本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
让我们说清楚，我 definitely 更喜欢一样东西。
Let's be clear, I definitely prefer one thing.
我更喜欢美国。
I prefer The U.
美。
S.
东西。
Thing.
我认为是美国。
I think The U.
美。
S.
经济，美国。
Economy, The U.
美。
S.
从回报率来看，市场绝对是无可匹敌的。
Market, in terms of return, is absolutely unbeaten.
美国的历史。
The history of The U.
S.
S.
在过去四十年或所谓的美国例外主义期间，这一切都与技术息息相关。
Over the last forty years or the so called exceptionalism, it has all to do with technology.
这是少数几个需要关注所谓中性利率的情况之一。
This is one of those cases in which it matters to look at the so called neutral rate.
在这些时候，正如你所说，生产率增长会急剧上升。
On these occasions, productivity growth, as you said, skyrockets.
这意味着中性利率很可能大幅上升。
So this means that the neutral rate most likely goes up quite a lot.
我不会试图将实际利率设定在中性利率水平之下。
I would not try to position the level of actual interest rates below the level of neutral interest rates.
这将是一个政策失误，在中期可能带来极其高昂的代价。
That would be a policy mistake which could be extremely expensive in the medium term.
在开始之前，提醒一下，Blockworks的顶级机构会议——数字资产峰会，今年三月将重返纽约。
Before we get started, a quick reminder that Blockworks' premier institutional conference, the Digital Asset Summit, is returning to New York City this March.
今年参会的资产管理规模超过4.2万亿美元，有150位演讲者和750家机构参与。
This year represents more than $4,200,000,000,000 in assets under management with a 150 speakers and seven fifty institutions attending.
演讲嘉宾包括SEC主席保罗·阿特金斯、CFTC主席迈克尔·塞利格、美联储理事史蒂芬·莫兰以及Tether首席执行官保罗·阿多尼奥，还有无数其他高管、资产管理人、监管者和塑造行业的核心加密基础设施建设者。
Speakers include SEC Chair Paul Atkins, CFTC Chair Michael Selig, Fed Governor Stephen Moran, and Tether CEO Paulo Ardonio, alongside countless other executives, asset managers, regulators, and the core crypto infrastructure builders shaping the industry.
如果你想了解2026年数字资产的严肃机构视角，数字资产峰会正是发生这一切的地方。
If you want serious institutional grade view of digital assets in 2026, Digital Asset Summit is where it happens.
使用代码 FORWARD200 可享受200美元优惠，详情请访问 blockworks.co/events。
Use code forward 200 for $200 off and head to blockworks.co/events for more details.
关于前瞻性指引的任何发言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，并非财务建议，也不一定代表Blockworks的立场。
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、嘉宾和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，条款和条件适用。
As always, investments in blockchain technology involve risk, terms, conditions apply.
请自行做研究。
Do your own research.
好了，各位。
All right, everybody.
欢迎回到《Forward Guidance》的又一期节目。
Welcome back to another episode of Forward Guidance.
今天和我一起的是LB Macro的首席执行官兼创始人路易吉·布蒂吉利翁。
And joining me today is Luigi Buttiglione, CEO and founder of LB Macro.
这期节目是为几周后路易吉将在纽约数字资产峰会上参与的小组讨论做的一次预热。
And this is a bit of a precursor episode to an upcoming panel that Luigi will be participating at, at our Digital Asset Summit in New York in a few weeks.
如果你喜欢我们的对话，欢迎购买门票，去现场参加这场会议。
So if you enjoy our conversation, feel free to get your tickets and go check out the conference there.
这将是一段非常精彩的时光。
It's going to be a fantastic time.
但Luigi，这是你首次做客《Forward Guidance》，我感到非常荣幸。
But Luigi, it's an honor to have you on Forward Guidance for the first time.
欢迎。
Welcome.
哦，能和你在一起我感到非常荣幸，Felix。
Oh, it's my pleasure, absolutely, to be with you, Felix.
是的，这一定会很精彩。
Yeah, it should be a great time.
对于还不了解你背景的人，你的履历非常丰富。
And for those that aren't aware of your background, you have a storied background.
所以我觉得花几分钟听听你多年来担任的不同职位，以及这些经历如何引导你走到今天，会很有意义。
So I think it'd be great to just spend some minutes hearing a bit about your different positions and hats you've held throughout the years and how that's led to what you're up to today.
我可以说是经济学领域的全球漫游者，因为我从学术界开始，后来进入了意大利央行和欧洲央行的中央银行体系。
I've been a little bit of a globetrotter of economics because I started with academia, then I moved into central banking at the Bank of Italy and the European Central Bank.
然后进入投资银行，我担任了巴克莱资本的首席经济学家。
Then investment banking, I was the chief economist of Barclays Capital.
之后我进入了对冲基金行业，长达十五年，担任过多家对冲基金的首席策略师。
Then I moved into hedge funds for fifteen years where I was chief strategist of a number of those.
最后一份工作是在布雷冯·霍华德。
The last one was Brevon Howard.
在过去的八年里，八年前我创办了这家咨询公司。
Then in the last eight years, eight years ago I started this consultancy company.
在公司成立的前七、八年里，我们主要服务大型机构客户，比如最大的对冲基金、大型银行，那些你熟知并经常提及的机构——虽然不算太多。但现在，我们正努力扩大受众和客户群体，希望将这类客户所需的资源、联系和专业知识带给更广泛的群体。
And basically for the first seven, eight years of history of this company we have been dealing with major players, so the largest hedge funds, big banks, people that you know and I'm sure that you speak about a lot of times, not too many, but now what we are doing, we are trying to broaden the spectrum of our audience and clients, trying to bring that kind of clients, so contacts, expertise to a larger audience.
因此，几个月前我们推出了一款应用程序，旨在让内容更易获取，同时降低成本，让更多人能够使用。
So this is also why we started really a few months ago an app which could be much more accessible in terms of content but also in terms of cost for a larger audience.
