Shares of Unitree Robotics have nearly halved since the Chinese company's blockbuster IPO almost two weeks ago, as concerns about a humanoid robotics bubble continue to mount. Not even China's World Humanoid Robot Games or World Robot Conference generated enough enthusiasm among retail or institutional investors to rekindle upward momentum.
The warning signs were first visible from the opening bell in Shanghai. Unitree initially surged 629% when it began trading on Shanghai's Star Market, immediately transforming China's first publicly traded humanoid robot manufacturer into a real-time indicator of the industry.
Unitree's valuation remains detached from even the assumptions of its own underwriting team. Citic Securities analysts valued the company at between 50.6 billion yuan and 55.9 billion yuan six to 12 months after listing. Even after the stock was halved, it is still worth more than four times the top of that range.
Through July, Unitree said it had produced about 18,000 humanoids, while first-quarter revenue increased 68.5% from a year earlier to 423 million yuan. Its current market capitalization is roughly 147 times its annualized first-quarter revenue.
"Given that level of uncertainty, Unitree's high valuation is probably not justified," said Chen Dong, CIO for Asia at Bank J. Safra Sarasin, citing the stock's lofty price-to-earnings ratio and the difficulty of staying ahead in an "infant-level" industry where competition is intensifying.
Zhang Ying, an economist at the Economist Intelligence Unit, said, "Widespread adoption is currently hindered by financial constraints, such as high upfront and maintenance costs, and technical limitations, such as short battery life, which make it difficult for manufacturers to justify the investment."
Unitree founder Wang Xingxing told the World Robot Conference in Beijing shortly after the IPO that mass-market adoption of these robots would be achieved within the next decade. That timeline is broadly in line with the forecasts we have provided readers from multiple institutional desks.
Unitree Strikes Double Gold on Day One🥇🥇🏃
The First World Humanoid Robot Games
Unitree takes first place in all Day-One races
1500m track race — 6:34.40 (Unweighted)
(Unitree H1 humanoid robot — the same model featured in the Spring Festival Gala)
400m track race — 1:28.03… pic.twitter.com/V1BPoNQMMP
More broadly, the Solactive China Humanoid Robotics Index (a yuan-denominated equity benchmark tracking Chinese companies involved in humanoid robotics, including robot manufacturers, AI systems, motion controls, precision actuators, and industrial automation) shows that the bubble has been deflating since peaking in mid-2025.
The next big test for Unitree and China's robotics industry is whether they can scale commercially before Tesla brings its humanoid robot to market, which JPMorgan analysts expect to occur in the second half of 2027 (read here).
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 05:45Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,
One migrant is now being granted settlement or citizenship in Britain every single minute, according to newly released Home Office figures.
In the three months to June 2026, 140,122 foreign nationals were given indefinite leave to remain or British citizenship - 1.07 people every 60 seconds. Across the full year, nearly 200,000 were handed indefinite leave to remain (ILR), a 16-year record and a 24 per cent jump on the year before. Another 245,520 were granted citizenship. Applications to become British hit an all-time high of 315,224.
This is the so called "Boriswave" arriving at the welfare office. The people waved in when salary and skills thresholds were slashed are now converting temporary visas into a permanent claim on housing, the NHS, benefits and, in time, the state pension.
'The numbers we see now are a huge increase on where they have been in the last few years.'
Research Director at the Centre for Migration Control reacts to Home Office data showing one migrant is being granted settlement or citizenship in Britain every minute. pic.twitter.com/k1PRUEofoH
Robert Bates, research director at the Centre for Migration Control, put it without decoration: the numbers are unsustainable, and the damage will have to be undone.
ILR is not a courtesy stamp. It is the right to remain for life, to access the same welfare entitlements as a citizen, to apply for social housing, and, after a further year, to apply for a passport. Once that status is issued, reversing it is a political fight the Home Office has spent years refusing to have.
Bates told GB News the latest settlement totals are "a huge increase on where they have been in the last few years." In the year to June, he noted, Britain issued around 200,000 grants of settlement - a 243 per cent increase on 2017. Every one of those people, he said, can claim benefits, social housing and NHS care, "and they will all end up being pensioners drawing money from the state."
