The crisis-driven dislocation across Gulf oil markets has positioned French energy giant TotalEnergies SE as an early mover, capitalizing on heavily discounted Persian Gulf crude priced at $50 to $60 a barrel and moving it through the highly contested Strait of Hormuz. CEO Patrick Pouyanné revealed at the Norwegian energy conference on Monday that transiting the waterway now costs roughly $20 million per supertanker.

Bloomberg earlier quoted Pouyanné as saying that the added cost of moving crude on supertankers through the Hormuz chokepoint is about $10 per barrel. However, with Brent crude futures at $92 per barrel, the potential profit could be upward of $30 per barrel. That is before financing and other costs, creating extraordinary margins for companies willing to accept the risks of being early movers in one of the world’s most dangerous waterways.

TotalEnergies is one of the largest traders of Iraqi and Qatari crude, with both producers continuing to move oil through the Strait of Hormuz.

“We are today probably the largest trader of oil from Iraq or from Qatar … and I can ​tell you that today crude oil is moving through the Strait of Hormuz very quietly, not ​publicly,” Pouyanné said. 

Pouyanné did not elaborate on whether TotalEnergies-contracted tankers are transiting the US military-supervised shipping corridor off Oman.

Recent data have shown a noticeable uptick in transits, raising the question of whether Tehran’s grip on the maritime chokepoint has eroded.

Pouyanné also warned that the refined-products market is currently in crisis.

“You have a bearish crude oil market and a very bullish product markets, which is very strange,” he said. “Our consumers in Europe will suffer on this one,” while in the US, “gasoline prices would not go lower than $4 as President Trump would like.”

More on Pouyanne from Bloomberg’s Javier Blas:

TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanne nails it, warning that some emerging nations are “losing trust” on LNG after two back-to-back price shocks (2022 and 2026). The result? “Back to coal.”

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) August 24, 2026

Gulf producers are willing to unload discounted crude, while some energy companies are ready to accept the risk of sailing through the Strait of Hormuz in pursuit of substantial profits. Despite all this, as Pouyanné warned, there is little that increased crude flows can do to resolve the worldwide refined-products crisis.

Authored by Hal Snarr via Mises Institute,

A previous article attributed widespread airline service failures not to individual carriers but to government interventions sold as consumer protections. Through a web of intricate regulations and controls, the state restricts entry, grants shared monopoly privileges to approved carriers, and creates what Rothbard calls a state-enforced cartel. The result is an illusion of competition that allows poor service to persist without attracting better alternatives. This article examines how the same pattern protects incumbents and suppresses competition across other industries.

The banking system provides perhaps the clearest example. Entry requires a charter, regulatory approval, access to payment networks, compliance with extensive federal and state laws, and deposit insurance. The Federal Reserve supplies bank reserves, emergency credit, and the benchmark underlying prime rates, while the FDIC protects depositors from losses and reduces their incentive to distinguish between prudent and imprudent banks. Together with the discount window, this protection creates moral hazard by socializing risk and encouraging loans banks might not otherwise make. The result is an illusion of competition within a protected system that shifts the consequences of risky banking onto taxpayers and the broader economy.

Credit card pricing reveals the consequences. Banks appear to compete through branding, rewards, introductory offers, fees, and expanded credit access, yet interest rates remain remarkably high relative to the prime rate. The CFPB found that the ten largest issuers controlled 83 percent of outstanding balances and generally charged higher rates than smaller banks and credit unions. Perks and easier access create an illusion of competition that conceals the monopoly rates paid by customers who carry balances.

This restriction of competition becomes even more explicit in health care. Certificate-of-need laws allow incumbents to exercise a competitor’s veto by opposing applications to build facilities, acquire equipment, add beds, or offer new services as unnecessary. Rather than letting patients determine whether another provider is needed, the state allows existing providers to declare the market adequately served. These restrictions help explain why many communities entered the pandemic with so few ICU beds. North Carolina eye surgeon Dr. Jay Singleton, for example, remains barred from offering lower-cost surgery at his own facility while his constitutional challenge proceeds. The outrage would be deafening if the state allowed McDonald’s to veto a Burger King opening across the street by claiming that Whoppers were duplicative. Yet health care incumbents exercise precisely this power, putting Rothbard’s monopoly privilege into practice by asking the state to block entrepreneurs they might otherwise have to outperform.

Montana’s waste-removal rules extend the same competitor’s veto from hospitals to dumpsters. Parker Noland discovered that construction companies were dissatisfied with existing debris-removal services. After borrowing money to buy dumpsters and a specialized truck, he began advertising but soon received a cease-and-desist order from the Montana Public Service Commission. Continuing required a certificate of public convenience and necessity through a process that allowed existing waste companies to oppose his entry without explanation. Republic Services and Waste Connections protested his application, while other certificate holders demanded his tax returns, revenues, financial statements, and other business records. Unable to match their legal and financial resources, Noland withdrew. Rather than merely enforcing safety standards, the state empowered his prospective competitors to deny dissatisfied customers an alternative.

Professional licensing extends the same exclusionary power to entire occupations by allowing organized interests to control entry in the name of quality and public safety. Through its influence over medical education, accreditation, licensing, and professional membership, the American Medical Association helped determine who could become a physician and often applied these restrictions discriminatorily. Black physicians were excluded from many state and local medical societies, limiting their access to the national association, hospitals, and professional opportunities. Following a three-year investigation, the AMA formally apologized in 2008 for the harm inflicted on black physicians, their families, and their patients.