希望你能将此视为一种推动经济学与金融知识民主化的尝试。
Hopefully, you can read it a little bit as an attempt of democratization of economics and finance.
它叫做LB Macro，其中LB是
It's called LB Macro as LB
宏观，这里
Macro, there
你去吧。
you go.
是的。
Yes.
我还注意到您这周推出了一个Substack，并且发布了一篇关于人工智能和生产力的首发文章。
You also launched a, I noticed you also launched a Substack this week and you came out with an initial piece all about AI and productivity.
这真是时机绝佳，因为这正是我最近一直在深入思考的问题：我们接下来该何去何从？
This is, it's great timing because it's, that's been something I've been thinking a lot about personally, is trying to understand where do we go from here?
我们该如何看待这种可能具有颠覆性的影响，它又将如何影响经济？
How do we think about something that is potentially so disruptive and how does that impact the economy?
我们又该如何从中辨别出经济真实运行的信号？
And how do we even derive signal of what's occurring in the economy?
所以我们想从这个话题开始对话，听听您对人工智能的看法——您认为目前哪些是炒作？
So we'd love to start with our conversation there and hear about your perspective on AI and where do you believe it's, hype?
这是一个泡沫吗？
Is Is it a bubble?
它是真的吗？
Is it the real deal?
它是否介于这两者之间？
Is it somewhere in between all those things?
你是怎么看待它的？
How do you think about it?
我认为‘颠覆性’是个不错的词，而且颠覆性是好事。
I think disruptive is a nice word and disruptive is good.
我们对它的看法，尤其是对美国而言。
So the way we think of it, especially for The U.
因为目前，AI主要属于美国。
S, because for the time being, AI is mainly a U.
美国。
S.
这件事目前对世界其他地方的影响很小，但我们认为这更像是一种福祉，而非灾难。
Thing, it affects very little for the time being the rest of the world, but the way we see that is more of a blessing than a curse.
有时我们听到人们说这是一种灾难，天啊，AI来了，我们该怎么办？
Sometimes we hear of it as it was a curse, oh my goodness, there is AI around, how do we go from here?
这是一件好事，毫无疑问。
It's a good thing, there is no doubt.
从这个角度来看，我们认为它与过去我们经历过的重大技术进步并没有太大不同。
And I would say from that standpoint, the way we think of that is that it is not that different from previous major technological progress we have had in the past.
实际上，根据我们的分析，到目前为止它看起来是主要的，但方向是一致的。
Actually from our analysis, so far it looks like the main one, but it goes in the same direction.
因此，我们认为这其中存在一种替代效应，也就是说机器承担了比人类更多的工作，从而提高了生产率，但也取代了一些岗位；但同时还有收入效应，即社会和经济变得更富裕，最终扩大了整体蛋糕，为更多人创造了更多机会。
So the way we think of it is that there is a substitution effect, so this means that a machine does more jobs than humans, so there is a productivity which takes out some jobs, but then there is an income effect, so the society, the economy gets richer, so in the end this broadens the pie, so there is more to do for more people.
所以，我想说，这是一大福祉，不是坏事。
So again, I would say a blessing, it's not a bad thing.
另外我想说的是，你提到了生产率，而正如我所说，目前它主要还是一种辅助工具。
The other thing I would say is that you mentioned productivity and this is, as I was saying, major for the time being mainly a U.
S.
S.
事情。
Thing.
对于世界其他地区来说，这并没有带来多少影响。
For the rest of the world, it has not meant much.
但同样，这也不是什么新鲜事。
But again, also this is not new.
如果你回顾过去四十年左右的历史，我们经历了四次重大的技术革命。
If you look at the history of the last forty years or so, we have had four major technological revolutions.
第一次是个人电脑，当我上世纪80年代中期上大学时，实际上我来到了美国。
The first one was personal computers when I went to university in the mid-80s, actually I came to The U.
S.
S.
我感到非常震惊。
And I was shocked.
我走进了纽约大学的计算机实验室，看到了60台个人电脑，而我这辈子在意大利从未见过一台。
I entered the PC lab of the New York University and I saw 60 PCs, I've never seen one in my life in Italy.
所以这是一次变革。
So this is one.
接着是90年代后期到2000年代的互联网热潮，然后是大约2010到2015年所谓的控制革命，而现在是人工智能。
Then there was of course the.com second half of the 90s and 2000, then there is the so called control revolution around twenty ten, twenty fifteen, and now there is AI.
在每一种情况下，我们都能观察到美国生产力的巨大且显著的提升。
And in each cases, we could observe a large, very significant boost to productivity in The U.
随后又回归平稳，但当时的提升非常显著。
S, which then normalised, but it was very significant.
比如在欧洲，我们几乎没看到任何类似的现象。
We almost saw none of it in Europe, for instance.
美国的历史。
The history of The U.
S。
S.
在过去四十年左右，也就是所谓的美国例外论时期，这一切都与技术有关。
Over the last forty years or the so called exceptionalism, it has all to do with technology.
不过为了说完这一点，技术并不是从树上长出来的，而是来自人力资本。
Although just to finish that, it's not that technology comes out from a tree, it comes from human capital.
所以某种程度上，你可以称这种物理资本革命源于人力资本革命，也就是大学、专利、所有这些研发活动，以及美国在这些领域中的研发。
So in a sense you can say that this, you can call it physical capital revolution, comes from human capital revolution, which means university, patents, all these things, R and D, R and Ds in all these fields in which The U.
美国。
S.
远远超过世界其他地区，尤其是不幸的是，我目前所坐的欧洲。
Dwarfs the rest of the world, and especially dwarfs Europe, unfortunately where I am now sitting.
是的，说得有道理。
Yeah, fair enough.
关于生产力这一点，众所周知，美国产出的生产力数据。
On that note about productivity, yeah, it's no secret that the productivity numbers that have been coming out of The U.
美国。
S.