Full segment:
"Just one in five of those individuals are actually work main applicants," Bates said. "Over half are family members and dependants, and actually one in seven are refugees. So this idea that they're all going to be economic dynamite and aren't going to make use of Britain's welfare state is pie in the sky thinking."
Indian nationals led settlement grants, with Chinese grants quadrupling. The pipeline behind them is larger still. The Home Office's own earned-settlement consultation estimated that between 1.3 million and 2.2 million people will settle in the UK between 2026 and 2030, with a central forecast of 1.6 million and a peak year around 450,000 in 2028.
Health and care visa holders who arrived in the post-2021 surge become eligible in a cluster from 2027. That is not a trickle. It is a second population event, baked in before Shabana Mahmood's promised 10-year wait even takes effect.
Bates's warning was blunt. "If the Labour Government continues to drag its heels on its reforms to indefinite leave to remain, then we could be facing a catastrophe." Even "the Home Office's conservative estimates suggest a £10billion, or up to several hundred billion pounds." "This is something that simply a country's books cannot afford."
While the settlement machine stamps papers, the asylum machine prints invoices.
The asylum system cost the British taxpayer £4.3 billion in 2025/26. Official Home Office spending on asylum stood at £4.36 billion in that year. Centre for Migration Control toted up the last ten years at £25 billion spent accommodating, supporting and processing illegal arrivals and asylum claimants. Bates calculated that as £150 a year from every household, an eightfold rise on the bill a decade ago.
The asylum system cost the British taxpayer £4.3bn in 2025/26.
In the last decade a total of £25bn has been spent on accommodating, supporting and processing illegal migrants/ 'asylum seekers'.
This money should have been spent on British priorities. https://t.co/yXA9tSj3hf
Labour's answer is a press release about hotels. Hotel numbers have been cut. At the end of June there were 16,021 people in hotels, half the 32,041 of a year earlier and well below the 56,000 peak of 2023. Fewer than 160 hotels remain in use, against around 400 at the height of the Conservative mess. Thirteen more sites were handed back in August, with ministers advertising £51 million in savings from that batch and £224 million from this year's closures.
What they do not advertise is the relocation. 69,038 asylum seekers are now in houses, flats and bedsits - up 4 per cent in a year and double a decade ago. The North West, including Manchester, holds the largest share: 16,349 in dispersed private rentals, almost a quarter of the supported total. Bates wrote that some 73,000 people are now in non-hotel accommodation, up since the election. They are not going into detention. The detention estate has fewer than 2,500 beds. They are going into the street behind yours.
Andy Burnham's instruction to the country was that middle-class areas should "play their part" so the "poorest communities" do not take "the lion's share." In practice that means villages such as Piddington - population 350 - being lined up to host hundreds of unvetted arrivals. Hotels were a visible scandal. Houses in multiple occupation are a quieter one. The bill does not shrink because the sign on the door changes from "Holiday Inn" to "dispersal."
Mahmood's line is that control is being "restored." "A little over two years into office and the asylum backlog is down, the number of asylum seekers in hotels is falling, illegal working arrests are at record levels, and deportations and returns are up markedly," she said. "Small boats numbers are also now falling, but we are not complacent."
The small print tells a different story. 86,000 people claimed asylum in the year to June - down 21 per cent, but still far above the pre-2021 normal. 33,000 came on small boats. Detected illegal arrivals totalled 38,000. Returns of people with no right to be here rose to 41,000, including 6,000 foreign offenders. That sounds like movement until it is set against the stock. More than 210,000 people have crossed the Channel since 2018. Analysis of Home Office figures found 9,694 of those dinghy arrivals had been deported between 2018 and the first half of 2026. Fewer than 10,000 removed in eight years.
Bates's assessment of Labour's record on the only number that matters - removal - was savage. "Less than eight per cent of small boat migrants who have arrived under Labour have actually been removed, and this includes, of course, those who were sent to France before sneaking back into the country." He added, that "Since Labour took power, the Home Office has deported more Poles than it has individuals from the top five small boat nationalities combined."
The backlog at initial decision has been cut to around 40,000, the lowest since 2019. Appeals have exploded the other way. In March 2023 there were roughly 8,000 cases in the First-tier Immigration Tribunal. By March 2026 the figure was well over 87,000. Applications are being "waved through," Bates wrote, while the courts fill up with a second queue. Failed claimants stay. The boats keep coming because the people in northern France can see the same statistics. "Even if their asylum application is eventually rejected, the human rights framework of this country, along with the Refugee Convention, means they will never be removed."