The AMA’s review shows that this discrimination extended beyond black physicians. Women accounted for only 2.9 percent of medical-school graduates in 1915 and remained a small minority for decades. Jewish applicants also faced blatant discrimination. In 1939, JAMA editor Morris Fishbein acknowledged that they were rejected “simply because they were Jewish” but defended the practice because Jewish physicians already represented a substantial share of the profession. Although the AMA’s apology focused on black physicians, the broader record demonstrates the danger of allowing professional organizations and incumbents to control entry. Presented as patient protections, licensing and accreditation helped create a state-enforced medical cartel that restricted the supply of physicians, raised prices, and reduced patient choice.

Control over entry and consumer choice also shapes public education, where the government acts as both financier and provider. Families must fund the system through taxes whether they use it or not, while licensing restricts who may teach, accreditation limits which institutions may compete, and political authorities determine curricula, funding, and operating standards. Parents are largely limited to their assigned public school, permitted charter schools, nearby private schools they must pay for separately, or moving to another district. Even these alternatives remain subject to state approval and regulation, while compulsory-attendance laws leave children no option to reject their poorly performing schools. Unlike a restaurant that loses revenue and eventually closes after repeatedly failing its customers, a failing public school may receive additional funding because the state restricts entry, compels attendance, and supplies it with captive customers.

This system burdens families with the fewest resources most heavily because they have the least ability to escape it. In my view, the availability of even one viable alternative helps explain why public schools in affluent neighborhoods often perform well. The threat that dissatisfied parents can send their children elsewhere disciplines the incumbent school. Wealthier families can afford both the coerced tuition imposed through property taxes and the additional cost of private schooling, or they can move to a district with better schools. Lower-income families, especially in urban areas where political authorities restrict charter-school competition, often have none of these options and remain trapped in failing schools. Desperate parents who evade residency rules to place their children in a better public school risk prosecution and jail.

Where licensing restricts entry directly, food regulations protect incumbents more subtly by imposing costs that large corporations can more readily absorb and influence. Major producers spread FDA compliance expenses across millions of products and employ teams of chemists, lawyers, lobbyists, and regulatory specialists beyond the reach of smaller competitors. The GRAS process also allows them to hire experts, declare substances safe, and introduce them without formal FDA review or notification, even though legal sale implies government endorsement. The Environmental Working Group estimates that nearly 99 percent of chemicals added to the US food supply between 2000 and 2021 entered through GRAS rather than formal FDA review. Large producers can then use these self-certified additives to mass-produce inexpensive foods, rewarding regulatory influence and scale rather than the whole-food alternatives consumers might otherwise choose.

The pharmaceutical industry adds patent privileges and rules requiring third-party payers to purchase prescribed drugs for patients to the regulatory advantages already evident in food production. Although defenders consider patents necessary to finance research, scientific discovery and the desire to improve human life motivate R&D across industries. Patents nevertheless favor drugs over potentially effective natural substances, which generally cannot receive protection unless their compounds are modified or synthesized. Large firms can also finance years of testing and regulatory review that may exhaust smaller competitors’ capital. FDA approval provides a government endorsement, while mandated third-party payment weakens patients’ sensitivity to price. These protections and the purchases they compel shield Big Pharma, raise prices, encourage patent farming, and replace consumer judgment with administrative permission.

Inside government-owned airports, political authorities decide which businesses may operate and what they may sell. Burger King and McDonald’s, for example, compete not side by side for customers but for permission to enter. This lack of competition once left me with the worst burger I have ever purchased. I threw it away after one bite, which says something because I was a poor PhD candidate at the time. A few years later, airport security prevented me from bringing a Chicago-style pizza home from an economics conference. Both experiences illustrate how government restrictions create an illusion of choice while shielding the fortunate few from outside competition. The weakened market discipline that permits an airport vendor to sell an inedible burger also allows airlines to provide poor service. Both compete for political permission in protected markets rather than for customers in open competition.

Together, these examples show why the airline ordeal discussed in a previous article indicts markets cartelized through regulations and other interventions enacted as consumer protections. Firms that entered after these regulated markets were established should not bear the primary blame because they merely respond to incentives that reward political entrepreneurship over market entrepreneurship. What appears to be competition among incumbents is largely OPEC-style jostling within a protected system. This cartelization increasingly resembles the old-world European mercantilism that provoked Marx’s rage, generating the scarcity, high prices, and declining quality that fuel the populism of Mayor Mamdani on the Left and President Trump on the Right. Healing this political divide requires looking beyond individual firms and dismantling the regulations that cartelize them. Restoring open competition would replace political permission with consumer choice and unleash the entrepreneurship that produces lower prices, higher quality, greater choice, and superabundance.

Authored by Monica Showalter via AmericanThinker.com,

What’s this strange proclivity from the left to provide the dregs of society with the same accommodations as those who pay their bills?

What on earth did I just listen to

Is this real life ? pic.twitter.com/m8Va9OBcGl

— IET 17 (@Inevitably_17) August 20, 2026

This is what passed for governance at the Los Angeles City Council last week:

“I’d like to propose that Los Angeles consider a pilot program for free hygenic sexual relief clinics, primarily serving the homeless and unhoused. This means equality. It means private sexual relief through masturbation, or where appropriate and consensual, with a partner. All funded by tax dollars and managed with professional oversight. It’s about allowing the homeless to have the same comforts and privacy as we have today.”

No, that’s not satire. That really happened, and based on what’s known, the guy was not thrown out of the room for it. Judging by the man’s social-services choice of words, he sounded as though he came from an NGO.

