy, we can't fully use it because our refineries are designed for heavier Middle Eastern crude, not the lighter shale oil we extract. Moving fuel helps, but it doesn't solve the refining mismatch.

 

Nonetheless, every little bit helps, I guess, but it won't fix diesel prices, nor will it roll back the across-the-board price increases I expect in the weeks ahead. I suggest Americans batten down the hatches because the twin storms of higher inflation and a slowing economy could be just around the corner.

 

The Fed is on hold. Iran is not. Oil regains highs, despite Trump's efforts. Markets test a critical support level. Read no further, unless you want the gory details.

 

My first downside target has been met. The S&P 500 Index has fallen to the 200-Day Moving Average (DMA). That is the level that has historically separated the bulls from the bears. Below it, we have problems. Above it, the sky's the limit. That's simple enough, I guess, but the question on your mind right now is what happens next?

 

That 200 DMA, while important, is not an exact science. More often than not, the market overshoots that line in the sand just to freak out the most investors. I am thinking that overall, we should pull back further, maybe closer to 10 percent over time rather than the 15 percent some bears are predicting.

 

As for when this conflict in the Middle East will end, I don't know. You could ask the president, since he has said that he will "have a feeling" when enough is enough and the war is over. When that occurs, the markets will rally. The bounce should be breathtaking, and if you are not invested, you will miss it. There won't be an opportunity to chase.

 

There is one caveat to that advice. If you are lucky enough to know someone in the inner circle or have paid (donated) enough to the right people, then you will be given advanced notice. Giving friends, relatives, and donors advance notice has become a standard practice within government over the last year.

 

I am not the only one with a foggy crystal ball. The Federal Reserve Bank has no idea what is in store for the economy or the financial markets either. They met this week but decided to do nothing but wring their hands. Chairman Jerome Powell (the Fed's lame-duck who isn't) said they would be watching and waiting for the next six weeks (the next FOMC meeting) until they see how this Middle Eastern conflict plays out. He intimated that the longer the war lasts, the more difficult the Fed's job becomes.

 

Higher-for-longer energy prices mean inflation strengthens as growth slows. The Fed has raised its inflation forecast for the year, but FOMC members still expect the economy to grow. Unemployment appears balanced. Since the immigration crackdown, job openings and job seekers are nearly zero, creating an unusual equilibrium.

 

On the inflation front, the Producer Price Index for February rose over twice as fast as expected, climbing 0.7 percent from January's 0.6 percent. This increase more than doubled most economists' forecasts, though not mine. About 30 percent of the gain was from higher diesel fuel prices. Read my column on diesel fuel this week. I expected this increase and anticipate that the next inflation numbers will be even higher.

 

The era of markets anticipating future rate cuts has ended, replaced by, at best, no change, and at worst, rate hikes if inflation accelerates. That shifts the narrative and market dynamics.

 

Precious metals and metals overall are a case in point. The sector has responded to the fear of higher interest rates by dropping precipitously. The hot money has bailed out and moved into speculating on energy and the U.S. dollar. I see further downside in all metals and a period of consolidation as interest rates decimate the asset class.

 

A series of measures — including using Strategic Petroleum Reserves, lifting Russian oil sanctions, and removing U.S. regulatory restrictions (The Jones Act) — to boost global liquidity appear to have slowed energy price gains.

 

Given that I am not a war correspondent, nor do I pretend to be, unlike so many talking heads in the financial media, all I can say about the conflict in the Middle East is that it has spread. Significant strikes on gas fields and oil refineries are investors' worst nightmares. That kind of escalation is a significant threat to global growth.

 

At the same time, the narrative has changed. The administration's assurances that we will kick Iran's butt, oil prices will fall, and on to the next victory are beginning to fall flat. Missile and drone strikes have taken precedence over words and presidential posts, with every new explosion sending oil prices higher and stocks lower.

 

Some traders are keying off the price of West Texas Intermediate oil (WTI) to signal which way stocks will go. Above WTI $97.37 a barrel, stocks fall further, while below WTI $92.62 markets rally. That is a wide range.  In between, equity markets are in a chop fest. The VIX (volatility index) indicates the same thing. It is at 25 right now. Below 19, the VIX signals all clear, but above 30, look out below! In between, we have the same chop fest as the oil price indicates. I warned readers to expect volatility, and we have it in spades. It will get worse before it gets better.