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp accused ministers of shifting the problem, not ending it: "Labour are moving illegal immigrants out of hotels and into flats in your building, and now they are telling them to go and disappear without a trace." The Conservative offer is to leave the ECHR and "deport every illegal immigrant." Reform has gone further and talked about abolishing ILR as a category. Labour's offer is a longer wait, a £10,000 repayment levy for those who later earn, and another round of former barracks.
None of that touches the people already being stamped through at one a minute.
Settlement and the asylum bill are only half the ledger. The other half is what happens after arrival - and that is the file the government is in court to keep shut.
Ministers are spending public money to block the release of conviction data by nationality for England and Wales, the dataset the Centre for Migration Control requested under FOI and the Information Commissioner ordered out. Justice Secretary David Lammy sanctioned an appeal. Families of the dead and the raped asked him to drop it.
Alex Whyte, whose sister Rhiannon was stabbed 23 times with a screwdriver by Sudanese small-boat arrival Deng Chol Majek at the asylum hotel where she worked, told GB News she felt "sick, disgusted and completely let down." Anger, she said, "doesn't even cover what I feel, and it never will." Labour, she added, is "too afraid to admit" what open borders have done. "Open your eyes. You are so aware of what is happening, but you are too afraid to admit it."
The families' letter to the Justice Secretary stated "Imagine if someone you loved had been attacked, abused, or killed by a person who had entered Britain from abroad." Victims and the public "deserve transparency about the people who enter our country and the crimes they subsequently commit." Withholding the data "damages trust" and blocks "meaningful action."
Partial figures already out explain the panic. Foreign nationals accounted for 14.1 per cent of sexual offence convictions in 2025. They made up about 9 per cent of the population and 26.1 per cent of sexual-offence arrests - 3.5 times the British rate. On the railways, CMC's British Transport Police data showed foreigners were 79 per cent of theft arrests in 2025, 40 per cent of drug-offence arrests, 37 per cent of sexual-offence arrests and 36 per cent of violent-crime arrests. Across England and Wales, foreign nationals were arrested 172,889 times in the year to March 2025 - one every 183 seconds.
That is why the Ministry of Justice is in a tribunal instead of a press conference. They know a nationality breakdown, published in full, would not produce a seminar. It would produce a reckoning. They know it would trigger mass unrest. So they fight the Information Commissioner with the same Treasury that cannot find an extra nurse and can find £4.3 billion for a system Bates described as "perma-chaos."
Net migration has come off the 2023 peak of 944,000. The year to December 2025 was estimated at 171,000. Work visas are down. Study visas are down. Labour waves those charts as proof the fever has broken.
Settlement is the delayed charge on the same account. You can slow the inflow and still lock in the stock. You can close a hotel and open a house. You can cut the initial backlog and watch the appeals list triple. You can talk about "earned settlement" while stamping 140,000 grants in a single quarter.
Bates's line on the student route captures the wider fraud. Around three-quarters of a million visas are still being issued, with students the largest slice. "We are seeing an increasing trend now of the student visa route being increasingly used not just actually to come and study at a world-beating university, but as a back door into Britain and a long-term migration route."
He further noted that more than 60 per cent of people arriving on student visas were still here more than three years after their courses ended. "So there is huge, huge pressure that is being piled already on the British welfare state."
That pressure is not an accident of weather in the Channel. It is a policy choice repeated by two governments: admit first, process later, settle always, remove almost never, and treat the public's demand for numbers by nationality as a public-order risk rather than a democratic right.
Mahmood says fairness is being restored. Burnham says nicer postcodes must take their share. The Home Office says the hotels are emptying. The stopwatch says otherwise. One grant a minute. Two hundred thousand settlements in a year. A quarter of a million new citizens. A record citizenship queue.
A forecast of up to 2.2 million more settlers before the decade is out. Four billion and more on asylum this year, twenty-five billion across ten. Nine thousand-odd Channel arrivals removed from more than two hundred thousand who came.
These numbers are unsustainable. The people running the system know it. That is why the crime file stays in the vault, why the hotels become HMOs, and why settlement is being issued faster than the country can absorb, house, police or afford it.
Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 05:00Alphabet's Google said on Friday that it has changed how it enforces its spam rules in Europe, following concerns from EU regulators that the policy could unfairly hurt news publishers and other websites that carry content from commercial partners.
The Google logo outside the company's offices in London on June 24, 2025. Carlos Jasso/ReutersThe dispute centers on Google's policy against "site reputation abuse," a practice often called "parasite SEO." It occurs when a third party publishes content on a well-established website primarily to benefit from that site's strong reputation in Google Search and gain higher rankings than the content might receive on its own.
Google introduced the policy to target arrangements in which outside companies use trusted websites mainly as vehicles for boosting their search visibility.
European regulators, however, raised concerns that Google's enforcement was too broad. They found that the policy was also reducing the search rankings of legitimate publishers simply because their websites contained material produced with, or supplied by, commercial partners.
Google said that from August 30, manual actions taken under the policy will no longer apply to users in the European Economic Area - the 27 EU states plus Iceland, Norway, and Liechtenstein. The policy remains unchanged everywhere else. The policy does not apply to ZeroHedge, as Google explicitly distinguishes editorial syndication from “site reputation abuse.” This is different from "parasite SEO" where an outside company places unrelated content on a trusted domain in order to exploit that site's Google ranking strength. And - since Google search algos still hate us with the white hot passion of 1,000 suns, the 'ranking strength' aspect would be moot anyway.
Google has now adjusted its approach in Europe in an effort to address those concerns and avoid a potential antitrust penalty. DMA breaches carry fines of up to 10% of global turnover.
The two sides are describing the same climbdown differently. "We welcome the repeal of this policy, which unfairly penalised publishers and other business users of Google Search," Commission spokesman Thomas Regnier said, adding that "thanks to the DMA, Google Search will no longer demote press publications solely for hosting third-party content." Google, for its part, called it an adjustment to "our enforcement approach" - and warned that "an overbroad application of the DMA could prevent us from addressing real threats to the integrity of our search results."
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 04:15Update(1615ET): Things have been quiet for many days and weeks on the military front when it comes to the Iran war, but on Sunday there are some emerging reports of new but limited US strikes. According to the latest late Sunday from Axios:
Senior American official: Earlier today, American forces attacked two Iranian launchers on Larzac Island. Revolutionary Guard forces were observed preparing to launch rockets carrying sea mines toward the Strait of Hormuz.
So despite the White House signaling a move away from military action and toward the economic warfare front, it's also clear that more sporadic tit-for-tat blows could follow. But Trump has lately made clear that military options are still on the table, and strikes will be utilized as needed.
CENTCOM says that they attacked two Iranian missile launchers on Larak island. This is the first time that they have struck an Iranian target in weeks.
— barry with the NED (@bonzerbarry) August 30, 2026* * *
Propaganda has always been a problem when it comes to the fog of war. The internet and social media add a new dimension to the confusion as conflicting information is allowed to spread like wildfire using civilians and media outlets as tools for propagation.
The lack of confirmation is exploited, often by both sides, and the truth becomes lost in the mire. That said, the facts on the ground will eventually see the light regardless of spin. In the case of the war in Iran, the facts on the ground do not bode well for the Islamic Regime.
Iranian leaders now openly admit that the US blockade has crippled around 35% of the nation's exports and imports while domestic prices continue to skyrocket by 60% or more. This, however, is not the most immediate problem for the regime.
It would appear that initial reports of gasoline shortages across Iran did not convey the true scope of the crisis. In the past week alone more evidence from within Iran has hit social media, showing mass lines at gas stations and panic among citizens as rationing is introduced.
Energy officials have acknowledged a gasoline deficit of roughly 15 million liters every day, warning that strategic reserves have reached “dark red” territory.
Iran has ten main operating oil refineries plus the large Persian Gulf Star condensate refinery, which is the country’s biggest gasoline producer, meaning, they do have the capability to produce their own domestic gasoline supply. So, why the shortages?
Some refined products are shipped into Iran from foreign sources and the US blockade is stifling that supply. However, there is also the possibility that the blockade has forced Iran to shut down a number of oil wells due to lack of storage. Depending on the type of well, a shutdown can cause extensive damage and prevent new production for years to come. It's likely that Iran's crisis is rooted in an oil supply problem as much as a refining problem.
