美联储理事米兰谈为何通胀担忧被夸大

油价现在上涨，对十二到十八个月后的通胀影响非常有限。

Oil moving higher now has very little inflationary consequence twelve to eighteen months out.

所有的通胀都集中在前期发生。

All the inflation happens upfront.

因此，这也是为什么央行应当像美联储历史上所做的那样，忽视油价冲击的原因之一。

And so that's part of why a central bank should look through an oil shock as the Federal Reserve has historically done.

一年后、两年后、三年后的通胀预期，基本都未受到近期走势的影响。

Forward inflation expectations a year out, two years out, three years out are all pretty much unaffected by what's been going on.

事实上，自美联储一月会议以来，许多预期值反而有所下降。

And in fact, a lot of them are lower since the FOMC met in January.

我认为，经济能够承受货币政策对劳动力市场提供的额外支持。

My view is that the economy can bear additional support for the labor market from monetary policy.

随着劳动力市场逐步温和降温、工资压力下降，你根本不会出现央行通常会应对的工资-物价螺旋。

With the labor market very gradually cooling and declining wage pressures, you just are not going to get a wage price spiral that a central bank would normally respond to.

当你提到‘让经济过热’这类说法时，这种表述极其不精确，因为它隐含地假设了供给是固定的，认为你无法提升汽车的马力。

When you sort of say something like running it hot, it's wildly imprecise because it's a statement that sort of assumes that supply is constant, that you can't increase the horsepower of the car.

我认为经济不需要货币政策像2021年或2022年那样猛踩油门、加速经济。

I don't think the economy needs monetary policy to be slamming on the gas and and accelerating the economy like it was in 2021 or 2022.

但我也不认为经济需要被货币政策拖慢。

But I also don't think it needs to be holding the economy back.

而目前，货币政策略具紧缩性，确实在拖慢经济，我认为这与宏观背景并不一致。

And right now, it is modestly restrictive and it is holding the economy back, and and I don't think that's consistent with the macroeconomic backdrop.

当你考虑供给侧冲击时——无论是人工智能、石油、监管，还是其他任何冲击——关键在于

What matters when you think about shocks to the supply side, whether they're AI, oil, regulation, no matter what the shock is, what matters when you think about this is

关于前瞻性指引的任何陈述均不构成购买或出售任何投资或产品的建议。

Nothing said on Forward Guidance is a recommendation to buy or sell any investments or products.

本播客仅用于信息目的，节目中任何人的观点均为其个人意见，而非财务建议，也不一定代表Blockworks的观点。

This podcast is for informational purposes only, and the views expressed by anyone on the show are solely their opinions, not financial advice, or necessarily the views of Blockworks.

我们的主持人、嘉宾以及Blockworks团队可能持有所讨论公司基金或项目的头寸。

Our hosts, guests, and the Blockworks team may hold positions in the company's funds or projects discussed.

一如既往，投资区块链技术存在风险，具体条款和条件适用。

As always, investments in blockchain technology involve risk, terms, conditions apply.

自己做研究。

Do your own research.

米兰行长，很高兴您参加数字峰会。

Governor Miran, great to have you to the Digital Summit.

欢迎。

Welcome.

谢谢您的邀请。

Thanks for having me.

让我澄清一下，我只是七位理事中的一位。

And let me just clarify that I'm one member of a board of seven governors.

我们一共有七个人。

There are seven of us.

我并不是像英格兰银行行长那样的 governors。

I'm not a governor in the sense that I'm governor of the Bank of England or something like that.

很好，克莱尔。

That's good, Claire.

嘿，总督。

Hey, governor.

莫兰总督，我很想从上周举行的最近一次FOMC会议开始谈起。

Governor Moran, would love to just start by unpacking the most recent FOMC meeting that occurred last week.

你投了反对票，支持降息25个基点。

You dissented in support of a 25 basin rate cut.

我特别希望你能详细说明一下你当前的分析框架，以及你为何投下反对票。

I'd just love for you to unpack your current framework and why you dissented there.

当然。

Sure.

谢谢。

Thanks.

你看，美联储我们有双重使命。

Look, you know, the the Federal Reserve, we have we have a dual mandate.

国会赋予我们关注通胀、物价稳定和劳动力市场的职责。

We are tasked by congress with paying attention to inflation, stable prices, and to the labor market.

我认为，尽管通胀数据较高，但通胀这一使命方面并没有那么严重，因为大部分超出目标的通胀是由一些测量上的异常造成的，比如投资组合管理服务——这本质上只是股市上涨，导致我们衡量通胀时被人为抬高了30到40个基点。

My view is that the inflation side of the mandate has, despite high, measured inflation, has not been so problematic because a lot of the inflation excess over target has been a result of some quirks of measurement of things like portfolio management services, which is basically just the stock market going up, biasing the way we measure inflation up by 30 base 30 to 40 basis points.

一旦修正这些因素，我不认为通胀本身过于严重；而劳动力市场在过去三年里却一直呈现缓慢走弱的趋势。

Once you correct for those things, I do not view inflation as being overly problematic, whereas the labor market has been on a very gradual trend of weakening over the course of the last three years.

这种趋势早已存在。

That trend has been in place.

它一直在持续。

It's been continual.

你可以看到，新进入劳动力市场的人在找工作时越来越困难。

You see it in increasing difficulty of finding jobs for new entrants to the labor market.

你也可以看到，失业者在求职间隔期间所花费的时间越来越长。

You see it in increasing length of time in in people spend between jobs during unemployment.

因此，我认为经济有能力承受货币政策对劳动力市场提供更多支持。

And so my view is that the economy can bear additional support for the labor market from monetary policy.

当然，过去几周发生的许多事情都与伊朗的战争有关。

Now a lot of lot of what's been going on in the last few weeks has, of course, been tied to the war in Iran.

我认为油价的波动让很多人感到不安。

And I think what's going on in oil prices has spooked a lot of people.

从交易和市场角度来看，你知道，市场会剧烈地双向波动。

You know, and understand from a trading perspective, from a markets perspective, things whip around wildly in both directions.

你会看到新闻标题来回拉扯，推动市场变动。

You get headline ping pong, and that pushes markets.

如果你持有杠杆头寸，那种感觉会非常、非常强烈。

And if you have levered positions, that can feel very, very, you know, sort of very intense.

