On Sunday, July 13, around 4 pm. Social media conversations in Nigeria, particularly on X, took a dramatic shift. It followed the news of the demise of Nigerian former President, Muhammadu Buhari, who according to his media aide, Garba Shehu, had died in a London hospital, where he had been receiving medical treatment.

“The family has announced the passing of the former President, Muhammadu Buhari, this afternoon, in a clinic in London,” Shehu announced.

The Nigerian social media space thus erupted into a frenzy of mixed reactions underlined by people’s memories of Buhari. To some, it stems from their knowledge of him in the eight years of his presidency – starting from 2015: To others, it dates back to about 42 years ago, when he was the Nigerian military ruler. Fueled by what many believe to be agony emanating from recent memory, the former had the loudest voices – not that the latter in any way were sharing sweet memories of the late president.

“Buhari banned X (Twitter) because of his fragile ego. He refused to transmit power to his Vice as constitutionally required despite not being in good health or in the country for months. I don’t even want to talk about the Lekki Toll Gate massacre,” human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, wrote.

“He made nonsense of the economy and allowed criminals to operate freely in his cabinet. After destroying the country, he supervised a fraudulent election that brought a terrible successor who has continued from where he stopped in their Nigeria destruction agenda,” he added.

Buhari’s second coming to power in 2015 was preceded by several failed attempts, which were characterized by violence and bloodshed but were overshadowed by the ‘Messianic emotionalism’ that enveloped Nigeria – and was sustained largely along ethnic and religious lines. In 2011, about 11 persons, largely members of the National Youth Service Corp. (NYSC), were killed in Kano by Buhari supporters, after he lost a presidential election.

Buhari was believed to be the answer to Nigeria’s long yearning for a corruption-free country – a belief buoyed by his perceived stance against corruption in 1983.

Though his dictatorial and economic antecedents from 1983 were available in black and white for all to see, many voted for him as he was rebranded as a ‘reformed democrat.’ It was said that Nigerians, spurred by emotion and sentiment, jumped on his “change”, (a campaign slogan his political party – the All Progressive Congress (APC) created) bandwagon not minding.

However, a few months after he was sworn in on May 29, 2015, the emotion began to be diluted by his actions and inactions across all areas of Nigeria’s wellbeing – and it accelerated quickly, creating impacts that Nigerians will not forget anytime soon.

Buhari promised Nigerians to address insecurity and put an end to Boko Haram terrorism. But months after he was sworn in, Nigeria’s security situation advanced from bad to worse, with the birth of killer Fulani herdsmen – who were described as one of the most deadly terror groups in the world. It was a bloodbath almost every day. Many believed that the government’s response was as infuriating as the terror itself. Buhari, addressing the herdsmen killings, only urged Nigerians to accommodate “your countrymen,” then claimed they were “foreigners from Libya.” This created the belief that his administration favored and protected his Fulani kinsmen, throwing Nigeria’s fragile unity into deeper chaos.

Then, in what his administration said was a solution to the problem, which was dubbed the herder-farmer crisis, Buhari proposed RUGA – a livestock policy proposal designed to mandate settlement for herdsmen in the 36 states across the federation. The policy was suspended following heavy backlash.

Besides the tens dying every day from the guns and swords of terrorists were others who Nigerian security forces, under the watch of Buhari, were massacring. In 2015, over 300 Shia Muslims were killed by the military, in what was later known as the Zaria massacre. There was also the Agatu Massacres of 2016, which set the tone for the large-scale killings with impunity that have dogged Nigeria’s Middle Belt till today. In 2016, Amnesty International reported the death of over 150 members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who were on a self-determination campaign in Southeast Nigeria.

The blood spillage was capped by the Lekki Toll Gate Massacre in 2020, where security forces killed scores of peaceful #EndSARS protesters against police brutality.

“My bank account was blocked. I lived in a safe house for 7 months. My car was shot at. I saw bodies. Got a bullet wound. I can go on and on, sued the Buhari government,” Sera Ibrahim recounts her ordeal after the Lekki Massacre.

