A Crusade Against Volatility: The Market Meets Uncertainty

A crusade begins, and a journey to meet volatility has begun—against a market which has not stabilized in any way, and unfortunately, likely won't for some time. This affects the market in a variety of ways, and there are a few prime examples we can use to demonstrate that.

Eroding Global Confidence and Diplomatic Instability

As stated before, the U.S. has, rightfully so, lost a lot of its good-faith standings financially, and also with our international relations.

For one, no tariff deals have been made and solidified at all. Most of what has been agreed upon has been verbal. Beyond that, these verbal agreements haven’t put us in a better position than we were before under the last political administration. While the intention is to do so, the result has mostly been making already horrific applications taken by the current administration slightly less bad. Ultimately, this leaves us in a position where we’re worse off than before—at best—even if these deal talks go through. So that’s not good.

With that in mind, and with the loss of good-faith dealings—both internationally and even internally—we just don’t trust or believe these deals will be adhered to or remain unchanged over the next four years with a bipolar United States. This is pretty understandable, given that what the current administration has shown is that if it benefits them in terms of voters and public support, they will push the narrative regardless of facts.

That said, dynamics around the world are changing—some as recently as the last few days. Without some kind of punitive monetary or popularity-based consequences tied to these deals if the U.S. violates them, other countries likely just won’t trust us. Instead, they'll move toward a short-term analysis of our movements.

This highly constrains corporate action, as the risks tied to strategic dynamics of their products continue to grow—which we can expand on.

The Steel Sector and the Illusion of Manufacturing Revival

Let’s take steel. U.S. Steel and Nippon have just been approved for their buyout. The focus was to generate manufacturing jobs that have moved away from the U.S.

The thing is—cheap labor is highly effective and proven to be so. The U.S. is anything but cheap when it comes to labor. We've been a “quality and innovation first” country for years, ever since China was brought into the global market and took over much of industry production.

If you’re running a business, of course you want ethical labor. But you also have to weigh the cost to your production line. Some businesses skip the ethics part entirely. The U.S. will likely never, in the near future, return to a manufacturing-focused economy—producing supply rather than demand as it does now. It would take delicacy, strategic product focus, economic analysis and monitoring, and job generation on a scale that, to put it bluntly, just won’t happen in the volatile economic environment we’re in right now.

Steel also has to deal with tariffs. Manufacturers that use steel now have to contend with immense cost incursions to generate the minerals, refine them, develop the materials for their products, and so on—on top of the cost of tariffs applied to their specific products.

That’s why a lot of defense production is moving away from the U.S. toward Europe—because it's cheaper to produce, cheaper in cost, and more reliable in terms of alliances and deals. The demand is there. The cost is the issue. So there’s no real incentive to generate jobs without some sort of tax relief or financial dynamic that can successfully offset the cost pressures.

That said, things still aren’t leveled out—internationally or nationally.

Oil Markets and Middle Eastern Instability

Now let’s look at something else: oil. As we know, the Middle East tends to be the dominant influencer in that market. It is perhaps the least stable it’s been since Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan.

Israel, at this time, is one of the main causes of that instability. And with relations escalating—and likely to remain tense even if they calm down—supply becomes a concern. So oil costs go up, which then causes a domino effect: damaging production costs, increasing the cost of transporting supply, and raising fuel costs for consumers. The current administration has touted that oil is the way forward, no longer trying to move toward clean energy. But the U.S. as a producer really can’t match the external market. With the increase in cost due to war, and the removal of clean energy funds and products, the cost to the consumer just goes up. It means you’ll buy less, put simply, because it costs more.

Oil and energy companies that were receiving funds and relief for investing in clean energy—which was cheaper and offered minimal startup costs—now have to pay more to operate while trying to sustain a market for their main product.

So best-case scenario, they change their focus from clean energy to oil—which costs more, is less reliable, and is tied to geopolitical risks—and then try to deal with that market and the tariffs. Even with tariff relief, they’re likely to lose money.

Immigration, ICE, and Labor Instability

There’s another thing to look at: the deployment of ICE, which affects immigrants and even non-immigrants who are perhaps just perceived as different in some way.

This has economic effects—currently just in LA and immigrant labor markets—but if the expansion of Marines and the National Guard continues, it puts law enforcement in the position of preventing violent opportunists while trying to avoid the negative optics of troops dealing directly with the public.

From a labor perspective, people live in fear—afraid or angered to operate as normal. That damages supply.

From a consumer perspective, it creates avoidance of basic day-to-day commodities that usually generate revenue—not just for the state, but federally, and for the businesses that rely on them.

Yes, work-from-home dynamics and online consumerism may rise slightly, but with the unstable tariff market and already rising inflation, it won’t be enough to offset the losses. And remember—you, as a taxpayer, are paying for all of this. It costs millions to have these troops, the National Guard, and law enforcement deployed like this. Just two buildings in LA have cost us close to $160 million and counting to maintain.

While they’re doing this, they are not protecting the border, not responding to actual crimes, and they’re leaving the nation in a more vulnerable position.

If this expands state by state, the cost—both in terms of national security and taxpayer dollars—will only rise exponentially. States won’t be able to sustain this on their own, so the funds will have to come from you—via tax.

Tax Policy, Risk, and the Cost of Innovation

Now that’s without even factoring in the tax bill, which is set to impact the general population far more than the ultra-wealthy. If that bill goes through, it’ll only get worse for the average consumer.

If you’re a boss, a CEO, or an owner looking to bring a product to market—or improve one—you’re stuck. The risk of doing so is much higher.

You don’t know if producing or expanding that product using materials in one region will suddenly cost you more. These supply and production systems are not lean or flexible in any real way.

So companies are less inclined to innovate, which means less growth—and fewer jobs.

And you’re stuck with the bill for all of it.

The Shift to Short-Term Thinking and a Market in Flux

As a result, the market is now focused on the short term. You can’t leave your money in one place for too long. The market shifts almost daily—sometimes hourly—under this administration.

So things go up, then they go down. Then up, then back down.

Without professional analysis and guidance, you could very likely lose a lot. And because of that, the market sinks. People hesitate to invest. They tiptoe through instead of charging forward. That’s what we’ve seen in the Dow, Nasdaq, and S&P 500. It’s like walking on a rickety bridge. Either you make it across—or the bridge gives way and you fall.

A Tired Nation and a Tipping Point

People are tired—tired of this kind of world and these volatile, combative dynamics. We've seen a rise in voices willing to speak out—whether in protest or in debate. We just don’t want this anymore.

There’s a growing push to become the America we were told to dream of—the country people once wanted to build a life in.

At some point, that push becomes an unstoppable force: the American people. And that force meets the immovable object: the current ruling party. When the two collide, either both will break and the country comes apart at the seams, or one gives way. I can tell you—it’s a lot easier for a smaller group to give way than for millions of people set on change.

We’ll see what happens, because we now have to watch everything short term and most importantly its completely unprecedented.