过去六到八个月的情况非常特殊，单位劳动力成本一直在下降，感觉每个人都想兴奋起来，说：‘就是现在了。’
Over the last six to eight months have been pretty exceptional and unit labor costs have been decreasing and it feels like everybody wants to get excited and be like, okay, this is it.
你能看出来。
You can see it.
人工智能正在影响劳动力市场。
AI is impacting the labor market.
但另一方面，对这种说法的批评是，我们刚刚经历了一轮相当显著的美联储加息周期，职位空缺正在逐月减少，每个企业可能只是在试图从每位员工身上榨取更多价值。
But then, you know, I would say that the criticism to that narrative, the other side of it is that, look, you know, we just went through a pretty meaningful Fed hiking cycle, job openings are decreasing each, you know, potentially each business is just trying to get more out of each worker.
因此，这就是生产率提高的原因。
And therefore that's why productivity is increasing.
你如何区分并对比这两种可能的解释，来判断：好吧，也许两者都有，但确实也存在人工智能对劳动力市场产生根本性影响这一故事。
How do you isolate and contrast those two potential narratives and see that, okay, this is actually, maybe it's a bit of both, but there is also that fundamental AI story hitting the labor market.
嗯，可能两者都有。
Well, is probably a bit of both.
如果观察生产率的变化趋势，2022年和2023年明显出现了生产率的跃升。
If one looks at the dynamics of productivity, there is clearly at the 2022, 2023, there is a jump in productivity.
我的意思是，这不可能只是运气。
Mean, it cannot be just luck.
我们可以看到，疫情后，生产力最初下降，然后强劲反弹，之后缓慢回落，逐渐回归到疫情前的趋势，但突然间，它又明显、持续且一致地反弹了，而这正好发生在2022年ChatGPT发布之后。
We could see that after COVID, initially productivity went down, then rebounded very strongly and then it was coming off gently, it was renormalising to the pre COVID trend, then all of a sudden it rebounds clearly and persistently and consistently and this is exactly after the launch of ChartGPT at the 2022.
所以我认为，生产力突然上升、劳动力参与率下降，这种可能性非常小。
So I would say it's very difficult that all of a sudden productivity goes up, labour formation goes down.
我的意思是，这与经济衰退完全不一样，跟衰退毫无关系。
I mean it's completely different from a recession, it has nothing to do with a recession.
但毫无疑问，对于这种我们一直在美国看到的增长态势，
But definitely for this kind of growth, we have seen, which we have been witnessing in The U.
我们
S.
在过去几年中，就业增长本应更强劲，即使考虑到劳动力供给因移民减少而低于正常水平——尤其是过去一年左右。
In the last few years, job formation should have been much greater, even encompassing the fact that supply of labour has been lower than usual because of less immigration, especially in the last year or so.
这还不止如此。
It's more than that.
而且很明显，正如你所说，可以在某些行业，尤其是受人工智能影响较大的服务业中，将这种影响单独分离出来。
And it's also clearly that you can isolate, as you said, clearly in some sectors, especially in some services, which are more AI affected.
我认为有很多迹象表明，虽然很难有100%的确凿证据，但迹象确实是存在的。
I would say there are a lot of indications, it's difficult to have 100% proof, but I would say the indication is there.
你提到了货币政策，我认为这也将成为新任主席凯文·沃尔什上任后的一大争论点——顺便说一下，我从在布雷瓦德工作时就认识他，那时他是我们的顾问。
You mentioned monetary policy and I think this is going to be a big debate also with the new chairman coming, Kevin Walsh, by the way I know him since my time at Brevardhad, he was our consultant there.
他指出，生产率增长意味着通胀更低。
He makes a point of the fact that productivity growth means less inflation.
这在短期内可能是成立的。
It could be in the short run.
我们之前也见过类似的情况，曾经见证过这种现象。
Again, we have seen these things, we have witnessed this thing in previous episodes.
我认为，在短期内将这种现象简单地转化为政策操作时必须极其谨慎，因为这正是那种需要关注所谓中性利率——即使储蓄与投资相等的利率——的关键情况。
I would say one has to be extremely careful in translating this into easy policy even in the short run, because this is one of those cases in which it matters to look at the so called neutral rate, the rate which equates savings and investment.
在我们当前所见的这种情况下，正如你所说，生产率增长急剧飙升。
On these occasions, like the one we are seeing now, productivity growth as you said skyrockets.
这意味着中性利率很可能大幅上升。
So this means that the neutral rate most likely goes up quite a lot.
如果我们再回溯一下瑞典经济学家埃克塞尔的教训，将利率水平置于中性利率之下是一个巨大的错误，因为最终你会导致资本过度积累，进而同时引发资产价格通胀，最终还会导致商品和服务的通胀。
And if we go back also to the lessons of Excel, a Swedish economist of a long time ago, it's a big mistake to put the level of interest rates below the neutral rate because in the end what you have is you have over accumulation of capital and in the end you have both a bubble, so asset price inflation and eventually also inflation of goods and services.
因此，必须极其谨慎。
So one has to be extremely careful.
如果仅仅因为看到生产力提升、短期内单位劳动力成本下降，就试图解读并享受这一现象，进而认为可以降息，这将是一个严重的政策失误。
That would be really a policy mistake to just try to interpret and enjoy this productivity and the fact that you see unit labor costs going down in the short term and thinking that you can go and cut interest rates.
如果允许我稍作补充，这让我想起了上世纪90年代后期我在意大利央行工作的时光。
If you allow me just a second, it reminds me of my time at the Bank of Italy in the second half of the 90s.
在此之前，我曾作为访问学者在哈佛大学，结识了保罗·萨缪尔森——他是上个世纪最伟大的经济学家之一，甚至可以说是有史以来最伟大的之一。
Previously I was visiting scholar at Harvard and I met Paul Samuelson, who's one of the greatest economists ever, just of last century, would say ever.