Do tell us what that ‘professional oversight’ would look like watching the perverts in action and who would get that particular job?

This, from a city that’s $97 million in the hole, with massive amounts of free accommodations for the always growing homeless population — from free teeth, to free food, to free showers, to free tents, to free sleeping bags, to free socks, to free mental health care, to free bus passes, to free drug paraphernalia, to in some cases, to free drugs. There’s nothing that can’t be showered down onto the homeless population, with the lone exception of rehab for actually ending the homelessness. 

So now the proposal is for free masturbation centers as if that would solve the problem of bums masturbating in front of schools. We already know what free drug paraphernalia did: It created more drug use, not less. Now the idea is to encourage bums to jack off at state expense and assume it won’t spill over into the sane population and make matters worse.

I have no doubt that this disgusting scheme is going viral among the NGO-industrial complexes around the world. A week or two ago, a formeer British parliamentarian suggested the establishment of free government brothels to ‘service’ illegal migrants, who are being flooded into the U.K.’s small towns and villages, flooding them with rape-minded single males. Someone must have heard that in Los Angeles and decided that that was just the thing for the homeless of that city, too. Now they’re all pushing for it, which obviously, means a new source of funding for NGOs along with a new government bureaucrat-hiring channel. I have no doubt this won’t be the last we hear of this idea.

It’s disgusting, suggesting that these groups are scraping bottom, trying to figure out how to squeeze out the last tax dollar from the city while inflicting yet another plague on society.

Helping the homeless is not a matter of accommodating their every need to allow them to be homeless with ease. It’s a matter of getting them off drugs and forced into work so that they can’t be homeless anymore that works. That is the last thing thse pervy idea-mongers pushing new homeless programs of the grossest sort would want for the homeless.

As we start a new weeks, the upward pressure on long-end bond yields from last week has shown initial signs of easing. Indeed, the 30yr Treasury yield is down -5bps overnight to 5.22%, whilst the 10yr yield is down by the same amount to 4.69%. That’s been supported by an announcement by the Treasury to CNBC that some/all of the cash in the Treasury General Account may be used to fund buybacks (bringin the US ever closer to Yield Curve Control and a new QE, much to Kevin Warsh’s horror) and by a pullback in oil prices, with Brent crude oil finally reversing course after a run of 6 consecutive gains to trade at $93.10/bbl.

That pullback in Treasury yields this morning follows last week’s surprise announcement that the US Treasury will increase its buyback operations for longer-dated Treasuries. That briefly eased the pressure on yields when it was announced, with the 30yr yield down -9.2bps on Wednesday to 5.19%, after reaching a post-2007 high of 5.31% last Monday. But even with that intervention, yields then crept back up into the weekend, with the 30yr yield closing at 5.27% on Friday, less than 4bps beneath its closing peak earlier in the week. Moreover, investor concern about wider financial repression led to clear effects in other asset classes, with the dollar index down -0.87% last week, whilst gold rose +5.18%. And this morning, gold is up another +0.72% to a 3-month high of $4,636/oz. 

One reason why yields moved higher into the weekend was the ongoing rise in oil prices last week, which added to fears about inflation. Indeed, if we look at the oil futures curve, it’s clear that markets are starting to price in a longer closure of the Strait of Hormuz again. For instance, the 12-month Brent future hit a 2-month high of $79.16/bbl on Friday, which isn’t far off its peak in the Iran conflict of $83.58/bbl back in May. So those expectations of higher oil prices put upward pressure on yields as well, and the weekend newsflow hasn’t shown any sign of progress towards a US-Iran deal either. 

The conflict is set to stay in the headlines this week, as US Treasury Secretary Bessent has said that he’ll be holding a press conference today to outline what he described as “the greatest coordinated economic isolation in the history of the world”. That follows President Trump’s post last week that “ANY country that allows its financial institutions, businesses, airports, or government entities to provide any type of lifeline to Iran will itself face TREMENDOUS Economic Consequences.” Bessent also wrote an article in the FT overnight, in which he referred to an “economic D-Day”.

Elsewhere, tariffs were also back in the headlines over the weekend, after the trade talks between the US and Canada broke down. Canadian PM Mark Carney said they were “walking away from a bad deal”, and would now “match Washington’s new tariffs dollar for dollar”. So that means Canada will now face 50% tariffs on around $20bn worth of goods, and Carney said that their own retaliatory tariffs would take effect on September 8. Meanwhile on the US side, President Trump posted that “Canada wants the benefits of being a State, without being one!!! They have also charged our great farmers, for many years, massive amounts of Tariffs. No more!!!” There’s already been a market reaction this morning to the breakdown of the talks, with the Canadian dollar weakening against every other G10 currency, including a -0.26% fall against the US Dollar. Otherwise, Bloomberg also reported overnight that Canada saw little chance of the talks resuming before the midterm elections. 

So with all that in mind, as we look forward, the week ahead has several other events, with a big one set to be Fed Chair Warsh’s speech at Jackson Hole on Friday. This is a speech that’s often used by Fed Chairs to make big announcements or send policy signals, and last year saw former Chair Powell acknowledge that policy might need adjusting, shortly before they cut rates again the following month. We’ll have to see what Warsh discusses this time, but he said at the July press conference that he hadn’t yet decided “whether it’s going to be a big-picture speech or whether it’s going to be a more traditional set up for all the action we’re going to have between September and December”.

