Who Will Call the Shots in 2026?

This month’s letter explores a simple but uncomfortable question: who ultimately controls a country’s economic destiny when debt, deficits, and political paralysis collide?

We start with a historical case study—the slow decline of the Spanish Empire. Despite vast resources, global dominance, and immense wealth, Spain repeatedly chose short-term political comfort over structural reform. 

The result wasn’t just repeated bankruptcies, but a gradual loss of sovereignty, as creditors and financial markets began dictating terms that kings and parliaments no longer could.

The parallel to today is hard to ignore.

In the US, the “easy way” still exists: meaningful spending restraint, elimination of fraud and waste, and restoring confidence by growing the economy faster than the debt. 

But the political reality makes this increasingly unlikely. Every year of inaction compounds the problem—and shrinks the window for voluntary reform.

If that window closes, history shows what comes next: bond markets, not voters, begin calling the shots.

We then look at what this means for 2026 specifically. 

Persistent trillion-dollar deficits, renewed money printing, political pressure for lower interest rates, while foreign investors steadily diversify away from dollar reserves.

That’s where real assets come in.

The final section of the letter explains why tangible assets—those tied to physical resources and essential goods—act as a financial Plan B.

We walk through two concrete examples: revisiting a gold producer that benefits asymmetrically from rising gold prices, and a new mention, an essential food business with a good entry point.

History doesn’t repeat exactly, but it rhymes. Nations that refuse to fix their finances voluntarily eventually lose control over how the fix happens.