但从货币政策的角度来看，我们必须为十二到十八个月后的经济制定政策，因为货币政策对经济的影响存在显著滞后。

But from a monetary policy perspective, we have to make policy for twelve to eighteen months from now because there are big lags with which monetary policy hits the economy.

如果我们调整利率，它不会在一年内就传导到实际的经济增长、失业率和通胀上。

If we adjust interest rates, it doesn't feed through into actual economic growth, into actual unemployment and inflation for at least a year.

对吧？

Right?

因此，我们需要为未来一年到一年半的经济设定政策，而油价变化对经济的影响实际上要快得多。

So we need to set policy for a year to a year and a half out, and the way that changes in oil prices prices affect the economy is actually much faster than that.

当石油价格突然上涨，比如因伊朗局势导致油价攀升时，油价会立即上升，短期内的整体通胀也会大幅上升。

When you get a spike up in oil prices, when you get a move higher in oil from something like what's going on in Iran, the oil price goes up goes up immediately and headline inflation goes up a lot in the short term.

但当你展望一年到一年半后，这种油价上涨几乎不可能对一年到一年半后才受货币政策影响的经济产生后续效应。

But as you look a year to a year and a half out, it's very unlikely that that causes subsequent effects that are affecting the economy a year to a year and a half out, which is when monetary policy can affect the economy.

因此，这也是为什么传统观点认为央行应当忽略石油冲击——美联储历来就是这么做的。

And so that's part of why the classic reasoning of why a central bank should look through an oil shock as the Federal Reserve has historically done.

所以，忽略石油冲击这一理念，最近在这里的讨论中确实变得越来越突出。

So that idea of looking through an oil shock was something that's really come forth in terms of recent discussions here.

似乎每隔几年，我们都会遇到某种需要应对的冲击。

It seems like every few years we have some sort of shock that we have to navigate through.

我很好奇，您能否详细解释一下？

And I'm I'm curious if you could just unpack it.

据我了解，目前的讨论认为，这些供应冲击往往只朝一个方向发展，比如推高通胀。

You know, the discussion seems to be that a lot of these supply shocks seem to go in one direction, one being higher inflation.

您如何看待这个问题？

How do you think about that?

是的

Yeah.

所以我来谈几点。

So I'll I'll I'll say I'll say a couple things.

一方面，当你思考这些负面供给冲击如何影响经济时，比如油价上涨。

One is when you think about how these negative supply shocks are hitting the economy, things like oil prices moving higher.

正如我之前所说，它在短期内对整体通胀影响很大，但当你展望更远的未来时，它并不会产生任何影响。

As I said before, it affects headline inflation very much in the short term, but as you look further out, it doesn't affect anything.

如果你对这些负面供给冲击感到担忧，这就是你需要关注的。

And that is if you were get concerned about these negative supply shocks, that's what you would be looking for.

你会关注更远期的通胀预期是否上升。

You'd be looking for a rise in inflation expectations further out in time.

如果你观察通胀互换市场，会发现一年、两年、三年后的远期通胀预期基本未受当前局势影响。

And if you look at the inflation swap market, you see that forward inflation expectations a year out, two years out, three years out are all pretty much unaffected by what's been going on.

事实上，许多预期值自年初以来反而有所下降，抱歉。

And in fact, a lot of them are lower since the start of the since I'm sorry.

自一月FOMC会议以来，其中许多数值已经下降。

A lot of them are lower since we met in January since the FOMC met in January.

因此，石油价格这一负面供给冲击完全没有传导到更远期的通胀预期中，也就是说，在货币政策能够产生影响的更长期限内，通胀预期并未受到影响。

And so there's been zero bleed through of the of the negative supply shock of oil prices into inflation expectations further out, you know, so further out in in time, which which again is when monetary policy will be able to affect.

你还需要关注的另一个问题是是否存在工资-价格螺旋。

The other thing you'd be concerned about is if there were a wage price spiral.

如果价格上涨，然后工资上涨，进而又推高价格，就会形成一个负面反馈循环，导致自我实现的通胀螺旋，这需要货币当局收紧政策来加以遏制和消除。

If prices go higher and then wages go higher and that pushes prices higher again, you get the a negative feedback loop that just creates a self self fulfilling inflationary spiral that requires tightening from the monetary authority to offset and to and and and to squash.

但我们目前并未看到这种情况发生，因为正如我之前所说，劳动力市场已经持续了大约三年的温和降温趋势。

That's not something that we see happening right now because the labor market, as I said before, has been on this very gradual cooling trend for about three for for about three years now.

对吧？

Right?

随着劳动力市场温和降温、工资压力下降，你根本不会出现工资-价格螺旋，而这种螺旋才是央行通常需要应对的类型。

And with the labor market very gradually cooling and declining wage pressures, you just are not going to get a wage price spiral that would be the type of thing that would get that would be that a that a central bank would normally respond to.

你刚才提到的另一点我想跟进一下，那就是我们长期以来经历了许多负面供给冲击。

Now you said something else that I'd like to pick up on, which is that we've had a lot of negative supply shocks, you know, sort of over time.

而且我认为人们往往认为这些是我们经历过的仅有的供应冲击。

And and I and I think that there's a tendency to think that they that those are the only supply shocks that we've that we've experienced.

但事实并非如此。

And that's not the case.

还有其他积极的供应冲击也在影响经济，而且这些也受到了很多关注。

There are also positive supply shocks that are hitting the economy too, and these get a lot of attention too.

其中一个就是人工智能。

So one of them is AI.

对吧？

Right?

人工智能是一种积极的供应冲击。

AI is a positive supply shock.

它提升了经济的生产能力。

It increases the productive capacity of the economy.

它让人们用更少的投入生产出更多的产品。

It lets people produce more with less inputs into production.

这是一个积极的供给冲击。

That's a positive supply shock.

另一个对经济产生重大影响的积极供给冲击是去监管化趋势。

Another very powerful positive supply shock that's been hitting the economy has been the trend in deregulation.

现在我认为，这是一群关注加密货币的人。

Now I think this is a this is a group people who are focused on crypto.

监管可能在你们许多商业模式中扮演了重要角色，而应对这些监管规定，可能让在座的不少人曾一度放缓了步伐，减少了产出，提高了生产成本。

Regulations have probably played a large part in a number of your business models, and having to deal with those regulations has probably for a number of people in this room at some point slowed you down, reduced the amount of things you can produce, increased the cost of production.