我邀请他到意大利央行，我们与他合写了一篇论文。当时他对格林斯潘非常不满，常说：‘他是个邪恶的推手’，指责格林斯潘过度解读CPI——CPI虽然很低，但他却在降息，而没有意识到当时正处于巨大的技术进步时期。他当时就预言会出现泡沫，而这正是90年代末真实发生的情况，最终格林斯潘不得不紧急加息，因为资产和商品都出现了通胀。
And I invited him at the Bank of Italy and he wrote a paper with us and he was very upset at the time with Greenspan, was saying, but he is an evil pusher, used to say, he is reading too much into CPI, CPI is low but he is cutting interest rates and without understanding that actually he is doing that at the time of huge technological progress and then he was saying we will have a bubble, which is exactly what happened in the end of the 90s and then actually Greenspan had to hike interest rates, he has to rush and hike interest rates because there was inflation in assets and in goods.
因此，必须非常谨慎。
So one has to be very careful.
我希望如此。
I hope U.
不会这样做的。
Won't do this.
我希望。
I hope.
你希望，但当你提到格林斯潘时，我们笑起来很有趣，因为这似乎是特朗普政府目前所参照的类比：看，我们想要一个能够看到生产率激增而不试图阻止它、反而顺势而为、进一步降息的美联储。
You hope, but it's funny it's us laughing when you mentioned Greenspan because it seems like that's the analog that the Trump administration is looking through right now, which is that, look, we want a Fed share that can see a productivity boom and doesn't try to stop it, but actually leans into it and cuts further.
我想这引出了一个问题：你认为货币政策制定者应该从何开始？
I guess that brings up the question of what do you think monetary policymakers should even begin?
比如，面对如此重大的颠覆性变化，他们的框架是什么？
Like what's their framework for such a big disruptive shift?
你知道，他们有这种特定的‘美国’……
You know, they have this like specifically The U.
……
S.
这个双重使命。
This dual mandate.
如果你在劳动力市场上有这样的影响，劳动力成本可能下降，也许白领员工被裁员。
And if you have this impact on the labor market where labor costs are coming down, perhaps, you know, white collar workers are being laid off.
但另一方面，如果由于数据中心建设所需的原材料加速上涨而导致通胀上升，那会怎样呢？
But then at the other side of things is that what if you have increasing inflation because of, oh, I don't know, maybe the commodities that are required for the data centre build out are accelerating.
由于生产率提高，中性利率也会更高。
You have a higher neutral rate because of productivity.
这对货币政策制定者来说似乎是一个非常困难的处境。
That just seems like a very difficult situation for monetary policymakers to be in.
确实如此，但我认为不会那么困难，我个人这么认为。
It is, but I think it won't be that difficult, I personally think.
因为即使在就业方面，我也不会看到真正的就业岗位流失。
Because I think even in terms of jobs, are not going to see really job destruction.
我们看到的将是就业增长放缓。
We are going to see less job formation.
但如果你看看当前的劳动力市场，失业率现在很低。
But if you look for instance at the labor market as it is now, where it is now, the unemployment rate is low.
我的意思是，虽然不是历史最低，但按历史标准来看已经相当低了，而且可能还会进一步下降。
I mean, it's not record low, but it's, I would say, quite low by historical standards and probably going down even further.
所以我不太确定劳动力市场真有那么严重的悲剧。
So I'm not too sure there is such a tragedy on the labour market.
我肯定会更担心通胀问题，即使不是在短期内，也至少在中期内。
I would definitely be much more concerned about what's going on with inflation, if not in the short term, in the medium term.
正如你所说，我不会试图将实际利率设定在中性利率水平以下。
And exactly what you said, it is the fact that I would not try to position the level of actual interest rates before below the level of neutral interest rates.
这将是一个政策错误，可能在中期内带来极其高昂的代价。
That would be a policy mistake which could be extremely expensive in the medium term.
有时候，中期内并不意味着五年，可能只是几个月，甚至一年。
Sometimes the medium term doesn't mean five years, it means a few months or maybe a year.
从政治角度来说，对特朗普而言，如果在中期选举甚至总统大选前出现通胀问题，可能并不是最理想的局面。
And then even politically, for Trump, it could be not the most ideal situation to have an inflation problem, I don't know, by the midterm elections or even by the presidential elections.
所以我认为，美国公众对通胀问题确实相当敏感，通胀问题。
So I think the American public rightly seems to be quite sensitive to the topic of inflation, inflation.
不是超级富人，而是中产阶级，是的。
Not the super rich, but the middle caste, yes.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为你之前写过的另一件事是，货币政策工具真正影响经济的能力，也就是说，如果我们向前看六个月，通胀缓解，然后他们开始大幅下调联邦基金利率。
I think another thing you've been writing about before is just the ability for monetary policy tools to really impact the economy, which is that, okay, if we fast forward six months and washes in and, you know, they start to cut the Fed funds by quite a bit more than expected.
根据你关于我们起点因生产率而更高的观点，突然间我们看到债券市场的长期利率开始以相反的方向下跌。
And to your point about our start being higher because of productivity, suddenly we see the long end of the bond market start to sell off in the opposite fashion.
你觉得这种情况发生的可能性有多大？
Like what, how likely do you see that as happening?
你如何看待这种潜在风险？
How do you think about that potential risk?
因为这似乎是一个非常棘手的处境。
Because that just seems like a very difficult situation to be into.
我完全同意你的观点。
I totally agree with you.
我的意思是，最终，市场守夜人债券会发挥作用。
I mean, think in the end the bond of vigilante will do the job.
在你所描述的这种情况下，我个人预期收益率曲线会变陡。
In that situation, I think that you depicted, I personally would expect the yield curve to steepen.
变陡——抱歉用这个词，是空头变陡。
And steepen, sorry for this language, bear steepening.
这意味着收益率曲线的平均水平会上升，但长期利率的上升幅度会超过短期利率。
So this means that the level, the average level of the yield curve goes up, but the long end goes up even more than the short end.
正如我们所知，对于美国这样的经济体。
And as we know for an economy like The U.
十年期收益率可能是最重要的利率。
S, the ten year is probably the most important yield.
而这一点并不完全受央行控制。
And this is not really under control of the central bank.
