On March 27, 2026, Collective members joined Grant Williams and Peter Atwater for a conversation about confidence—or rather, its collapse. Gas prices were spiking following the Iran strikes. University of Michigan consumer sentiment had just posted a triple bottom at historically low levels. And markets were starting to ignore White House jawboning for the first time in the Trump presidency.
Grant Williams is a macro investor and podcast host known for asking uncomfortable questions. Peter Atwater is a sentiment analyst who studies how confidence drives behavior — in markets, politics, and society. They’ve been having recorded conversations for years. This format gives members the chance to be in the room live, asking questions as the conversation unfolds.
This is part three of the new series of Collective Roundtable Sessions: live conversations with experts and analysts on the topics that matter most to investors and allocators. Paid members join live and participate in Q&A.
What They Discussed
The K-shaped confidence divide: Coming into 2026, the global elite felt invulnerable…tech oligarchs, political leaders, all living like there’s no tomorrow. At the same time, a massive sea of despair at the bottom was being bludgeoned by high visible gas prices. Peter: “This K exists not just in the United States, but globally.” When confidence at the top is woefully disconnected from the street, and both groups want control, tension becomes inevitable.
Why the Epstein files won’t go away: As confidence falls, people start looking for scapegoats—and those at the top are highly visible, highly vulnerable targets. The Epstein files represent absolute unaccountability among financial and political elites. Peter: “When confidence falls, it’s all about the symbols. The details as they come out will be increasingly shocking.” The files activate something visceral in people who feel powerless, and that’s not a force that dissipates on its own.
Gas prices as the opponent that won’t quit: During the tariff tantrum, there was delay and abstraction that gave the administration room to jawbone. Gas prices are different; they’re tangible, visible, unavoidable. Every time you drive past a station, you see the number. Peter: “What he faces at the gas station is an opponent that just won’t quit. And it is a very tangible measure that may be at this point a fiercer opponent than the Iranians.”
The market jawboning failure: On March 26, the administration tried to jawbone markets overnight. For months, every Truth Social tweet had moved markets in the desired direction. This time it didn’t. Markets moved for a nanosecond, then reversed. Peter: “That could represent a bigger tipping point—that what has now been set in motion, the car is now moving and can’t be stopped. And I don’t mean militarily. I mean economically.”
Foreign capital flight risk: Put yourself in the position of a voter in Germany, Korea, or Japan. Gas prices are rising dramatically. Everyone can point to the United States for setting it in motion. You as a nation have plenty of capital invested in the US. Peter: “I think we are likely to see an enormous populist wave demanding that capital be pulled from the United States.” Policymakers overseas will struggle to explain why keeping money in the US was a good idea when their own citizens are suffering.
The November midterms are existential: This isn’t just a typical midterm election. If the House and Senate move to Democrats, impeachment hearings become likely. Peter: “The stakes here aren’t the House and the Senate. The stakes here are President Trump and whether he is able to stay in office.” When someone who craves control faces losing it, expect them to use every lever available, including voter suppression and other steps to ensure a path to victory.
When nihilists become financial terrorists: The apes who pushed GameStop and AMC higher for four years are now watching AMC break through $1. They’ve been losing money straight for years. Grant: “It would be some capitulation for the apes to decide that selling stuff short was actually the way to go.” Peter: “We have to be thinking about what does despair bring out in people, particularly financial despair. Their goal is to make money. They don’t care whether they make it because prices have gone up or prices have gone down.”
AI’s confidence problem: People love abstract futuristic technology when confidence is high. AI’s problem is that its benefits still feel intensely abstract while its costs feel realer by the day: more expensive electricity, environmental concerns, job losses. Peter: “You can’t have abstract future benefits at a time when people feel a real immediate cost. That’s the greatest threat to AI.”
What’s Next
This was the final session in our February-March Roundtable Series. All three conversations are now available:
Session 1: The Greenland Question (recorded Feb 18, click here to watch)
Dr. Dwayne Menezes joins from Nuuk to discuss US-Greenland relations, Russia’s Arctic advantage, and why acquisition rhetoric backfired.
Session 2: AI Infrastructure & Energy Constraints (recorded March 3, click here to watch)
Lake Dai and Matt Reustle discuss power bottlenecks, the 40% GPU utilization problem, and where smart capital is flowing in the AI stack.
Watch the full conversation above. Grant and Peter go deeper into the meta settlement as a tipping point, the reality TV presidency framework, Musk’s SpaceX IPO targeting retail, and moral compass swings when confidence collapses.
The Collective Roundtable Sessions bring together sharp thinkers for the conversations that matter to investors and allocators. Members join live when topics are timely and can ask questions directly. Join us as an Insights subscriber to participate in future sessions.
Remember, this post is for informational purposes only. For anything investment-related, you should consult a qualified financial advisor who can help assess your individual needs, risk tolerance, and goals.
