I drove an RV through Wyoming and spent the whole trip thinking about why the financial press gets monetary policy completely wrong. Here's what I own because of it.

The WSJ just ran a piece saying tech does well during rising rate periods. The data goes back to 1999. What it misses: two of the biggest rising-rate periods were coming out of the 2008 crash and COVID. Of course tech does well when the alternative is the economy being in a ditch.

Scott Sumner's point: never reason from a price change. Rising rates are not necessarily tightening. Lowering rates are not necessarily easing. It depends on where the invisible Wicksellian equilibrium rate is relative to what the Fed is doing.

Proof: Turkey's 2025 repo rate was 38%. Inflation averaged 35%. Those are considered "tight" rates in Turkey's macro environment. High rates correlate with loose policy and high inflation. Not the opposite.

The investment implication: the type of rising-rate environment that's coming — if the equilibrium rate is rising faster than the Fed can follow — is nothing like 2009 or 2020. It's inflationary, not deflationary. That's terrible for stocks with 1% true FCF yields promising growth far into the future. It's good for businesses with revenues indexed to inflation and fixed-rate debt.

What I own for this scenario: AXP, EPD, EOG for inflation. BRK.B and FRFHF for the crash scenario. Short-term bonds for dry powder.

Also: the Chernobyl HBO show is a better metaphor for Fed policy than any economics textbook. Full explanation here: https://cavemanscreener.substack.com/p/the-phantom-haunting-the-fed-wicksell