随着这些监管障碍的消退，你们制造人们想要购买的产品变得更容易了。

And as those regulatory barriers recede, it becomes easier for you to make products that people want to buy.

因此，当监管环境变得更加宽松时，这也构成了对经济的积极供给冲击。

And so as the regulatory as the regulatory backdrop becomes easier, that's a positive supply shock that hits the economy too.

今年一月，我在希腊发表了一次演讲，回顾了关于监管的现代文献，发现要量化联邦监管法规并将其转化为经济学家进行严谨实证研究所需的数值非常困难。

Now I gave a speech in January in Greece where I looked at the literature, the modern literature on regulation, and it's very difficult to sort of quantify the federal regulatory code and turn that into a number in a way that economists would like to do rigorous empirical studies.

但我研究了那些利用人工智能和机器学习工具来实现这一目标的现代文献。

But I looked at the modern literature that sort of uses AI and machine learning tools to do so.

我计算出，过去十五个月左右冲击经济的去监管浪潮，最终将在未来几年每年将通胀拉低约百分之零点五。

And I calculated that the deregulatory wave that's been hitting the economy over the last fifteen months or so would ultimately drag on inflation by about half a percent a year for the next few years.

对吧？

Right?

所以这影响相当可观。

So that's that's that's that's quite chunky.

就在几周前，美联储的两位经济学家丹尼洛·加斯卡斯卡尔迪·加西亚和马特奥·亚科维洛发布了一份新的美联储工作人员研究报告。

Now just a couple of weeks ago, there was a new Federal Reserve staff research paper released by two staff economists at the Fed, Danilo Gas Cascaldi Garcia and Mateo Yacoviello.

这份关于去监管的美联储研究报告发现，他们采用了与以往文献完全不同的估算方法，以及与以往文献完全不同的监管衡量方式。

And what this Fed research paper on deregulation found is they they did a they they did a entirely different estimation method than the previous literature, and they did an entirely different measurement method for regulations in the previous literature.

当将他们的研究结果应用于过去十五个月左右我们所经历的去监管冲击时，这意味着未来两年每年将对通胀产生约0.3%的拉低作用。

And when you apply their results to the scope of the deregulatory shock that we've seen over the last fifteen months or so, it implies a roughly 0.3% drag on inflation each year for the next two years.

对吧？

Right?

所以这不仅仅是一次性影响，而是来自监管环境放松的持续性通缩效应。

So that's not just a one off effect, that's a persistent, disinflationary effect from the receding regulatory backdrop.

现在，使用完全不同的文献和完全不同的估算方法，我计算出的是0.5，他们计算出的是0.3。

Now using an entirely different literature, entirely different estimation methods, I calculated 0.5, they calculated 0.3.

我认为这两者很可能在噪声范围内彼此接近。

I think those are probably within noise of each other.

它们肯定在置信区间之内。

They're certainly within confidence bands.

我无法排除其中一个而支持另一个。

I wouldn't be able to reject one in favor of the other.

但无论哪一个，影响都相当大，我认为非常显著。

But either of them are very big and I think very substantial.

我认为，政策制定者在考虑货币政策的适当设定时，应当将这类冲击纳入考量。

And I think of the types of shocks that policymakers ought to take into account when we're thinking about the correct settings for monetary policies.

所以，确实，我们已经经历了若干负面的供给冲击，比如油价上涨。

So yes, it is the case that we have had a number of negative supply shocks hit the economy, things like oil moving higher.

但同样真实的是，我们也正面临非常强劲的正面供给冲击。

But it's also the case that we have very powerful positive supply shocks hitting the economy too.

与石油不同，我预计像放松监管和人工智能这样的因素会持续产生通缩影响。

And unlike oil, I expect some of these like deregulation and AI to be persistent in their disinflationary effects.

上周的会议是经济预测更新会议。

So last week's meeting was a summary of economic projections update meeting.

我非常希望听听，当你权衡这些正向或负向供给冲击的背景时，这如何影响你对未来一年联邦基金利率的预测？

I would love to just hear about when you balance out the context of either these positive or negative supply shocks, how does that characterize your forecast for the federal funds rate for the next year?

在最近的预测摘要中，由于石油冲击迅速影响经济，而我认为其他一些冲击是逐步显现的，因此我把今年的总体通胀预测上调至2.7%。

So in the last, summary of projections, because of the oil shock, right, that hits the economy very quickly, whereas I think some of these other shocks play out over time, I did raise my inflation projection for my headline inflation projection for this year to 2.7%.

对吧？

Right?

所以我因为石油冲击而略微上调了预测。

So I moved it a little bit higher because of the oil shock.

然而，正如我之前所说，政策不应对此作出反应，因为这种冲击是立即发生的，而政策对经济的影响要滞后十二到十八个月。

However, as I said before, this is not the type of thing that policy should respond to because that happens all upfront and policy affects the economy twelve to eighteen months out.

现在石油价格上涨，对十二到十八个月后的通胀几乎没有影响。

It has very oil moving higher now has very little inflationary consequence twelve to eighteen months out.

所有通胀都集中在前期发生。

All the inflation happens upfront.

十二到十八个月后发生的是，经济可能会更疲软，因为人们花在加油上的每一美元，都是他们没有花在其他商品和服务上的钱。

What does happen twelve to eighteen months out is the economy might be weaker because every dollar that people put into filling their gas tanks is a dollar they're not spending on other goods surfaces.

因此，这可能会对失业率造成上行压力。

And so that might put upward pressure on the unemployment rate.

所以在三月的经济预测摘要中，我将政策利率上调了半个百分点，这不是因为伊朗的石油，而是因为我们在十二月预测摘要和三月预测摘要之间收到的通胀数据。

So in the the March summary of economic projections, I boosted my policy rate by half a percent, not due to oil in Iran, but due to the inflation data that we received in between the December summary projections and the March summary projections.

这使我的预测处于中性水平。

That puts me at that that puts my my projection at about neutral.

对吧？

Right?

中性政策利率是指既不刺激也不宽松的货币政策利率。

So the neutral policy rate is the monetary policy interest rate that's neither stimulative nor accommodative.

目前，我认为这大概在百分之二点五到百分之二点七五之间。

Right now, I think that's probably about two and a half percent, two and a half to to two and three quarters percent.