We did a preview of the event (link here), where we note that the prevailing view is that if Warsh goes for the “big-picture” speech, then his options include a discussion of the Fed’s taskforces he set up, or possibly a speech on AI’s impact on the economy and his thinking. Alternatively, if he goes for the “more traditional” speech, they think Warsh could do a “cleanup” of the July press conference, and he may wish to counter one market narrative that Fed policy actions could be delayed until the task forces have completed their work. Otherwise, he might also discuss how officials are viewing inflation dynamics, or how the FOMC views the monetary policy implications of evolving financial conditions and recent volatility in long-term interest rates. But whatever he decides, market pricing is still very much in the balance for the next meeting in 3 weeks’ time, with futures currently pricing in a 39% chance of a hike. So investors are keeping an eye out for anything that could shift this in either direction.

Elsewhere this week, earnings season is winding down, but we do have a few releases left including the perhaps the most improtant of all – Nvidia – on Wednesday. In the last few years, Nvidia’s earnings have often been a big macro event in their own right, with reactions on a par with US jobs reports and CPI prints. But in the most recent quarters, the positive earnings surprises haven’t been as big as we saw in 2023-24, and after each of the last 4 earnings reports, Nvidia’s share price actually fell the next day. Speaking of Nvidia, Bloomberg also reported over the weekend that some of their biggest customers had been told about price hikes for servers containing its AI chips. So that adds to the signs that AI is having inflationary consequences, and isn’t a straightforward positive supply shock. 

Otherwise, the data calendar is fairly light next week, with a few inflation reports likely to be the main focus. That includes the US PCE reading for July on Wednesday, which is the Fed’s target measure, for which our US economists expect core PCE at a monthly 0.18%. Then in Europe, we’ll start to get some of the flash CPI prints for August, including from France and Spain on Friday, ahead of the Euro Area-wide number next week. 

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of key global events this week

Monday August 24

• Data: US July Chicago Fed national activity index

Tuesday August 25

• Data: US August Conference Board consumer confidence index, Philadelphia Fed non-manufacturing activity, Richmond Fed manufacturing index, business conditions, July new home sales, June FHFA house price index, Germany August Ifo survey, France August consumer confidence
• Central Banks: Fed’s Barkin speaks
• Earnings: Intuit
• Auctions: US 2-yr Notes ($69bn)

Wednesday August 26

• Data: US July PCE, personal income, personal spending, durable goods orders, Japan July PPI services, Australia July CPI
• Central banks: ECB’s Cipollone and Fed’s Barkin speak
• Earnings: NVIDIA, Crowdstrike, Salesforce
• Auctions: US 2-yr FRN (reopening, $28bn), 5-yr Notes ($70bn)

Thursday August 27

• Data: US July advance goods trade balance, wholesale inventories, August Kansas City Fed manufacturing activity, initial jobless claims, Germany September GfK consumer confidence, France July PPI, Eurozone July M3, Canada Q2 current account balance, China July industrial profits, Norway Q2 GDP
• Central banks: Jackson Hole symposium (through August 29), BoJ’s Himino speaks, ECB’s account of the July meeting
• Earnings: Marvell, Toronto-Dominion Bank, Autodesk, Workday, Dollar Tree, Pernod Ricard
• Auctions: US 7-yr Notes ($44bn)

Friday August 28

• Data: US August MNI Chicago PMI, Kansas City Fed services activity, Japan August Tokyo CPI, July jobless rate, job-to-applicant ratio, Germany July import price index, August unemployment claims rate, France August CPI, July consumer spending, Q2 total payrolls, Italy June industrial sales, August consumer confidence index, economic sentiment, manufacturing confidence, Eurozone August economic confidence, Canada Q2 GDP, Sweden Q2 GDP
• Central banks: Fed Chair Warsh speaks at Jackson Hole symposium, ECB’s Schnabel speaks

Looking at just the US, the key economic data releases this week are the Durables report and the core PCE inflation report on Wednesday. There are a few speaking engagements by Fed officials scheduled this week, including events with President Barkin and remarks from Chairman Warsh at the 2026 Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium. Several other FOMC officials are likely to speak in currently unscheduled television interviews on the sidelines of the symposium.

Monday, August 24 

• There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 

Tuesday, August 25 

• 08:00 AM Richmond Fed President Barkin (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin will speak at a Chamber of Commerce event. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On August 13, Barkin said, “There’s an argument to be made that the inflation we see today is already headed to the right path… And the current level of interest rates, many think, is still restrictive enough to bring inflation down.” But he added, “There’s a counterargument, however, that says the elevated inflation we see today is more embedded… [and] If true, this argument suggests help is needed to bring inflation all the way back down to target.”
• 09:00 AM S&P Case-Shiller home price index, June (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.1%, last +0.15%)
• 10:00 AM New home sales, July (GS -2.3%, consensus -1.3%, last +1.6%) 
• 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, August (GS 91.0, consensus 90.2, last 90.8)
• 04:00 PM Richmond Fed President Barkin (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin will speak to the Charlotte Regional Business Alliance. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 

