In my view, this widely held wisdom is based on a profound misreading of economic and political reality and trends in the U.S. and around the world. I believe that a looming global recession and fear of deflation will lead the Fed to cut rates instead and reinstate quantitative easing, or QE, causing U.S. bond yields to fall.

First, it is important to understand that the 2008 financial crisis was never resolved. Aggressive fiscal- and monetary-policy tools--extremely low rates and multitrillion-dollar bond-buying programs--helped contain the crisis. But they didn't fix the problem. The global economy has been stabilized, but fundamental weaknesses remain.

An economic reckoning may surface as soon as the next few months.

In the U.S., second-quarter economic data look strong. But that is misleading. There are plenty of indications of weakness, including slowing sales of cars and houses, and a decline in mortgage refinancing. The cumulative effect of interest-rate hikes, frozen levels of real income, and rising oil prices will also weigh on the public's buying power.

In the corporate sphere, the boom in stock buybacks, which in May reached an astounding $174 billion, comes directly at the expense of capital investment that would boost economic growth. A potential global trade war is also detrimental; the U.S. dollar's weakness in 2017, combined with reinvigorated economies throughout the world, contributed immensely to U.S. exports...

June's interest-rate hike was most likely the last in the current cycle. The next major move by the Fed could be to lower rates, followed by more QE. The realization that this is happening will bring about a dramatic change in investors' views and will return U.S. bond yields to the 1.5%-2% level. The development, I believe, will be rapid and surprise a financial system dramatically underweight long-term bonds.

As we say, "happy times are here again" -- almost nonstop since 2009. So this editorial is bold call -- but it has really been a "bipolar" economy since the 2008 crisis; with every person able to see whatever they want to see in the mixed data... at some point, a clear trend will likely manifest...

The number of high net worth individuals (HNWI) -- which Capgemini defines as those having investable assets of $1 million or more (excluding primary residence, collectibles, consumables and consumer durables) --  grew almost 10 percent, or 1.6 million, to 18.1 million in 2017.  

"High net worth individuals around the world enjoyed investment returns above 20 percent for the second year in a row," Anirban Bose, head of Capgemini's financial services global strategic business unit, said in a statement. The report's analysis confirms that "global HNWI wealth would exceed $100 trillion by 2025," Bose wrote

Sounds reaaaal sustainable...

But Subran and other international trade experts warn not to count China out too quickly.

"The first thing to observe here is that China is not a country of laws -- it's an authoritarian dictatorship... so from that opening point, China is potentially able to play much, much dirtier than the United States," said Jacob Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, who warned that American businesses could take the punishment for Trump's antagonism.

"He will essentially force the Chinese government to retaliate in other ways -- and those other ways can be much more costly to American firms," he said. "That belief is premised on a fundamentally erroneous assumption about how the modern economy works... and a lack of concern with how engaged American businesses are involved already in China."

Underwriting is not nearly as bad as in 2006--2007 yet, but it appears the trend is what it always has been, when the economy is strong and there is too much capital, underwriting standards fall down, and then the stage is set for a bad outcome when the economy goes bad. It is typically 10--12 years between collapse of the last crash and then credit quality deterioration and the next credit collapse. We are at 10 years. Dodd Frank had rules to try to avoid a replay of 2008 in CMBS, but a lot of loans now are made by private equity funds that are not subject to these regulations.

One thing that is immutable is that as each generation comes into Wall Street, they think they know better how to do it, and they eventually do the same dumb loans in pursuit of profits and bonuses. It has never been different. We are not about to have a major crash again, but CMBS loan quality is deteriorating now, and one day in the next 2--3 years, it will be a bad problem. When they start doing a lot of CDOs and virtual CMBS pools with derivatives, then that is a sure sign the end is near.

...

And this might just be the opening act for a theme that could endure for at least 12 months. While the Fed is expected to deliver up to two more rate increases in 2018 and further hikes next year, the ECB just ensured it won't move until the latter half of next year at the earliest.

...

The government has recently been issuing a lot more debt to finance its deficit, much of it in the form of Treasury bills that are sold to investors. But to find sufficient buyers, the Treasury has had to pay higher rates on Treasury bills. This helped attract money out of the federal funds market into Treasury bills, and in turn that caused the fed funds rate to move higher and closer to the top of its range.

This caught the Fed's eye. The central bank, according to analysts, wants to avoid a situation in which the fed funds rate moves above the Fed's target range. "The Fed doesn't want anyone in the market to think it's not in control of overnight rates," Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP, said. "It might worry some people if it went above the upper band''

Seems like the Fed doesn't have a clue how this post-2008 jalopy of a monetary system works...

...

This is the third bank that settled with state attorneys general for illegally influencing the Libor. Barclays, Deutsche Bank and now Citibank have been fined $420 million collectively.

Citibank agreed to comply with ongoing investigations into other banks' Libor cases.

Darius Brawn, a hedge fund veteran who previously worked as a portfolio manager for SAC and Citadel, told CNBC he thinks $10 billion is a conservative estimate. He cites Tesla's plans to ramp up its Model 3 production, build new factories, make a new Roadster, Semi trucks and a Model Y vehicle, and to embark on large-scale production of its glass solar roof tiles.

...

Brawn, who has shorted Tesla personally, points out that it's highly unusual for a growth company to cut its planned investment spending, as Tesla did last quarter from $3.4 billion to under $3 billion... Without raising additional capital, Brawn said, the electric vehicle maker has enough cash to last for only a few quarters.

...

"I do not believe Wall Street investment banks are willing take the massive reputational, legal and financial risks associated with underwriting billions of dollars of new securities for [Tesla]" [Said Gabe Hoffman].

He and other bears also believe Tesla may not even be able to conduct an equity offering because of the existence of an undisclosed, and ongoing, enforcement action by the SEC. This action was discovered through FOIA research