As Nigeria was drenched in blood, Buhari’s economic policies were unraveling, reversing the gains made under former President Goodluck Jonathan. In August 2019, Buhari announced the closure of Nigerian land borders, a protectionist policy he said would boost local production, and curb arms smuggling. The decision, among other economic policies, saw Nigeria’s inflation jump from single to double digits, with food inflation spiking over 300%. Eventually, the country suffered a double recession – marking the end of Nigeria’s enviable economic growth – projected to be the third fastest growing economy in the world for the year 2015– and the beginning of economic turmoil that will linger years after Buhari’s leadership and eventually, death.

Today, Nigeria’s sky-high inflation has been largely attributed to the illegal printing of N30 trillion in Ways and Means that Buhari ordered the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), under the leadership of former Governor Godwin Emefiele, to print. Economists noted that the most disappointing part isn’t the illegality but that there is nothing to show for the money. The printing of N30 trillion did not even cut borrowing.

Unemployment rose from 10.4% in 2015 to 33.4% in 2020 – five years into his eight-year rule. According to the Budget Office, between 2016 and 2022, the Buhari government raised total revenues of N26.67 trillion and expended N60.64 trillion, leaving a deficit of N33.97 trillion. Ultimately, he moved Nigeria’s public debt profile from N42 trillion to N77 trillion by May 2023.

“I had never heard of the concept of being a care worker in the UK until Buhari became president, wrecked the economy and tens of thousands of Nigerians started looking for where to flee to,” Osarogie Ogbonmwan wrote.

While Nigerians cried out over his actions and inactions, Buhari activated his 1983 Decree Number 4, which he used as a military dictator to silence dissent. The decree criminalized any reporting deemed critical of the government. Thus, media houses were targeted, journalists and some critics of his government fled the country. But his crackdown went beyond the civic space to everyone he deemed an enemy.

The Twitter ban of 2021, after the platform deleted one of Buhari’s posts threatening the Igbos of the Southeast region, lasted seven months. It was of no surprise to many who knew him from way back, even though it was seen as a clear depiction of authoritarian impulse, one at odds with the democratic principles he was elected to uphold.

Politically, his administration displayed a troubling erosion of judicial independence, exemplified by the prolonged illegal detention of figures like El-Zakzaky and Sambo Dasuki, despite court orders for their release. The suspension of Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen, which was widely described as a blatant bastardization of the rule of law, further undermined faith in the government’s ability to follow due process. The abduction of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB, from Kenya, and his illegal detention in defiance of court orders, have also been cited as an example of Buhari’s government rascality.

While all this was unfolding, Buhari was seen failing spectacularly in one area that people thought he would excel in – fighting corruption. With allegations of nepotism and lopsided appointments – favoring mainly – people from the north, officials in his government were largely accused of corruption.

“He had an abysmal scorecard on internal security & emboldened widespread corruption not seen since the mid-1990s. He has almost no legacy worth applauding,” wrote Abubakar.

Among the many traits that people said they noted as Buhari unraveled, was hypocrisy. For a man who had championed a campaign for local consumption, with slogans such as “Buy Naija to Promote The Naira,” Buhari spent months in a London hospital. This is despite billions of naira allocated to the State House Clinic. For instance, 3.94 billion was allocated for the clinic in 2015, N3.87 billion in 2016, and N3.2 billion in 2017, the allocations were increased in subsequent years. This disparity underscored a leader who failed to fix the very system meant to serve him, let alone ordinary Nigerians.

“A man who closed the borders to encourage consumption of local produce yet ends up dying in a UK hospital where he was a regular consumer of British healthcare. Sums up the contradiction of a man that was loved by many common people yet didn’t care to use his image of integrity to further the lot of the common man,” wrote another Nigerian named Neto.

In his eight years of leadership, Buhari was accused of insouciance toward the plights of Nigerians – not showing up, or speaking up when the country needed him most. His lack of empathy was pointed out in many instances of killings across the country, in which the president failed to sympathize with the people, visit them, or even acknowledge their ordeal.

Against the backdrop of bitter memories that characterized Buhari’s time in power, some Nigerians – at the news of his death at 82, believe the former president lived so long for a man who caused his country so much pain.

“There’s no joy in Buhari dying. Definitely no pain, but there’s no celebrating the passing of someone who ruined the country, and still died at a ripe old age. If there’s any justice in the world, there should be dire consequences for damaging the futures of generations to come,” Chidi Okereke wrote.