The Iranians have recently called for a return to the standards set by the MOU agreement with the US, and they have also accused the US of committing "war crimes", arguing that the blockade is causing a humanitarian crisis.
The recent admissions of economic damage, the fuel shortages and the assertions of humanitarian crisis are a sharp tone shift from Iran's posture only a month ago. Couple this with the 400% surge in ships traversing the Strait of Hormuz and it would seem that Iran is losing the war outright. If the blockade continues for another few months the financial damage could be irreversible and repairing resource flows could take years.
It's not enough for the regime to survive if the economy they oversee dies.
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 04:15Authored by Daniel Lacalle via dlacalle.com,
The US $40 trillion debt has dominated global headlines. However, although the US fiscal challenges are relevant, we must remember an important lesson. Fiscal policy is not about who wins but who loses first.
According to official 2026 estimates, the present value of U.S. Social Security and Medicare financing gaps is about $95 trillion over 75 years, roughly 5% of the cumulative present value of projected GDP over that period, on top of federal debt held by the public, which is already projected at 101% of annual GDP in 2026.
However, the euro area's hidden fiscal burden is at least as large as its recorded debt. Official European Commission estimates put net accrued public-pension liabilities at around 150% of GDP, after future contributions are considered, while gross pension promises amount to roughly 371% of GDP. Importantly, this excludes much of the future pressure from health and long-term care spending.
What does this all mean? The next debt crisis may not come from the U.S. but from the eurozone.
First, the U.S. dollar remains the world reserve currency and treasuries are the most important asset for central banks globally, even with the recent gold purchases and rebalancing.
Second, the political landscape in most large European Union economies is one of fiscal denial. France's sovereign bond yields are now higher than Italy's. No eurozone government is willing to cut spending or limit future liabilities. Unfinanced committed liabilities (debt already assumed but not issued) exceed 300% of GDP in key euro area nations.
Third, euro area sovereign assets have generated negative real economic returns since 2021, leading to a declining appetite from global investors. U.S. debt is a challenge, but euro area debt is significantly more problematic because the reported debt is only the "excessive deficit protocol" figure, not the total liabilities of public administrations.
Euro-area Maastricht debt captures only consolidated currency and deposits, loans, and debt securities at face value. It is therefore materially smaller than the full balance-sheet liabilities of public administration and narrower still than the euro area's implicit pension and public sector-related commitments.
The key lesson is that investors should be rightly concerned about issued debt, but they should be even more scared of expanding government size added to unfunded liabilities in a region crippled by economic stagnation.
All of this tells us that the recent global bond sell-off is not a temporary issue. Markets are telling governments that no central bank is going to hide their irresponsibility anymore.
Developed economies' governments have pushed all the limits of debt-funded policies and surpassed their fiscal, economic, and inflationary limits.
Fiscal limit: More spending creates persistent deficits, and tax hikes never solve the issue. Government spending is a burden on taxpayers and the economy.
Economic limit: More government spending and bloating GDP with debt-fueled public sector outlays only weakens the economy and productive investment, leading to stagnation.
Inflationary limit: Government spending leads to persistent inflation and markets discount higher-for-longer consumer prices, eroding the economy while the combination of higher taxes and consumer prices demolishes the middle class.
The United States creates headlines because Treasury yields remain the global benchmark for the price of money and collateral, but the euro area may generate the next big sovereign shock because its member states borrow in a currency they do not control and governments refuse to reduce spending, resorting constantly to tax hikes and regulatory burdens that make the economy weaker.
As of 21 August 2026, the U.S. 30-year Treasury yield traded at 5.27% and the 10-year Treasury yield around 4.73% after a week of sharp moves that briefly pushed long-dated yields to their highest levels since 2007. However, if the world saw the U.S. as a risk and other nations as safe havens, German bond yields would be falling, as happened in other periods of risk aversion. That is not the case. Germany's 10-year Bund has soared to 3.26%, the UK 10-year yield is at a record 5.1%, and Japan's 10-year yield is near 2.89%, confirming that the repricing is global rather than U.S.-centric.
This is what matters for investors and governments. Long-term sovereign bonds are no longer the unquestioned safe assets. That is why gold is soaring too.