因此，央行当然可以控制短期利率，但无法控制长期利率。
So the central bank of course can control the short term rates, not long term rates.
但这些利率对抵押贷款影响很大。
But they matter a lot for mortgages.
所以他们必须对此非常谨慎。
So this is something that they have to be very careful about.
通货膨胀是一个缓慢的过程，但一旦爆发，就会迅速失控。
Inflation is a slow motion process, but when it goes, it goes.
一旦发生，就很难遏制。
It's very difficult to stop it.
一旦爆发，就意味着十年期利率会陷入困境，进而整个经济也会陷入困境。
When it goes, then this means that for ten years it's troubled and then for the economy it's troubled.
所以我认为，这正是一个场合——虽然我不太认同欧洲的政策制定，但此时采取所谓的‘稳健手法’是明智的。
So I think this is one of those occasions, I'm not a huge fan of European policy making, but this is one of those occasions which is so called steady hand approach is advisable.
试图过于激进，试图利用宽松货币政策带来的短期利益，我认为可能会极其危险。
Trying to be too much of an activist and trying to exploit the short term benefits monetary policy coming from an easy monetary policy, I think could be extremely dangerous.
顺便说一下，没必要。
By the way, there is no need.
这是一个表现良好的经济，而不是表现不佳。
It's an economy which is doing well, it's not doing badly.
我认为，如果美国人民感受到什么问题，我会说，比失业更严重的是通货膨胀，是价格太高了。
I think if there is a problem which is felt by the American people, I would say more than the lack of jobs is inflation, is the prices are too high.
你想加剧这个问题，想让这个问题更严重，为什么呢？
You want to boost this problem, you want to increase this problem, why?
不太清楚上行空间在哪里。
Not too sure where is the upside.
是的，有道理。
Yeah, makes sense.
目前有两个非常对立的重大趋势，其中一个我们到目前为止一直在讨论，那就是美国。
Two big themes that are occurring right now that are very in contrast to each other is one which we've basically been talking about so far, which is U.
S。
S.
由于人工智能热潮以及所有领先的前沿模型都位于美国，因此具有独特性。
Exceptionalism because of the AI boom and the fact that all the leading frontier models are U.
美国。
S.
比如OpenAI和Anthropic等公司都基于美国。
Based, like OpenAI and Anthropic, etcetera.
因此，所有国际资本都希望投资于这个我们很久以来见过的最具吸引力的增长故事。
And so all this international capital wants to be exposed to what is potentially the most compelling growth story that we've had in a very long time.
所以你希望持有这些资产。
So you want to own those assets.
它们都是美国的。
They're all U.
美国。
S.
以美元计价的资产。
Denominated assets.
但另一方面，还有一种说法是关于美元、国际收支平衡、持续存在的高额关税及其影响，即：如果你缩小贸易逆差，流向世界其他地区的美元就会减少，这些美元在美元计价资产中的再循环也会减少。
But then on the other side of things is this narrative of what's going on with the U.
S.
S.
因此，我们看到，非美国股票市场在过去六到八个月的表现远优于美国市场。
Dollar and the balance of payments and these big tariffs that have been going on and the impact of that, which is that, look, if you narrow your trade deficit, that's less dollars going to the rest of the world, less recycling of those dollars in The U.
S.
S.
美元计价资产。
Denominated assets.
所以，我们看到，非美国的股票市场在过去六到八个月的表现远优于美国市场。
And so we've seen, you know, ex U.
S.
S.
S.
Equity markets have been performing exceptionally well over the last six to eight months compared to U.
美元。
S.
股票。
Equities.
但还有美国。
But then there's also The U.
美元。
S.
只有这些美国股票真正暴露在人工智能热潮中。
Equities are the only ones that are truly exposed to this AI boom.
这两个主题看起来非常矛盾。
And those two themes feel very at odds with each other.
我想知道，你是如何看待这两个方面的？
I'm curious, how do you think about those two?
好吧，我们说清楚一点。
Well, let's be clear.
我明确更喜欢其中一个主题，那就是The U。
I definitely prefer one theme and I prefer The U.
S。
S.
主题。
Theme.
我认为另一个只是短期现象。
So I think the other one is a short term development.
欧洲市场的超额收益就是这种情况，我记得在2010年或2015年，欧洲市场突然被称作未来十五年都便宜，那一年确实如此，之后它就跑赢了。
The overperformance in Europe is one of those, I think it was one year in 'ten or one in 'fifteen, all of a sudden the European market was called cheap for fifteen years, there was one year when it was true and then it outperformed.
而且可能并非如此，我不想涉及政治，但这么说吧，我认为The U。
And probably it was not, I don't want to go into politics, but let's say this, I think The U.
S。
S.
经济，The U。
Economy, The U.
S.
S.
从回报来看，这个市场绝对是无可匹敌的。
Market in terms of return is absolutely unbeatable.
所以，无论你怎么看待市盈率，无论是股票市场还是债券市场，收益率都集中在美利坚。
So if you look at price earnings, however you square them, equity market or even the bond market, yields, the yield is all in The U.
S.
S.
所以，如果你想赚钱，抱歉，你必须投资美国。
So if you want to make money, sorry, you have to invest in The U.
S.
S.
去年发生的事情是，当然还有另一个同样重要的变量，那就是风险。
What happened last year was that there was of course the other variable which also matters, which is risk.
尤其是去年，我不想涉及政治，但当时人们对美国的风险存在一种认知。
And last year in particular, again I don't want to go into politics, but there was a perception of risk in The U.
S.
S.
各种各样的。
Of various kinds.
如果我是一名储备管理者，比如亚洲的储备管理者，我会担心我的储备资产被没收，或者有人会对我发动战争。
If I am a reserve manager, say an Asian reserve manager, I fear that my reserves could be confiscated or someone can do war to me.
这些事情让人们意识到真相。
These things unearth people.
因此，你可能会接受较低的回报，有时甚至是低得多的回报，比如投资欧洲，但这是因为风险更低。
So you may accept to have lower returns, sometimes even much lower returns, say to investing in Europe, but because of a lower risk.
