Don’t look now, but “no landing” has (very quietly this time) become the consensus global macro outlook.

At various intervals over the past three years, market mavens — both real and armchair — became enthralled with the “no landing” theme, a play on two established terms from the macro lexicon: “Soft landing” and “hard landing.”

If a “soft landing” is an overheat and a hiking cycle that resolves in a relatively peaceful glide path back to tolerable inflation and trend growth with no recession, and a “hard landing” is a downturn that resets inflation via an economic contraction and job losses, then “no landing” is a scenario where nominal growth and inflation continue to run hot, or at least very warm. The plane, as it were, just keeps on flying.

Historically, “soft landing”s are exceedingly rare, but it looked (and still looks) like the Powell Fed might’ve pulled one off, despite Donald Trump’s best efforts to make “hard landing” great again on “Liberation Day.”

While Trump certainly doesn’t want a recession, he’s not a man who’s fond of middling outcomes. It’s safe to say that given the choice, he’d rather “no landing” than “soft landing.” Indeed, populists always prefer run-it-hot domestic economic policies and that’s precisely what Trump’s pursuing in the US, marrying fiscal expansion with demands for easier monetary policy.

It thus comes as no surprise that “no landing” isn’t just back, it garnered a record share of the vote in the latest installment of BofA’s Global Fund Manager survey.

As the figure shows, 52% of panelists said “no landing” is the most likely scenario, the most ever. “No landing” flipped “soft landing” in the poll for the first time last month.

Great, right? Not necessarily. “No landing” risks the return of inflation. And an unsustainable growth impulse is… well, unsustainable.

Apropos, nearly four in 10 survey respondents said Kevin Warsh’s policies as Fed chair are likely to beget higher Treasury yields and a weaker dollar.

But Trump and Scott Bessent want lower US Treasury yields, and there’s every indication the White House is prepared to go to great lengths to achieve that outcome.

It’s far from clear that Warsh’s professed aversion to a large SOMA is consistent with Trump’s determination that policymakers should pull out all the stops to cap long-end yields.

Remember: The combination of higher sovereign yields and a weaker currency — i.e., the consensus among pros for Warsh’s chairmanship — isn’t natural for an advanced economy. That’s the stuff of emerging markets where, not coincidentally, you tend to find a lot of autocratic executives pushing run-it-hot, “no landing” domestic macro agendas.