Wednesday, August 26 

• 08:30 AM Personal income, July (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%); Personal spending, July (GS +0.1%, consensus +0.1%, last +0.3%); Core PCE price index, July (GS +0.20%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.1%); Core PCE price index (YoY), July (GS +3.24%, consensus +3.3%, last +3.3%); PCE price index, July (GS +0.12%, consensus +0.1%, last -0.1%); PCE price index (YoY), July (GS +3.61%, consensus +3.6%, last +3.7%): We estimate that personal income and spending increased by 0.3% and 0.1%, respectively, in July. We estimate that the core PCE price index rose 0.20% in July, corresponding to a year-over-year rate of +3.24%. Additionally, we expect that the headline PCE price index increased 0.12% and increased 3.61% from a year earlier.
• 08:30 AM GDP, Q2 second release (GS +1.6%, consensus +1.5%, last +1.5%); Personal consumption, Q2 second release (GS +3.4%, consensus +3.2%, last +3.2%)
• Core PCE inflation, Q2 second release (GS +3.42%, consensus +3.4%, last +3.4%); We estimate a 0.1pp upward revision to Q2 GDP growth to +1.6% (quarter-over-quarter annualized). Our forecast reflects an upward revision to consumer spending growth (+0.2pp to +3.4%) but a downward revision to business fixed investment growth based on stronger personal care and healthcare spending but softer software spending details in the quarterly services survey (QSS). 
• 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, July preliminary (GS +1.0%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.5%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, July preliminary (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.7%); Core capital goods orders, July preliminary (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.7%, last +1.2%); Core capital goods shipments, July preliminary (GS +1.0%, consensus +0.8%, last +2.0%): We estimate that durable goods orders increased 1.0% in the preliminary July report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted) based on our tracking of commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.6% increase in core capital goods orders—reflecting strength in the new orders components of manufacturing surveys in July—and a 1.0% increase in core capital goods shipments—reflecting the continued increase in core capital goods orders in recent months.
• 11:45 AM Richmond Fed President Barkin (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin will participate in a panel discussion at a Greensboro Chamber event.

Thursday, August 27 

• 08:30 AM Advanced goods trade balance, July (GS -$103.0bn, consensus -$100.2bn, last -$101.4bn); We forecast that the goods trade deficit weighed slightly in July, reflecting a continued decline in oil exports.
• 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended August 22 (GS 210k, consensus 208k, last 206k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended August 15 (consensus 1,800k, last 1,799k)
• 08:00 PM Jackson Hole agenda and paper titles likely released: The Jackson Hole program is expected to be posted to the event’s website, with the paper titles or panel topics and speaker names. Full text of the papers and speeches will be posted to the website at the time each event is scheduled to begin. This year’s topic is “Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and Policy.”

 
Friday, August 28 

• 10:00 AM BLS releases preliminary annual payrolls benchmark revision: The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) will publish a preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision to the level of nonfarm payrolls for March 2026. The final benchmark revision will be issued and incorporated into nonfarm payrolls alongside the January 2027 employment report in February 2027. Based on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW)—the key source data for the annual benchmark revision—an upward revision seems likely; we estimate on the order of 50-450k (or a 5-40k upward revision to monthly payroll growth over April 2025-March 2026). We believe that difficulties accounting for unauthorized immigrants caused the QCEW to understate job growth and likely contributed to the deeply negative benchmark revisions of the last three years. Undercounting of unauthorized workers in the benchmark should be less of an issue for this year’s benchmark and going forward, reflecting the sharp slowdown in immigration.
• 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, August final (GS 51.0, consensus 51.0, last 51.0): University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, August final (GS 3.3%, last 3.3%)
• 10:00 AM Fed Chairman Warsh speaks: Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh will deliver keynote remarks at the 2026 Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium. Speech text is expected. 

d

Michael Saylor’s Strategy, the world’s largest public company holding Bitcoin, raised about $2 billion through common stock sales last week while making no new Bitcoin purchases.

The Bitcoin treasury company sold 18.26 million MSTR shares between Aug. 17 and Aug. 23 through its at-the-market (ATM) offering program, according to a Monday filing with the SEC, adding a new pool of cash to its balance-sheet toolkit as part of an effort to preserve flexibility.

Strategy repurchased about 1.43 million of its STRC preferred shares for $136.4 million, added $300 million to its US dollar reserve and directed the remaining proceeds to a newly launched US dollar cash account.

“The new USD Cash pool gives Strategy more time and optionality, but it does not remove those underlying obligations,” said Nicolai Sondergaard, a senior research analyst at Nansen.

The newly established USD Cash pool, which currently holds $1.59 billion, will sit alongside its existing reserve (which stands at $5.1 billion reserves) bringing total cash to $6.69 billion…

Strategy said the new cash account gives management more flexibility to respond to market conditions and can fund purposes including Bitcoin purchases, preferred-stock dividends, debt payments and securities repurchases.

USD Cash enhances our Digital Credit Capital Framework, and is separately designated for general Bitcoin Treasury Company purposes, including acquiring BTC, paying preferred dividends & interest, repurchasing MSTR/preferred stock, repaying converts, and increasing USD Reserve.

— Michael Saylor (@saylor) August 24, 2026

As CoinTelegraph reports, the company made no Bitcoin purchases or sales during the week, leaving its holdings at 840,447 BTC, acquired for $63.36 billion at an average price of $75,385 per Bitcoin.

Strategy hasn’t bought Bitcoin since the seven days ended June 22.

“For MSTR shareholders, the trade-off is dilution in exchange for flexibility,” Sondergaard concluded.

“The latest equity issuance strengthened the balance sheet, but did not immediately increase Bitcoin-per-share exposure.”

Strategy’s shares and debt securities rallied last week as Bitcoin ran toward $80,000, but the financing flywheel remains impaired, with its valuation premium still well below earlier-cycle levels.

Authored by AG News Staff via American Greatness,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation Saturday expanding privacy protections for immigration service workers, despite warnings that the measure could chill investigative journalism and face First Amendment challenges.