我们现在比那个水平高出约75个基点。

We're about 75 basis points above that level.

所以，我觉得很抱歉。

So, you know, I think it's sorry.

我们确实是。

We're yeah.

我们大约差一点。

We're about a sorry.

我们现在比那个水平高出大约一个百分点。

We're about a percentage point above that level right now.

我认为在今年内逐步回归中性水平是合适的。

I think it's appropriate over the course of this year to just get back to neutral.

我不认为经济需要货币政策像2021年或2022年那样猛踩油门、加速经济。

I don't think the economy needs monetary policy to be slamming on the gas and and accelerating the economy, like it was in 2021 or 2022.

但我也不认为经济需要被货币政策拖后腿。

But I also don't think it needs to be holding the economy back.

而目前，货币政策略具限制性，正在抑制经济增长，我认为这与宏观经济背景并不一致。

And right now, it is modestly restrictive, and it is holding the economy back, and and I don't think that's consistent with the macroeconomic backdrop.

所以你一开始提到了人工智能潜在的生产率繁荣，以及它如何可能比负面的石油供应冲击更加持久。

So early in there, you mentioned this idea of AI potential productivity boom and how it could be much more durable than something like a negative oil supply shock.

当我想到这种持久性冲击时，我首先想到的是，它对长期经济中性利率（R星）可能产生什么影响？

And the first thing that comes to my mind there when I think about a durable shock like that is what is its potential impact on the long term economic neutral rate or R star?

我很想听听你对中性利率长期预测的看法，特别是面对人工智能生产率繁荣这样一种可能的强大正面冲击时。

I'd be curious to hear about how, what's your perspective on the more long term forecasts of the neutral rate in light of such a potentially powerful shock, positive shock, such as the AI productivity boom?

是的。

Yeah.

所以你看，我认为人工智能生产率繁荣无疑会推高中性利率。

So look, you know, I I think that the AI productivity boom, does unambiguously push the neutral rate higher.

然而，我认为还有许多其他反向因素在压低中性利率。

However, I think there's a lot of other countervailing factors that have been weighing on the neutral rate.

因此，如果投资随着时间变得更有利可图、更有效率，确实会提升长期中性利率，也就是资本和投资所能获得的中性利率，这种提升会抬高中性利率。

And so it it is the case that if if investing becomes more profitable over time, if investing becomes more productive over time, that raises the long term neutral, you know, neutral rate of interest that you get on capital on investing, and that boost that boost neutral.

但还有其他因素在拖累它。

But there's other things that have been weighing on it.

我一直试图引起注意的一个因素，对它产生了相当强烈的影响，那就是人口增长率的变化。

And one thing that I've been trying to draw attention to that's been weighing on it, think, quite quite powerfully is the change in population growth.

我们经历了人口增长率在两个方向上的最大冲击，这在我有生之年，可能在座许多人的有生之年都是如此。

We lived through the biggest shocks to the population growth rate in both directions in, certainly in my lifetime, probably in the lifetimes of many many folks in this room.

在短短几年内，我们曾经历了一段人口大幅增长的时期，大约在2021到2023年。

Within the course of a few years, when we had a period of of massively growing population in 2021 to 2023 or so.

而在2024到2025年中期，人口增长急剧下滑，几乎降至零，劳动年龄人口增长现在可能已基本持平。

And then in 2024 to 05/06, that population growth plummeted pretty much to, you know, working age population growth is is probably, you know, pretty close to flat now.

因此，这是一次巨大的增长激增，随后又是一次剧烈的下滑。

And so that was a huge spike up in growth and then a huge spike down.

正如无风险利率是受生产率影响的资本均衡回报的函数，它也受到经济增长率的影响，而经济增长率又受人口增长的影响。

And just as the neutral interest rate is a function of the equilibrium returns in capital that are affected by productivity, it's also affected by the growth rate in the economy, which is affected by, population growth.

因此，在我看来，这是对利率构成重大压力的因素，而且你在全球范围内都能看到这一点。

And so that, in my view, is a is a very big thing weighing on interest rates, and you see that, across the world.

在疫情之前，我们花了多年时间讨论全球利率的日本化。

We spent many years before the pandemic discussing discussing, Japanization of global interest rates.

你知道，生育率下降、全球人口老龄化、人口增长放缓，导致许多国家的利率走低。

You know, declining fertility rates, declining, you know, aging populations around the world, declining population growth led to lower interest rates in a lot of countries.

我们曾花很多时间讨论，是否所有人都在朝这个方向发展。

And we and there was a lot of time spent discussing is this is everybody going in this direction.

对吧？

Right?

我认为，这些渠道和路径一直是有效的经济机制，或许在疫情前它们是主要因素，当时很多人都在讨论这些。

I think that those channels, those pathways were always valid economic pathways, and maybe they were they were of primary importance sort of before the pandemic, and a lot of people were talking about them.

而在疫情期间，许多其他因素开始变得重要，主要与疫情本身以及之后推出的庞大经济支持计划有关。

And then during the pandemic, a lot of other things started to matter, mostly related to the pandemic, and then the massive economic support programs that were launched after that.

但人口老龄化、人口增长与利率之间的联系并未消失。

But those the connection between population aging, demographic growth, and interest rates didn't go away.

对吧？

Right?

只是其他事情占据了更多的注意力，但这些路径仍然有效。

It just you know, other things occupy better retention, but those pathways are still valid.

我认为在未来几年，我们会看到它们再次变得重要，因为我们经历的人口增长冲击规模巨大。

And I think that we'll see in coming years that they they matter again because of the size of the shocks that we've experienced to population growth.

我认为影响利率的另一个因素是财政赤字的改善。

The other thing that I think weighs in the interest rate is the improving fiscal deficit.

所以，如果你对比去年第二季度到第四季度的财政赤字与前年同期的财政赤字，显然最大的变化就是关税。

And so I think that if you look at the fiscal deficit in q two through q four of last year versus the fiscal deficit of q two through q four of the previous year, and of course, think the major delta is the the biggest delta is is tariffs.

并不是所有变化都来自关税，但最大的变动确实是关税。

It's not all tariffs, but the biggest delta is tariffs.

财政赤字下降了不少。

The fiscal deficit came in quite a bit.