Long-term bonds are being repriced for inflation risk, fiscal deterioration, high debt supply, and the inability of central banks to disguise fiscal irresponsibility.
When the U.S. 10-year and 30-year yields rise, financing conditions tighten globally through mortgages, corporate credit, bank funding, and emerging-market borrowing costs. In this environment, the market is not moving to euro area debt for protection; it is moving away from it.
The United States retains the world reserve currency and has the deepest and most liquid sovereign bond market in the world. This does not eliminate the debt problem, but it changes its transmission. Furthermore, at least the United States government is keeping federal spending under control, although not cutting it as fast as desired. That is not the case in the euro area, where none of the large economies seem to have any intention to control spending; rather, the opposite. Thus, this adds to the pressure of unfunded liabilities.
The euro is the only global currency that faces re-denomination risk, and the fiscal policy of the euro area has opted for interventionism and government control rather than free markets. The ECB centralizes monetary policy in the euro area, yet governments spend and borrow as if they possess unlimited monetary credibility. Their only fiscal tool is higher taxes. This creates the risk that what begins as a liquidity event quickly becomes a solvency concern, especially when markets doubt whether Brussels, Frankfurt, and national governments will respond with a coherent strategy. We saw it in 2011.
Now, the euro area has added more risks. The "savings and banking union" and central bank digital currency (CBDC) projects do not provide relief for global investors; rather, they raise concerns that the euro area may have opted for interventionism and government control by imposing the use of the currency instead of enhancing its appeal as a global hub for free markets and capital attraction.
The savings and banking union project will not avoid a debt crisis in the euro area. With governments that do not accept spending cuts, the digital currency may only lead to surveillance, control, and, ultimately, higher inflation.
This is why the next crisis may come from Europe, not despite the U.S. debt problem but because the euro area lacks institutional flexibility, discipline, and an open market approach. Thus, if the euro area accelerates its interventionist plans to force investment and promote the use of the currency through repression, the problem may become more significant. If monetary policy cannot be a limit to fiscal irresponsibility and governments refuse to reduce their spending, the currency and the financial system are at risk. Resolving the United States' debt problem requires implementing spending cuts and fostering higher productive growth. Unfortunately, euro area governments are not generating economic growth and are instead increasing government intervention. As such, when confidence in a large member state disappears, the consequences are systemic for the entire monetary union.
The world is seeing the German spending experiment fail in real time, and that is why German bonds are falling as fast as others, instead of strengthening.
Recent data from France and Germany show that the problem extends beyond a small country within the union. The core of the euro area is weakening while the peripheral countries are either disguising stagnation with immigration and political spending (Spain) or are still in post-crisis mode.
France's 10-year yield has soared to levels not seen since 2008. German bonds, once viewed as a safe haven, weakened alongside other euro area issuers. The ECB anti-fragmentation tool disguised imbalances for a while and now has transferred the risk to all sovereign issuers.
France matters because it is the core euro-area economy alongside Germany. French public debt is expected to be about 118% of GDP in 2026 and could rise toward 130% of GDP by 2030. Markets now understand that no new prime minister is going to cut spending. They will repeat the same failed approach of the past three decades: raising taxes and postponing necessary spending cuts.
As markets begin to reprice France as a fiscal weak link rather than a core strength, the euro area's internal problems become impossible to ignore. This European project has made rising government spending and a large public sector the focus of policy, treating the private sector as a cash machine for an ever-expanding bureaucracy.
The real problem is not simply the absolute level of debt. The combination of high borrowing, big government, high taxes, and a lack of real growth capacity leads to rising interest costs, and it is now evident that central banks can no longer disguise this problem.
When U.S. borrowing costs rise, global financial conditions tighten. It is a significant problem that requires spending cuts, government shutdowns, and higher private sector growth. When euro area borrowing costs soar, they show evidence of the unsustainability of a European project based on expanding the size of government at any cost. When governments reject short-term pain, they pass it to citizens.
The solution is not more government, monetization, intervention, or more taxes on productive capital. The answer is credible spending cuts, lower structural deficits, stronger incentives for private investment, and reforms that eliminate regulatory burdens and lift productivity as well as economic growth. If nothing changes, U.S. debt will continue to tighten global financial conditions, but the euro area may still be the place where the next sovereign crisis erupts.
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 03:30