Assembly Bill 2624, dubbed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” by Republican Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, expands California’s Safe at Home program to certain nonprofit employees who assist people navigating the U.S. immigration system.

The law will take effect Oct. 1, 2027, after Newsom leaves office because of term limits.

Democratic Assemblywoman Mia Bonta, who introduced the bill in February, said the protections are necessary because immigration service providers face harassment and threats.

“Our immigrant service providers are living in fear because of extremists looking to demonize the work that they do and the populations they serve,” Bonta said Saturday.

The measure imposes penalties on people who distribute information or images of covered immigration workers under circumstances the law defines as inciting violence or threats. Posting personal information or an image with the specific intent that another person imminently use it to commit a crime involving violence or a threat of violence: punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 per violation, imprisonment of up to one year in county jail or under Penal Code § 1170(h) (16 months, 2 years, or 3 years), or both.

Critics argue the language could discourage journalists from investigating nonprofit workers suspected of fraud or misconduct. Bonta disputes that interpretation, maintaining the law targets doxxing and threats rather than legitimate reporting.

DeMaio accused lawmakers of attempting to intimidate people “trying to shine light on bad behavior.”

The legislation became associated with independent journalist and YouTuber Nick Shirley after his investigations into alleged fraud involving immigrant communities and nonprofit organizations. Shirley has argued the measure emerged in response to his reporting in Minnesota and California.

The controversy intensified Wednesday when Shirley was conducting an interview outside the state Capitol in Sacramento.

Terry Schanz, chief of staff to Democratic Assemblywoman Tina McKinnor, interrupted the encounter while holding a sign making a crude allegation about Shirley’s anatomy.

The incident created an uncomfortable contrast with Democratic arguments that the new law is needed to combat harassment. Multiple complaints have since been filed against Schanz with the Legislature’s human resources department, according to the New York Post.

California’s existing Safe at Home program provides substitute mailing addresses to certain people considered vulnerable to threats, including domestic violence survivors and some health care workers.

With AB 2624, California will extend similar protections to qualifying immigration service workers, setting up a likely debate over where personal safety protections end and constitutionally protected newsgathering begins.

“Canada has been ripping off the United States of America for years,” wrote President Trump in his latest social media outburst, laying out his tariff torrent against Canada.

“Their ridiculously high tariffs on our Farmers and farm products has made life impossible for these great American Patriots, and has long created a 60 Billion Dollar Deficit between our two Countries.

Not sustainable, and NOT ANYMORE!”

The US implemented a new 50% tax on imports of hundreds of Canadian items including furniture, plastics, plywood and electrical equipment on Saturday.

It’s such a high rate that it may cut off the world’s biggest market for some Canadian enterprises.

And now this morning, Trump unveiled more products will face dramatic tariff increases come the start of next year…

“On January First, 2027, Tariffs on all Cars, Trucks, both large and small. Automotive Parts, and Steel, will be increased to 50%.

Build in the U.S. and there are ZERO TARIFFS.

Canada will be treated like a State no longer!

On Trade, and in other ways, also, they are among the worst Nations in the World to deal with.

They feel entitled, and yet, WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US!

They do 95% of their business with the U.S., with us, the exact opposite!”

The Loonie was weaker ahead of Trump’s tweet…

Carney’s government has pledged financial help for businesses caught in the crossfire. That may prove more complicated than previous aid packages for industries like steel that have been facing US tariffs for more than a year. 

The new tariffs are “very diffuse, and they hit, in particular, small and many medium enterprises in various parts of the country and in radically different supply chains,” said Matthew Holmes, chief of public policy at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.

“Very difficult for the federal government especially to create a package of supports for them.”

Canadians may have wanted their prime minister to stand tough and not sign a bad trade deal with the US; but the collapse of talks, and the escalation of the tariff war, will come at a price.

Regular readers are aware that one of our biggest concerns with the AI supercycle, and the entire AI arms race between the US and China, is that when push comes to shove, not only is there mounting grassroots opposition to data center build out across the US but, more importantly, the US is badly lagging China when it comes to the rollout of much needed energy to power the hundreds of Gigawatts of energy needed to power up the hundreds of data centers that are coming on line. 

Consider that as we noted two weeks ago, China is currently building 37 nuclear reactors while the US is building zero.

Monthly nuclear update: China 37 nuclear reactors under construction; US 0 pic.twitter.com/GnIU82Jqtf

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 14, 2026

Meanwhile, the stopgap measure of using gas power as data center energy sources, while prudent, is about to hit a wall as much of the future buildout is rapidly approaching its maximum capacity. Which means that unless nuclear energy is fast-tracked, there will be a massive energy gap preventing the future construction of data centers, something we noted in “More Than Two-Thirds Of The Power Sought For US Data Centers Will Never Materialize.”

Which is why we have been keeping a close eye on the rollout and commercialization of modular reactors which are a much more credible long-term energy source for the AI revolution, and were pleasantly surprised to read this morning that Nano Nuclear Energy, a leader in the commercialization of US modular reactors, announced the signing of a strategic commercial framework with Tillman and its global data-center platform, Tillman Digital Gateway, to advance the future deployment of Nano Nuclear’s Kronos MMR Energy Systems across Tillman’s planned AI industrial zones in the United States.

The framework identifies Nano Nuclear as Tillman’s anticipated preferred nuclear technology provider and establishes a structure for the parties to collaborate on the evaluation and development of nuclear generation opportunities across Tillman’s growing U.S. data-center pipeline, with a parallel opportunity to expand to certain international markets.