但我希望，正如我们在金融界常说的，希望并不是一个好的策略。
But I hope, I know as we say in finance, hope is not a good strategy.
但我希望，美国不会长期推行这种做法。
But I want to hope that this is not going to be pursued for too long by U.
S。
S.
当局。
Authorities.
这不好。
This is not good.
但从回报角度来看，我认为只有一个故事，那就是美国。
But in terms of return, I think there is only one story and this story is The U.
S。
S.
S。
S.
再者，如果你看看股票、公司、科技，最终就连利率也是如此，我们之前讨论过中性利率，而中性利率归根结底就是生产力。
Again, if you look at equities, companies, technology, in the end even interest rates, we were discussing neutral interest rates, where neutral interest rates basically is productivity in the end.
这就是本质。
That's what it is.
而这发生在美国内部。
And this is in The U.
S.
S.
所以我认为欧洲的故事至少是这样一年：市场更多地在交易风险而非回报，这固然有其道理，但更多时候是过度反应了。
So I think Europe is a story of, at least a story of a year where rightly, I don't know, I understand, understandably more than rightly, markets was trading more risk than return.
而且从一个较为保守的角度来看，当我观察美元时，我实在难以接受这些观点——认为美元已经走向终结。
And also from a modest standpoint, also looking at the dollar, I really struggled to accept these ideas, these notions that this is the end of the dollar.
事实并非如此，这根本不在计划之中。
It is not, it just is not in the cards.
可能会有糟糕的年份，是的，糟糕的年份谁都可能遇到，即使是顶尖人物也不例外。
There could be some bad years, yes, bad years happen to everyone, even to the best people.
我认为去年我就是其中之一，这与风险有关。
And I think last year I was one of them and it has to do with risk.
但你看看我们如今正在经历的这个悲伤的日子或战争，归根结底，美元的表现并没有那么糟糕。
But you can see in this sad day or war now that we are witnessing, well in the end the dollar is not doing that bad.
所以即使从风险角度来看，如今人们或许会说，与欧洲相比，美元的风险可能并没有那么高。
So even in terms of risk these days maybe people are saying well maybe it's not that risky compared to Europe.
欧洲更加脆弱。
Europe is much more vulnerable.
考虑到你是意大利人，一直从事以意大利为中心的工作，你可以说是最具有欧洲情怀的经济学家，没人会指责你有偏见。
I don't think anybody would accuse you of being biased considering that you're an Italian, you've worked in Italian centric, like you're the most European economist.
没有人比我更欧洲了。
No one more European than me.
是的。
Yeah.
而你却这样说，这让我非常感兴趣，因为过去十二个月里，有一种说法是欧洲终于开始释放财政刺激，比如德国解除财政紧缩，重新开始支出。
And here you are saying this, and that's really interesting to me because, yeah, like there's this narrative over the last twelve months about Europe is unleashing fiscal finally, whether it's, you know, Germany taking off the fiscal breaks, starting to spend again.
你可能也对这个想法感到一丝兴奋：终于，在经历了十年的财政紧缩之后，欧洲将迎来财政扩张，经济将再次繁荣。
And you've had this perhaps this little bit of excitement around that idea of, okay, now we're going to finally have fiscal after a decade of fiscal austerity across Europe and things are going to be booming again.
你怎么看待这个观点？
What do you think about that thesis?
想到一个大陆的正面故事竟然与此有关，这有点令人悲哀，因为这正是我们正在讨论的内容。
You know, it's a bit sad thinking that the good story of a continent has to do with that, because this is what we are talking about.
所以在我们讨论美国的生产力之前。
So before we're talking about productivity in The U.
美国。
S.
并且认为德国的财政政策——意味着德国更多的债务——能够在那里持续推动增长。
And thinking that fiscal policy in Germany, which means debt, more debt in Germany can bring growth persistently over there.
我觉得这有点可悲。
Think it's a bit sad.
所以坦白说，我不认为应该基于这种想法去买入货币，即通常情况下，除非你能极好地利用它来提升生产力等等，但老实说，我不希望被看作是反德国或反意大利之类的，但事实上我认为他们存在问题。
And so to be honest with you, I don't think it's a great narrative to buy a currency thinking that usually, unless you do a fantastic use of that to boost productivity and so on, but frankly, I don't want to be perceived as anti German or anti Italian or whatever, but frankly I think that they have a problem.
他们最好直击问题根源，而不是试图拖延。
And they better go to the root of the problem rather than trying to postpone.
这不过是问题的拖延。
That is a postponement of a problem.
当你想要真正解决这个问题时，才会去加杠杆。
It's when you want to deal with the problem that you leverage up.
德国确实可以加杠杆，因为从国际标准来看，该国的债务水平较低。
Germany can leverage on, it's true, because the level of debt in that country is, by international standards, is low.
所以他们可以这么做。
So they can do that.
这并不是瑞士，也不是挪威，但绝对不是意大利、法国或美国。
It's not Switzerland, it's not Norway, but definitely it's not Italy, France or The U.
S.
S.
但坦白说，我认为仅靠这种方式就能解决德国的问题，我对此表示怀疑。
But frankly, thinking that they can sort out the German problems with that, I struggle.
更何况，事实上他们目前的一个问题是，由于行政效率低下，他们难以真正将资金投入基础设施建设。
Even because, by the way, one of the problems they have now in practical terms is that because of inefficiencies in the administration they struggle to spend that money, to spend money really in infrastructure.
所以他们试图花钱，但更容易把钱花在消费上，这也正是他们受到质疑的原因，甚至在德国国内，政府也因这一点受到质疑。
So they are trying to spend so it's easier to spend it in consumption and this is also why they are questioned, even in Germany the government is questioned on that.
你之前说加杠杆是为了投资，现在又要加杠杆用于消费，这可不是什么有前景的叙事。
So you told that you are leveraging up for investments and now you will leverage up for consumption, this is not exactly the most promising story.