我认为按年化计算，大概是4500亿美元左右，不过这只是我凭记忆说的。

And I think at an annualized rate, it's probably, if I remember correctly, about $4.50, but that for $450,000,000,000, but that's off the top of my head.

所以这个数字可能不准确。

So that might not be correct.

如果你看2025年第二季度与2024年第二季度的对比，这是一次显著的下降。

It's it's it's a significant decline if you look at q two through 2025, calendar q two through 2025 versus calendar q two through 2024.

我认为主要的变量是关税。

And I think the major delta is tariffs.

对吧？

Right?

因此，财政借款的减少也会影响中性利率，我认为这也会对中性利率构成压力。

So that declining the decline in fiscal borrowing is something that pushes around the neutral rate too, and that is something that I think will also weigh on it.

所以，关于中性利率，我的观点倾向于我同事观点范围的下限，如果你看SEP的话，但我并没有超出这个范围。

So, you know, so my view of the neutral rate is towards the bottom of the range of where my colleague's view is if you look at the SEP, but I'm not outside of the range.

在进行交易之前，你应该知道究竟是谁在推动市场。

Before you place a trade, you should know who is actually moving the market.

这就是Arkham发挥作用的地方。

That's where Arkham comes in.

Arkham是一个加密货币情报平台和交易所，让你看到真实的链上数据，了解哪些钱包在买入、卖出和转移资金，然后基于这些信息直接进行交易。

Arkham is a crypto intelligence platform and exchange that lets you see real on chain data, which wallets are buying, selling, and moving funds, and then trade directly on that information.

Arkham 的设计旨在让区块链变得易于理解，而不是呈现原始的交易数据。

Arkham was built to make blockchains human readable instead of raw transaction data.

你可以获得清晰的个人资料、可视化工具和自定义仪表板，展示表面之下的真实情况。

You get clear profiles, visualizers, and custom dashboards that show what's really happening beneath the surface.

追踪钱包和资金流动正变得与技术分析或基本面分析同等重要。

Tracking wallets and fund flows is becoming just as important as technical or fundamental analysis.

链上情报也是交易者防范黑客攻击、跑路和诈骗的最佳工具之一。

On chain intelligence is also one of the best tools traders have to protect themselves against hacks, rugs, and scams.

通过 Arkham 交易所，你可以在一个平台上从洞察直接执行交易，这是全球首个由加密情报驱动的交易所。

With Arkham Exchange, you can go from insight to execution in one place, the world's first exchange powered by crypto intelligence.

访问 Arkham，前往 arkham.com 开始使用真实的链上洞察进行交易。

Check out Arkham and start trading with real on chain insight at arkham.com.

大家好。

Hey, all.

我是 Blockworks 的联合创始人 Michael Apolito。

Blockworks cofounder Michael Apolito here.

稍作休息，聊聊我们刚刚推出的Blockworks投资者关系服务。

Quick break to talk about something we've just launched, Blockworks investor relations.

随着市场转向机构资本，投资者希望获得更多的透明度、标准化和更高水平的专业性。

As the market shifts toward institutional capital, investors want more transparency, more standardization, and a higher level of professionalism.

但传统的投资者关系模式缓慢、手动，且不适应加密货币的运作方式。

But the traditional IR model is slow, manual, and not built for how crypto works.

如果你在链上构建业务，你的数据已经是实时的，你的业务本身就具有透明性，挑战在于将这些转化为清晰可信的投资者故事。

If you're building on chain, your data is already live, your business is already transparent, the challenge is turning that into a clear, credible story for investors.

这正是Blockworks IR要解决的问题。

That's exactly what we're solving with Blockworks IR.

它是一个单一平台，整合了实时分析、品牌化投资者门户和一对一的咨询服务，帮助你传达真正重要的信息。

It's a single platform that brings together real time analytics, branded investor portals, and hands on advisory support so you can communicate what matters.

如果你是链上企业，希望提升你的投资者策略，请访问blockworks.com/investorrelations了解Blockworks投资者关系服务。

If you're an on chain business looking to level up your investor strategy, check out Blockworks Investor Relations at blockworks.com/investorrelations.

好了。

Alright.

回到本期节目。

Back to the episode.

你提到的另一个主要持久趋势是去监管化。

So the other major durable trend you mentioned was this idea of deregulation.

就在上周，美联储发布了一些关于其如何参与这一去监管化更新的初步咨询意见。

And just last week, the Federal Reserve put out some initial consultation on this update to the Federal Reserve's perspective on how it contributes to that update on deregulation.

我想知道你能否分享一下你的看法，以及你是如何思考这个问题的。

I'm curious if you could just provide your perspective on that and how you're thinking about it.

如果你上过经济学课，就会学到供需关系。

So so if you look if you take an economics class, there's supply and demand.

对吧？

Right?

如果你保持供给不变，而大力刺激需求，推动需求上升，就会产生通货膨胀。

And if you hold supply constant and you slam your foot on the gas for demand and you push demand out, you get inflation.

但如果你扩大供给，就不会出现通货膨胀。

And if you push supply out, then you don't get inflation.

你可以用更少的资源生产更多。

You can produce more with less.

我认为，网上很多人经常用的一个说法是‘让系统全速运转’。

And I think, you know, one expression that that people online use a lot is is running it hot.

对吧？

Right?

我认为‘让系统全速运转’这个说法，其实隐含了对引擎本身状况的假设。

I think that running it hot is you're sort of well, if you use that expression, you're conditioning upon what the engine is.

如果你开的是一辆马力很小的车，却想开到每小时60英里，那你很可能就是在让系统全速运转。

And if you're trying to go 60 miles an hour in a car with a handful of horsepower, you know, you're probably running it hot.

但如果你开的是一辆马力强劲、有数百马力的车，想开到每小时60英里，那就不是让系统全速运转。

But if you're trying to go 60 miles an hour in a car with a large number of horsepower, hundreds of horsepower, you're not running it hot.

对吧？

Right?

这辆车完全能应对这个速度。

That car can handle that speed.

这就是推动供给侧扩张与限制供给侧之间的区别。

And this is the difference between pushing the supply side out versus restricting the supply side.

如果你推动经济的供给侧扩张，且供给快速增长，那么需求也能快速增长，而不会引发通货膨胀。

If you push the supply side of the of the economy out and supply is growing quickly, then demand can grow quickly too and it's not inflationary.