In connection with the proposed collaboration, the parties are targeting 2 GW or more of advanced nuclear capacity by the mid-2030s and 6 GW or more by 2040, subject to general and site-specific definitive agreements, customer commitments, financing, regulatory approvals and other project requirements.

“Power availability is becoming one of the defining constraints on the continued expansion of AI infrastructure, and addressing this challenge will require both near-term execution and long-term planning,” said James Walker, CEO of NANO Nuclear Energy.

“For NANO Nuclear, this framework represents an important potential commercialization pathway that connects our technology with an anticipated multi-gigawatt-site pipeline of power demand,” said Jay Yu, Founder and Chairman of NANO Nuclear Energy. “Importantly, the structure is intended to align both organizations around measurable project-development and commercial milestones as individual opportunities progress. We believe combining Tillman’s infrastructure-development capabilities with our nuclear technology, regulatory licensing pathway and deployment model can create a scalable foundation for future nuclear-powered AI infrastructure.”

“Meeting the extraordinary power requirements of next-generation AI infrastructure requires us to plan not only for what our campuses need today, but for the resilient, scalable power architecture they will require for decades to come,” said Sachit Ahuja, Co-President of Tillman Global Holdings. “We view NANO Nuclear as an emerging leader in advanced nuclear whose progress to date, commercially focused strategy and modular technology platform make it a compelling potential solution for our medium- and long-term power requirements. This framework combines Tillman’s infrastructure-development platform and relationships with large-scale technology customers and NANO Nuclear’s advanced nuclear capabilities, creating a pathway to benefit from the integration of nuclear generation into future Tillman campuses as our portfolio expands.”

Below are the listed key elements of the proposed framework: 

• Preferred nuclear technology relationship: The framework identifies NANO Nuclear as Tillman’s proposed preferred nuclear technology provider for potential advanced nuclear energy deployments across Tillman’s planned U.S. AI industrial zones.
• Joint project development: Tillman and NANO Nuclear intend to evaluate candidate sites for future nuclear energy deployment and collaborate on site diligence, development and licensing planning, customer engagement and project structuring as individual opportunities advance.
• IPP-style deployment model: For qualifying projects, the parties contemplate an independent-power-producer-style structure under which Tillman or its affiliates would finance, develop and own project power infrastructure and NANO Nuclear would develop, support operations, and supply the reactors and fuel, with specific commercial arrangements to be negotiated on a project-by-project basis.
• Milestone-Based Warrant Arrangement and $5 Million Initial Equity Grant: The framework contemplates the proposed issuance to Tillman of fully milestone-vesting warrants to purchase up to $100 million of NANO Nuclear common stock. A majority of the warrants would vest only upon future binding reactor purchase commitments. The remaining portion of the warrants would vest only upon achievement of specified project-development milestones. The framework also contemplates an initial restricted common stock grant to Tillman with a notional value of $5 million, a portion of which would vest upon execution of definitive equity grant agreements, with the substantial majority vesting only upon achievement of specified project-development milestones.
• Project-level equity participation: The framework also contemplates potential rights for NANO Nuclear to participate alongside Tillman in a portion of the equity of certain project-level entities associated with future nuclear generation and corresponding data-center development once qualifying nuclear projects reach specified development milestones. Any such participation is subject to separately negotiated project-specific terms and definitive agreements.

To be sure, this is still woefully insufficient to plug the full gap of roughly 763 GW of uncommitted or unconfirmed energy needed for data center power builds, but it is a welcome start and we believe that more data centers will need to follow in Tillman’s footstep to arrange precisely the kind of long-term energy deals that advanced nuclear companies like Nano Nuclear make possible.

Recent deadly Russian attack waves on Ukrainian cities – especially the capital – have prompted France to announce it will be speeding up deliveries of anti-air defense missiles to the Ukrainian armed forces.

It also comes after after a call between French President Emmanuel Macron and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky – which focused on the country’s rapidly dwindling supplies of interceptor missiles.

Macron specifically referenced a Friday Russian drone attack on the city of Kryvyi Rih, which happens to be Zelensky’s hometown.

Two Russian drones in succession hit the Sun Gallery shopping center in the city, resulting in a death toll of 16 people, with approximately 130 others wounded.

“I expressed our horror and our emotion to him,” Macron said of the Zelensky call. “With these strikes and those this week against Kyiv, Russia is continuing and intensifying the crime of its aggression. By systematically targeting civilians, and by choosing intimidation and escalation, Russia is likely seeking to project strength but is above all revealing an admission of weakness.”

Vowing to increase collective Western pressure on Moscow, Macron announced the following:

In this context, it is crucial to provide Ukraine with all the necessary means to defend its skies and thwart this aggression. I announced to President Zelensky the strengthening of our support, with the delivery of interceptors and the continuation of our cooperation in the wake of the launch meeting of the Anti-Missile Coalition held in Paris on July 13 last and the letter of intent signed on November 17, 2025. It is essential that all countries with capabilities at their disposal also join this effort.

Macron has also indicated that his country is leading the charge in seeking to develop European alternatives to the US Patriot missile system, given it is widely acknowledged that the Patriot is the only weapon currently possessed by Ukraine capable of downing high-speed ballistic missiles.

Members of Europe’s ‘Coalition of the Willing’ are meeting again Monday:

French President Emmanuel Macron, U.K. Prime Minister Andy Burnham and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz will co-chair a Coalition of the Willing meeting Monday aimed at strengthening support for Ukraine and increasing pressure on Russia.