我认为他们应该尝试我们之前提到的做法，美国的优点在于。
I think they should try to do what we were saying before, the good thing about The U.
S。
S.
我不想去说美国。
And I don't want to say The U.
S。
S.
它并不是世界上理想的地方，但有很多非常出色的地方，欧洲人应该去学习这些，而不是一味抱怨。
Is the ideal place in the world, but there are a lot of very good things and Europeans should learn about that rather than complain.
所以他们应该在人力资本、研发和 meritocracy 上投入更多，欧洲在这方面并不擅长。
So they should invest much more in human capital, R and Ds, meritocracy, Europe is not good at that.
你也能听到很多这样的人，我敢肯定你从大西洋对岸也能听到那些拥有绝佳想法的欧洲人。
A lot of the people that you can hear also, I'm sure you hear also from the other side of the Atlantic, those big Europeans who have some fantastic ideas.
但这些人在大多数时候恰恰是问题的一部分，而不是解决方案。
Well, these people most of the time are a part of the problem, not of the solution.
他们之所以在那里，并不是因为他们是杰出的个人，而是因为他们有正确的人脉关系。
They are there not because they were phenomenal individuals but because they had the right political connections.
坦白说，这听起来不像一个好故事。
And this doesn't smell like a great story, frankly.
是的。
Yeah.
你觉得这对欧盟的故事有什么影响？
How do you think that impacts the story of the European Union?
它似乎非常不稳定，在某些方面正面临困境。
It seems like it's very volatile and struggling in some forms.
我的意思是，正如你提到的，欧洲一个国家可能想通过债务市场加杠杆，
I mean, the simple notion of the fact that, like you mentioned, you know, one country of Europe might want to leverage up with their debt markets.
而另一个国家却不想，但它们却被同一种货币绑定在一起。
One other country might not want to, but they're all tied by the same currency.
这正是欧盟的原罪——不同的债务市场，却使用同一种货币。
And that just, I mean, it's the original sin of the European Union is just like different debt markets, but the same currency.
我完全同意。
I couldn't agree more.
你知道我的个人经历是，我在2000年离开了意大利央行，2000年。
You know my personal story is that I left the Bank of Italy in 2000, 2000.
你知道2000年发生了什么。
And you know what happened in 2000.
欧元推出了。
There was the launch of the Euro.
我亲自起草了我国加入欧元区的方案。
I drafted personally the programme, the entry programme in my country into the Euro.
但正因为是我起草的，所以我离开了。
But because I drafted it, I left.
这并不是因为我反欧洲。
And not because I was anti European.
现在在欧洲，如果你反欧洲，人们就会觉得你是法西斯，这完全不是一回事，这就像你所说的，这是经济学入门知识。
Now it looks like if you are anti European, this is the notion in Europe, it looks like you are a fascist, this is nothing to do, this is what you said, this is economics 101.
这只不过如此而已，并不是成为法西斯。
It's nothing more than this, it's not to be a fascist.
坦白说，这可以成为另一集的主题，因为这会占满整个节目，但欧元的历史基本上就是所谓经济学家与所谓货币主义者之间的历史。
So frankly, this could be the topic for another episode because it would take the whole broadcast, But the history of the Euro is basically the history of the so called economist against the so called monetarists.
经济学家们过去常说，这可以追溯到1971年，很久以前了。
The economist they used to say, and this backs to 1971, so a long time ago.
当时每个人都支持欧元。
Everybody was in favor of the euro.
当然，作为一个欧洲人，我并不傻。
Of course, a European, I'm not stupid.
我认为欧盟是一件好事，欧洲货币也是好事。
I think European Union is a good thing and the European currency is a good thing.
但你必须把事情做好。
But you have to do things well.
你不能把事情做糟，然后还说做得好，这两者根本不是一回事。
You cannot do them bad and well, they are not the same thing.
好的意思是，经济学家们过去常说，我就是其中之一，你们必须先建立经济联盟，然后是财政联盟，接着是银行联盟，再是政治联盟，等到一切都运转得非常好时，再建立货币联盟。
Good means the economists used to say, I'm one of them, you have to do first economic union, then fiscal union, then banking union, then political union, and then when everything works very well, you have monetary union.
这有点像美国的发展历程。
Which is a little bit the story of The U.
美。
S.
顺便说一句，其间还发生过内战，这一点不应被遗忘。
And there was a civil war in between, by the way, which should not be forgotten.
所谓的货币主义者，他们最终持这种观点，认为这个过程可能会太漫长。
The so called monetarists, which in the end they were on, they used to say well it could take too long.
不如从货币联盟开始，然后强制推动其他所有联盟的建立。
Let's start from monetary union and then we can force all the other unions.
但正如我们所知，正如你所说，这些联盟至今尚未实现。
But as we know, as you said, these unions are not there yet.
现在有财政联盟吗？
Is there a fiscal union?
没有。
No.
有银行联盟吗？
Is there a banking union?
没有。
No.
有政治联盟吗？
Is there a political union?
没有。
No.
没有这些联盟，货币联盟能长期维持吗？
Can a monetary union work for too long without all these unions?
这还是个问号。
That's a question mark.
为了人民的福祉，这又是另一个问号。
For the welfare of its people, that's another question mark.
展开剩余字幕（还有 217 条）
我想说的最后一句话是，如今的情况甚至更加困难，因为欧洲的政治局势与五年前、十年前、二十年前已经不同了。
And last thing I would say is that now the situation is even a bit more difficult because the political situation, the political environment in Europe is not the same as five years ago, ten years ago, twenty years ago.
二十年前，所谓的亲欧洲政党掌权。
Twenty years ago, the so called pro European parties were in power.
不管对错，我认为它们为了本国人民的利益犯了很多错误。
Right or wrong, by the way, I think they made a lot of mistakes for the good of their own people.
但现在我们正进入一种新的局面——这里不做评判——越来越多的民族主义政府正在掌权，或在每个国家拥有相当大的权力。
But now we are moving into a situation where, and again, there is not a judgment in this, let's say more let's call nationalist governments are taking the power or have a substantial power within each country.