如果你抑制供给侧，而经济无法生产出足够的供给来满足需求，就会出现通货膨胀。

If you're holding the supply side in and and the economy can't produce supply to meet demand, then you're getting an inflation.

我认为这就是关键区别。

And I think that's the difference.

像人工智能和放松监管这类措施之所以重要，是因为它们能让经济以更少的投入生产出更多的产品。

And that's where things like AI and things like deregulation come into play is because they allow the economy to produce more with less.

资本深化也是如此。

And that's also true of capital deepening.

如果你看看去年税法改革中部分激励投资的措施，比如对设备和研发的全额一次性扣除政策。

If you look at the incentives for investment that that were in part of the tax legislation last year, you know, the full expensing on on full expensing on equipment and full expensing in r and d.

这些措施激励了对生产性资本的投资。

These incentivize investment in productive capital.

当你拥有更多生产性资本时，就能生产得更多。

And when you have more productive capital, you can produce more.

所以我认为这一切都取决于情况。当你提到‘让经济过热’这样的说法时，这其实非常不精确，因为它隐含地假设了供给是固定的，你无法提升汽车的马力。

And so I think it's all a function of So when you sort of say something like running it hot, it's wildly imprecise because it's a statement that sort of assumes that supply is constant, that you can't increase the horsepower of the car.

但如果你推动放松监管、应用人工智能、深化资本积累，你就是在提升汽车的马力，能够用更少的资源生产更多，因此需求可以更快增长，而引擎在高速行驶时也不会过热。

But if you go through deregulation, if you go through AI, if you go through capital deepening, you're increasing the horsepower of the car and you can produce more with less, and therefore demand can grow faster and the engine doesn't heat up when you go fast.

所以我认为这个比喻需要做一些调整。

So I think that that metaphor needs needs some adjustment.

但当我思考这些供给侧政策与货币政策的相互作用时，很多都通过我们所谓的两个主要渠道体现出来。

But when I think about these supply side policies and their interaction with monetary policy, a lot of it flows through what we call so there's there's two primary channels.

一个是价格会发生什么变化。

One is what happens to prices.

对吧？

Right?

我之前谈到放松监管时稍微提过这一点。

I talked a little bit about that with deregulation.

如果你能用更少的投入生产更多，就能降低生产成本，并传导至消费品价格。

If you can produce more with less, you have you lower the cost of production that feeds through into consumer prices.

如果你消除了进入壁垒，因为监管可能构成进入壁垒——我在一月的监管演讲中详细讨论过这一点——你就能创造更多竞争。

If you're removing barriers to entry, because regulations can serve as barriers to entry, and I talked a lot about this in my January regulation speech, you're creating more competition.

更多的竞争会降低价格。

More competition will lower prices.

它会降低利润率。

It will lower markups.

它会降低垄断利润。

It will lower monopoly profits.

我认为供给侧因素影响货币政策的另一个渠道，是通过我们所说的产出缺口。

The other channel through which I think a lot of the supply side of stuff affects things that we hear about from monetary policy is through what we call the output gap.

产出缺口是指潜在增长率——即在失业率处于自然水平时经济所能生产的水平——与实际产出之间的差异。

And the output gap is the difference between potential growth, what the economy can produce with, you know, unemployment at its natural level, and where actual output is.

因此，如果失业率高达8%，经济中就存在大量未被利用的闲置资源，经济产出低于潜在水平，还有大量增长空间。

And so if you've got the unemployment rate at 8%, there's tons of unused slack in the economy, there's tons of unused resources, the economy is producing below potential, there's a lot more it can produce.

如果你的失业率是3%，那就意味着经济产出超过了潜在水平，因为你试图以非通胀的方式生产超出经济承载能力的产品，从而导致价格压力。

If you've got the unemployment rate at 3%, you're above potential because you're trying to produce more than the economy can produce in the non inflationary way, and you get price pressures as a result.

现在，当你思考供给侧冲击时——无论是人工智能、石油还是监管——无论是什么冲击，关键在于它究竟是推动了实际GDP或潜在GDP的扩张，还是使其收缩，以及幅度有多大？

Now, what matters when you think about shocks to the supply side, whether they're AI, oil, regulation, no matter what the shock is, what matters when you think about this, is is it pushing out or pulling in actual supply or sorry, actual GDP or potential GDP by more or less?

因此，许多人假设，在面对许多生产率冲击时，实际产出和潜在产出会以大致相同的幅度上升。

And so if you have a situation like and one assumption that a lot of people make is that actual and potential move out by roughly the same amount in response to a lot of these productivity shocks.

在某些时候，我认为这个假设是合理的。

There are times when I think that that's a good assumption.

例如，如果你回顾90年代格林斯潘的生产率故事，当时的前主席格林斯潘认为，生产率的提升将带来非通胀性的高GDP增长。

So for example, if you think about, the Greenspan productivity story in the nineties, where, you know, former chairman Greenspan was making, was was making the case that improvements in productivity were going to lead to high GDP growth that was non inflationary.

因此，政策实际上无需做出反应。

And therefore, policy doesn't really need to respond.

我认为，在电信革命的背景下，这个论点非常有道理。

Now, I think that argument, I think, makes a lot of sense in the context of the telecoms revolution.

因为如果你在建设大量电信基础设施，就必须开挖街道、铺设通信线路，然后再把路面恢复原状。

Because if you're building lots of telecom capacity, you have to tear up streets, lay telecom wire, put the streets back together.

有大量的投资活动发生。

There's a lot of investment activity that occurs.

因此，由于投资活动，需求增加；同时，由于互联网连接性的提升带来了生产率提高，供给也增加了。

And so you get the increase in demand because of the investment activity, and you get the increase in supply because you have a productivity enhancement from the increased internet connectivity.

我认为，假设产出缺口的净变化为零，或者说中性，是合理的。

The net of change in the output gap, I think it's a fair assumption to assume it could be zero, sorry it could be neutral.

但对于其他类型的冲击，情况可能并非如此。

With other type of shocks, that may not be the case.

特别是在监管冲击的情况下，我认为实际GDP的上升幅度会远小于潜在GDP。

Certainly, with the case of a regulation shock, I think I think that act I think that actual GDP will move up by a lot less than potential GDP.