European leaders are pledging further support to Kyiv, days after a Russian drone attack on a crowded shopping mall in Kryvyi Rih killed at least 16 people.

One former US official has given new insight into just how low Ukraine’s Patriot supplies have dwindled.

Below: Russian drone strike hit shopping center in Kryvyi Rih days ago…

At least 5 killed and nearly 100 wounded after Russia struck the “Sun Gallery” shopping mall in Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine. The second Geran-type drone hit the scene once emergency crews were already on site.@Archer83Able pic.twitter.com/7GK6w6ULbI

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) August 21, 2026

“Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asked the U.S. for about 5 percent of its remaining Patriot inventory in a meeting with Mike Pence, the former vice president said Sunday,” Politico reports. According to more of his comments:

If the U.S. could spare 5 percent of its missile defense system, Pence said Zelenskyy told him, then “he believes that would get them through the winter months.”

Zelensky in early August had said Ukraine received only a third as many air-defense interceptors so far in 2026 compared to the same period in 2025.

“Our partners have the missiles. What is needed are the necessary political decisions on deliveries and on accelerating production, including localization in Ukraine,” Zelenskyy said at the time.

Authored by Jeremy Lott via The Epoch Times,

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, made his second push in two weeks to halt the Muslim foot washing facilities at his state’s airports on Friday.

“DFW [Dallas Fort Worth International Airport] stopped plans to install additional Islamic wudu washing facilities after I threatened to withhold state grants to entities operating these airports,” Abbott wrote in an Aug. 21 X post.

The governor also wants DFW to remove two foot washing stations in one interfaith chapel, and Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport to remove its more extensive foot washing facilities.

Abbott wrote that he had “referred both government-owned airports to the U.S. Department of Justice for investigation and enforcement” and added: “If the existing facilities are on city owned property, Texas will pursue litigation for religious discrimination at taxpayer-funded facilities.”

DFW Says Stations Stay

A DFW spokesperson told The Epoch Times last week that it “accelerated its review due to elevated public interest” and “determined not to proceed.”

The airport’s response to the governor’s second demand was different. DFW sent a same-day letter that it shared with The Epoch Times laying out why it will not be removing anything.

In the letter, signed by DFW CEO Chris McLaughlin, DFW said it had shelved plans for a larger foot washing facility while at the same time “respectfully disagree[ing] that the installation of the stations would discriminate against any religious view in violation of law.”

The proposal for a larger prayer washing room grew out of an “observed health and safety concern,” which DFW said it had the “legal authority to address.”

Observant Muslims pray at five distinct times in a day, and some amount of body washing is typically required to cleanse them for those prayers.

The faithful have to get that water from somewhere. DFW wrote that its staff “observed an increasing number of individuals using bathroom sinks to wash feet.” This created a “potential slip and fall hazard because the bathroom sinks are not designed for this purpose.”

Regarding the existing small washing stations located in the interfaith chapel on Concourse D, for international flights, DFW wrote that those stations are “open and available to all.”

Whether or not to use them is a “private choice,” and any visitor to the airport may make use of them for “either a secular or religious purpose.”

Because all can access the foot washing stations, “there is no unfair treatment,” DFW wrote. It added that no federal or state grant funds were used to install the foot fountains.

Houston Mayor Weighs In

The Houston airport shared a lengthy statement by Houston Mayor John Whitmire, a Democrat, with The Epoch Times.

“The ablution room at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) was developed and approved by the previous administration of Mayor Sylvester Turner,” Whitmire said, and it started operating during his own administration in 2024.

The expansion that the washing room was part of “was paid for by fees charged to the international airlines,” Whitmire said, and taxpayer funds from city, state, or federal sources were not used.

He also made the case for its inclusiveness, saying that the washing room and the “adjoining prayer room are open to all travelers, employees and stakeholders with access to Terminal D, regardless of faith.”

The Houston airport has interfaith chapels and, taken together, “these facilities serve travelers of all faiths and beliefs,” he said.

“Therefore, their operations do not entail any discriminatory actions,” Whitmire said.

The Houston mayor said that before the facilities were provided, passengers often used sinks in the airport’s bathrooms for foot washing.

Neither the mayor nor the Houston airport have indicated that there is any plan to remove the facilities in response to the Texas governor’s statements.

Muslims and the First Amendment

Reactions to the controversy have been varied. The Texas chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations sent a statement to The Epoch Times calling it an “anti-Muslim political stunt” on the governor’s part and thanking the Houston mayor for “debunking” some of Abbott’s claims.

Justin Butterfield, director of litigation at the Heritage Foundation, suggested that this controversy is not happening in a vacuum.

“There are two principles at play,” Butterfield told The Epoch Times. “Government should accommodate religion robustly but shouldn’t grant coercive power to one faith to invidiously discriminate against all others.”

Apart from the specifics of this case, Butterfield said that the governor is “rightly concerned about the risk of a group demanding more than accommodation by declaring public spaces theirs and coercing others to comply with their religious beliefs.”

Butterfield gave the example of a mosque in the Dallas metro area that “sued preachers and their church for handing out Christian literature on a public sidewalk near the mosque” last December. The case was eventually thrown out on First Amendment grounds.

Texas has a sizable Muslim population, with more than 310,000 Muslims living in the state. In raw numbers, that puts it behind New York, California, Illinois, and New Jersey, but ahead of Michigan.

The total Muslim population of the United States currently clocks in at just under 4.5 million, according to World Population Review figures.