The U.S. 10-Year Treasury rate holding steady at 4.423% reflects a moment of stability in the bond market, often tied to expectations around inflation, economic growth, and Federal Reserve policy. The U.S. 10-Year Treasury rate at 4.423% has wide-ranging implications for the economy and highlights a growing economic divide.

The 10-year Treasury yield is a critical benchmark for various interest rates, including mortgages, corporate bonds, and consumer loans. At 4.423%, borrowing costs remain elevated compared to historical lows (e.g., sub-2% yields during 2020). This impacts affordability for homebuyers, businesses seeking expansion, and consumers financing big-ticket items like cars. 30-year fixed mortgage rates, closely tied to the 10-year yield, hover around 6.5-7%, making homeownership less accessible for middle- and lower-income households.

A stable yield at 4.423% suggests markets expect moderate economic growth and inflation around 2.5%, as noted by U.S. Bank analysts. Rising yields often signal optimism about growth and inflation, while falling yields indicate caution or recession fears. The current stability reflects a resilient U.S. economy (2.7% GDP growth in 2024, exceeding 1.2% forecasts), but uncertainty persists due to tariff policies and fiscal deficits.

Higher yields make Treasuries more attractive than riskier assets like stocks, potentially diverting investment from equities. This can dampen stock market performance, particularly for growth-oriented companies. Bond prices move inversely to yields, so a stable 4.423% keeps bond values steady but reduces returns for new investors compared to higher-yield periods (e.g., 4.7% in April 2024). The U.S. deficit, at $1.8 trillion in 2024, and projected debt growth of $22 trillion over the next decade, put upward pressure on yields.

Investors may demand higher returns to absorb increased Treasury supply, especially if confidence in U.S. debt wanes. Tariff policies and potential tax cuts (e.g., the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”) could exacerbate deficits, pushing yields higher and increasing borrowing costs across the economy. The 10-year yield affects global capital flows, as it’s a benchmark for international markets. A stable but elevated yield attracts foreign investment to U.S. Treasuries, strengthening the dollar but potentially weakening demand for emerging market bonds.

Higher yields benefit investors holding Treasuries or fixed-income assets, as they earn more interest. Wealthier households, with greater access to financial markets, gain disproportionately, while lower-income households, often without investments, miss out. Stable or rising yields can suppress stock prices, hurting middle-class investors with 401(k)s or equity-heavy portfolios, while bondholders (typically wealthier) benefit.

Elevated mortgage rates tied to the 10-year yield (e.g., 6.5-7%) make homebuying less affordable, particularly for lower- and middle-income families. This widens the gap between homeowners (who build wealth through property) and renters. Large corporations can access credit markets at favorable rates, while small businesses face higher borrowing costs, limiting their ability to compete or expand.

Strong economic growth (2.7% in 2024) supports low unemployment (4.1%), but wage growth has slowed to 3.9% from a 2022 peak of 5.1%. This benefits employers but squeezes workers, particularly in lower-wage sectors, as inflation erodes purchasing power. Interest rate-sensitive sectors (e.g., construction, real estate) lag, reducing job opportunities for blue-collar workers, while high-skill sectors thrive, favoring educated professionals.

Tariff-induced volatility, as seen in April 2025 when yields spiked to 4.5%, disproportionately harms lower-income consumers. Tariffs raise prices for goods, squeezing budgets for those with less disposable income, while wealthier households can absorb cost increases. Fiscal policies favoring tax cuts over deficit reduction (e.g., proposed legislation) may fuel inflation, further eroding real incomes for lower- and middle-class households.

A strong U.S. dollar, bolstered by high Treasury yields, reduces demand for emerging market assets, limiting capital flows to developing economies. This exacerbates global inequality, as poorer nations face higher borrowing costs and currency depreciation. While establishment narratives emphasize the 10-year yield as a neutral economic signal, it’s worth noting that sustained high yields can entrench structural inequalities.

Policies driving deficits (e.g., tax cuts, increased spending) benefit elites with financial assets while burdening future generations with debt. Moreover, the Federal Reserve’s focus on inflation control often prioritizes bondholder interests over wage earners, as tighter monetary policy can suppress job growth.