例如，如果在严格的碳排放法规下，一座烟囱每天只能运行八小时，而当碳法规放松后，它可以每天运行十六小时，你并不需要额外投资，因为资本存量已经存在。

So for example, if you've got a smokestack that you can run eight hours a day with strict carbon regulations, and then the carbon regulations ease and you can run at sixteen hours a day, you don't need to do additional investment because you've got the capital stock already there.

你已经有了那座烟囱。

You've got the smokestack.

只是现在你可以让烟囱每天运行更长的时间了。

It's just that you can run the smokestack more hours a day.

因此，在这种情况下，潜在GDP的上升幅度我认为远大于实际GDP。

And so that's a case in which potential GDP goes up, I think, by a lot more than actual GDP.

你能生产的供给量大幅增加，但需求并没有大幅上升，因为你只是缓解了生产限制。

The amount of supply you can produce has gone up by a lot, but the amount of demand has not gone up by a lot because all you've done is ease ease production constraints.

你并没有显著增加投资需求。

You haven't increased a lot of investment demand.

人工智能，我不确定。

AI, I don't know.

人工智能可能处于两者之间。

AI could be somewhere in between.

当然，人工智能通过GPU和数据中心等形式创造了巨大的投资需求。

So certainly AI creates a huge amount of investment demand in the form of, you know, GPUs and data centers.

我认为，许多GPU的需求流向了海外。

A lot of the GPU demand I think is leaked overseas.

许多GPU并不是在美国制造的。

A lot of the GPUs are not made in The United States.

毫无疑问，数据中心的需求推动了美国的投资活动。

Certainly data center demand does lead to investment activity in The United States.

当然，我们在开发人工智能以及将人工智能整合到公司现有工作流程的员工薪酬上投入了大量资金。

Certainly, we pay a lot of of employee compensation to people who are working on on developing AI, integrating AI into the into existing company work streams.

但在潜在GDP和实际GDP之间，最终结果会如何呢？

But where does it shake out on potential GDP versus actual GDP?

我并没有明确的看法。

I don't really have a firm view.

所以我想换个话题，进入我们参加本次会议真正关注的核心议题——数字资产以及你对它们的看法。

So I wanna shift gears here into the heart of what we're truly here for this conference, which is digital assets and and your perspective on them.

我想从最近开始推出的精简主账户说起。

And I wanna start with this introduction of these Skinny Master Accounts that have been begun rolling out.

我们已经看到Kraken获得了其中一个的批准。

We've seen Kraken get approved for one.

因此，我很想听听你对这些精简主账户作用的看法，它们与完整的主账户相比处于什么位置？

And so I would just love to get your perspective on how you think about the role of these Skinny Master Accounts with respect to where it sits in comparison to, you know, full fledged Master Account.

当然。

Sure.

这很好地衔接了之前的讨论，因为我们之前谈到了生产率增长和技术进步。

So this this ties into the previous conversation nicely because we were talking about productivity growth and we were talking about technological advancements.

如果纵观人类历史的长期趋势，正是技术进步推动了我们所经历的所有人类繁荣增长。

And if you look over the very, very long term of human history, it is technological advances that drive all of all of the growth in human prosperity that we've experienced.

我认为，多种技术进步都是如此，而且我认为金融创新是其中重要的一部分。

And I do and and I think that's true of a wide variety of technological advances, and I think that financial innovation is an important part of that.

因为金融创新、金融科技和金融能力的进步有助于将资本配置到最需要的地方，使经济更高效地生产、产出更多，并总体上推动人类繁荣。

Because financial innovation and advances in financial technology and financial capabilities help to allocate capital to where it needs to be to make the economy produce efficiently, produce more, and and just generally drive human prosperity.

所以，我认为金融创新也很重要。

So I do think that financial innovation is important too.

我认为，为稳定币引入这些精简型主账户，将是推动此类创新发生的重要一步。

I think that introducing these skinny master accounts for stablecoins will be will be an important step, in the direction of of allowing that type of innovation to occur.

美联储最近发布了关于精简型主账户的意见征询，我们收到了大量反馈意见。

The Federal Reserve recently put out a request for information for comments on Skinny Master Accounts, and we received a large volume of these comments.

工作人员目前正在审阅这些意见。

The staff are going through the comments now.

我看过其中一些意见。

I've I've I've looked at a few of them a few of the comments.

让我印象深刻的一些内容包括ACH访问权限以及对瘦主账户余额规模的上限。

Some of the things that stuck out at me were things like ACH access and caps on and and caps on the the size of the the balances the size of the of the Skinny Master Accounts.

但这仍然是一个正在积极研究和制定规则的领域。

But this is an area of of this is an area of of active examination and and and active active rule making.

所以，你知道，这件事正在向前推进。

And so, you know, it is it is something that is moving ahead.

我很期待负责支付委员会的沃勒理事推动此事进入下一阶段，我认为它具有很大的潜力。

I'm excited for governor Waller who leads the payments committee to put, to sort of to to push this to next steps, and and I think it's got a lot of potential.

我们看到的另一个大趋势当然是稳定币。

The other big trend that we're seeing is, of course, around stablecoins.

你最近就稳定币发表了一次具有里程碑意义的演讲，我很想听听你对这个问题的思考是如何演变的，以及它在更广泛的金融体系中的作用——你认为它将如何融入现有体系，如何补充现有机制，以及你目前对此的总体看法。

You had a landmark speech about stablecoins recently, and I would love to just hear about how you're evolving your thinking there and its role within the broader financial system where you see it being incorporated, where you see it it complements what already exists there, and, yeah, just how you're thinking about that.

谢谢。

Thanks.

我在十一月发表过一次演讲，我想是那样。

So I gave a speech in November, I think.

差不多吧。

Something like that.

是的。

Yeah.

十一月关于稳定币。

November about stablecoins.

在那次演讲中，我提出了几个关于稳定币的观点。

And and, you know, I I I made a couple of arguments about stablecoins in that speech.

我主要的观点是，如果存在符合《天才法案》的稳定币，它们有助于促进数字支付。

The the major argument that I made was that if you've got, Genius Act compliant stablecoins, they help you they help facilitate digital payments.

但从美国、欧洲以及那些已经拥有美元计价储蓄账户、美元计价货币市场基金和国债的地区的资本储蓄角度来看，如果一个系统拥有开放的资本和开放的资本市场，那么从储蓄角度来看，稳定币我认为并没有增加太多价值。

But from a savings pool of capital perspective in The United States, in Europe, in places that already have access to dollar denominated savings accounts, dollar denominated money market funds, treasury bills, if you have a system with with open capital, in open capital markets, from a savings perspective, stablecoins don't, I think, add as much.

从支付角度来看，它们确实有帮助，因为它们促进了数字支付。

From a payments perspective, they do because they're facilitating digital payments.

但如果你有一个庞大的资本池，我不确定稳定币是否真的增加了那么多价值。

But if you've got a huge pool of capital, I don't know that stablecoins are adding are are adding are adding that much.

但在实施资本管制的地区，或者由于地理或发展原因银行体系难以渗透的地区，情况就不是这样了。

Now that's not true in places with capital controls, and it's not true in places where the banking system struggles to penetrate because of geography or development.

对吧？

Right?

因此，世界上很大一部分人生活在资本管制之下，如果他们想获得美元储蓄工具，比如美元存款、国债或货币市场基金，他们根本没有能力这么做，因为他们在的国家法律规定，你就是不能把钱转成美元。

And so you've got large parts of the world where people are living behind capital controls where if they wanted access to dollar savings instruments, like dollar deposits, treasury bills, money market funds, they don't have they they don't have the capacity to do so because the country they're living in, the law is you just can't move your money into dollars.

我们不会让你这么做。

We're not gonna let you.

不管人们多么渴望获得美元，他们就是不被允许。

And it doesn't matter how bad the people want access to dollars, they're just not allowed to.

世界上还有其他一些地区非常偏远，可能根本没有银行服务。

There are other parts of the world where it's very rural and there may not be banking services.

也许人们有手机，通过手机上的卫星连接，但他们无法使用真正的银行服务。

And maybe people have a cell phone and so they, you know, have a satellite link on their cell phone, but they have no access to actual banking banking services.

或者该国的银行服务太不可靠、波动太大，或者通货膨胀太严重，导致他们不想使用银行服务。

Or the banking services in the country are too unreliable and volatile or in in their or there may be too much inflation, and they don't want to use the banking services.

所以我的观点是，我对稳定币的增长非常乐观，但我认为稳定币的大量采用实际上将来自那些希望以美元计价、希望持有美元但目前无法持有美元的大笔资金。

So my perspective is that is that I'm very optimistic about stablecoin growth, but I think that a lot of the stablecoin uptake is actually gonna come from large volumes of money that wanna be denominated in dollars, that wanna sit in dollars, and are currently unable to sit in dollars.

对吧？

Right?

大量原本无法进入美元体系的储蓄。

Huge pools of savings that have no other way of getting into into the dollar system.

突然间，有了实现这一目标的方法。

Suddenly, there's a way of doing it.

当然，你仍然需要进入加密生态系统才能做到这一点。

And, of course, you still need to get onto the crypto ecosystem to do that.

所以仍然存在某种进入门槛，但我认为这使问题变得更容易了。

So there is sort of still an an entry real issue, but I think it makes the I think it makes the problem easier.

我觉得这有点像网约车应用这种新技术，打破了出租车牌照的垄断。

And I I sort of think of it a bit like, you know, a rideshare app sort of being a new technology that broke up the monopoly of a taxi cab medallion.

对吧？

Right?

正是这种类型的技术，能够帮助人们绕过以往无法触及的美元存款壁垒。

It's that type of thing that sort of that creates that creates that, ability to sort of start circumventing barriers to dollar deposits that people didn't have access to before.

当然，回到我们之前讨论的中性利率，如果全球大量资金流入以美元计价的储蓄，这将对中性利率产生压力。

Now, of course, tying this back to neutral rate that we were discussing before, if you have huge inflows from the rest of the world into US dollar denominated savings, that's gonna weigh in the neutral rate.

对吧？

Right?

这正是上世纪九十年代末和二十一世纪初发生的情况，前美联储主席本·伯南克称之为全球储蓄过剩。

This is what happened in the late nineties and the early two thousands, what former chairman Ben Bernanke called the global savings glut.

如果我们达到对稳定币增长更乐观的预测，那么资金规模可能不会像全球储蓄过剩那么大，但或许能达到其一半的规模。

If we hit the more optimistic projections of stablecoin growth, you could be looking at at magnitudes that are that are, you know, maybe not quite as big as the global savings glut, but let's say half as big.

因此，这些因素完全有可能对货币政策产生重大影响，而这无疑将形成一股强大的力量，压低利率，使其维持在较低水平。

So, you know, there is the scope for these to matter, you know, very substantially for monetary policy as well, which, of course, would be a very, you know, which would be very powerful force weighing on interest rates keeping them lower.

是的

Yeah.

我完全同意，我经常认为稳定币为世界其他地区进入美元体系提供了巨大的助力。

I completely agree that I I think a lot about stablecoins as being this this huge tailwind for the rest of the world to be able to gain entry to the dollar system.

我想知道，你怎么看待这个问题的另一面，我认为这一点被低估了，那就是代币化存款？

I'm curious, how do you think about the other side of the equation, which I think goes understated, which is Tokenized Deposits?

你对代币化存款怎么看？

What do think about those?

是的

Yeah.

所以，代币化存款在我看来，是银行已提供服务的一种改进——当然，我并没有对代币化存款做过深入研究。

So Tokenized Deposits strike me as a and to be clear, I have not made a I have not made an extensive study of tokenized deposits in particular.

但据我所知，可能比你还少，代币化存款似乎是对现有银行服务的一种改进。

But what I know about them, which is probably less than you do, is that they strike me as an improve an improve an improvement on services that are already being offered by banks.

对吧？

Right?

这最终会彻底改变银行业吗？

Is that something that is that something that ultimately ends up revolutionizing the banking system?

我不知道。

I don't know.

但在我看来，代币化存款是利用技术持续改进银行所提供金融服务的又一步骤。

But this Tokenized Deposits strike me as as as a, you know, another step in a long line of improving the financial services that that banks offer by by utilizing technology.

但我没有对此进行深入研究，如果听了你的观点，我也愿意改变我的看法。

But I haven't made an extensive study of it, and I would be open to changing my mind based on things you tell me.

是的。

Yeah.

够了。

Enough.

是的。

Yeah.

我们以后还得请你回来，再就这个话题深入聊聊。

We'll have to have you back again for another conversation on that one too.