在意大利，梅洛尼执政，顺便说一句，她的表现并不差。
So in Italy there is Meloni which by the way is not doing bad.
在法国，很可能很快将是勒庞或她的副手上台。
In France, probably most likely soon there will be Le Pen or her deputy.
在德国，有德国选择党，这是一个重要的少数派政党，此外在荷兰、比利时等地也是如此。
In Germany there is AFD, which is an important minority party, and so on, in The Netherlands, Belgium and so on.
再次强调，我不想对这些政党做出任何评判，因为这并非我的职责。
Now again, I don't want to express any judgement on these parties because that's not my job.
但如果你有一个项目或像欧元这样的微型全球化，却没有我之前提到的其他联盟的支持，而掌权的又是民族主义政党，那么要使其真正可持续是非常困难的。
But if you have a project or mini globalization like the euro without the support of all the other unions that I mentioned before, it's very difficult to make it really sustainable where the parties in power are nationalists.
这有点自相矛盾。
It's a bit of an oxymoron.
由民族主义者推动的全球化或微型全球化，效果并不好。
Having a globalisation or a mini globalisation made by nationalists doesn't work very much.
而且，正如你正确指出的，目前欧洲的机构并不稳固。
And at the moment where the institutions, as you correctly pointed out, of Europe are not so sound at the moment.
因此，关于欧洲的最终结局尚未定论。
So the end story on Europe has not been written.
在欧洲，我认为一个共同的欧洲是好事，但这并不意味着我们正在采取正确的方式去实现它。
In Europe, I think a common Europe is a good thing, but it doesn't mean that we are we are taking the right we are pursuing the right way to achieve it.
本集由Coinbase赞助播出。
This episode is brought to you by Coinbase.
如果你是长期的加密货币持有者，但不想出售你的比特币或以太坊，Coinbase现在提供由Morpho支持的加密货币抵押贷款。
If you're a long term crypto holder but don't want to sell your Bitcoin or Ethereum, Coinbase now offers crypto backed loans powered by Morpho.
你可以使用比特币作为抵押借入高达500万美元，或使用以太坊作为抵押借入高达100万美元，利率通常在4%到8%之间，极具竞争力。
You can borrow up to $5,000,000 using Bitcoin or $1,000,000 using ETH as collateral, all at competitive rates typically between four and eight percent.
无需信用审核，贷款在数秒内即可发放，且你可以随时还款，没有固定期限。
There are no credit checks, loans originate in seconds, and you can repay anytime with no fixed deadlines.
USDC流动性资金可用于首付、偿还高息债务、应对意外开支，或任何生活中的其他需求。
The USDC liquidity can be used for things like a down payment, refinancing high interest debt, unexpected expenses, or anything else life throws at you.
重要的是，Coinbase不将借贷交易视为应税事件，平台上已发放的贷款总额超过10亿美元。
Importantly, Coinbase does not treat borrowed transactions as taxable events, and over $1,000,000,000 in loans have already been opened through the platform.
如果你想在不卖出加密货币的情况下获得流动性，请点击节目说明中的链接，了解更多并立即开始使用。
If you want liquidity without selling your crypto, click the link in the show notes to learn more and get started today.
在交易之前，你应该了解究竟是谁在推动市场走势。
Before you place a trade, you should know who is actually moving the market.
这就是Arkham的用武之地。
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，并直接基于这些信息进行交易。
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、跑路和诈骗的最有效工具之一。
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 开始利用真实的链上情报进行交易。
Check out Arkham and start trading with real on chain insight at arkham.com.
稍微换个话题，2014 年你发表了一篇关于杠杆的开创性论文。
Shifting gears here a little bit, but in 2014, you you wrote a seminal paper about leverage.
当时这极具前瞻性，因为人们普遍认为私营部门的资产负债表在 2008 年后已大幅去杠杆，但实际上，杠杆只是转移到了公共部门的资产负债表上。
And at the time, it was it was very prescient because there is this this idea that private sector balance sheets had delevered significantly post 'eight, but in reality it was just this transfer of leverage towards the public balance sheets.
而且我觉得，自从新冠疫情以来，这个观点已经不再只是经济学家在讨论，整个社会都在谈论了，那就是看看政府的资产负债表。
And I would, I feel like ever since COVID that idea has just become something that not even just economists talk about, like the world society talks about, which is that look at government balance sheets.
它们的杠杆率飙升得厉害。
They have levered up like crazy.
如今私营部门的资产负债表普遍非常保守，尤其是在美国这样的国家。
Private sector balance sheets are pretty conservative these days, especially in countries like The U.
美国。
S.
我们并没有真正看到这种情况。
We haven't really seen that.
我很好奇你如今如何看待这个问题，因为它引出了财政可持续性的疑问，进而引出财政赤字以及公共债务资产负债表加杠杆能持续多久的问题。
And just curious about how you think about that these days, because it leads to the question of fiscal sustainability, which leads to the question of fiscal deficits and how long this leveraging up the public debt balance sheets can occur.
只是想听听你最近对这些问题的看法。
Just wanted to hear about how you're thinking about all of that these days.
是的，谢谢你提醒我几年前那篇论文。
Yeah, thank you for reminding that paper of a few years ago.
是的，我认为这个标题至今仍然非常贴切。
Yeah, the title I would say, I still think it's quite actual.
它当时是《去杠杆？什么去杠杆？》
It was Deleveraging What Deleveraging?
有点像意大利的方式，我们到底在谈什么？
A little bit like the Italian way, what are we talking about?
正如你所说，我们只是把私人债务转为了公共债务。
As you said, we were just moving private, translating private into public debt.
公共部门的债务可能比私人部门更稳健，但我认为债务终究还是要偿还的。
Public is probably sounder than private, but I would say still debt is, and that has to be repaid.
现在，对于债务你只有两种选择。
Now, there are only two things that you can do with debt.
要么还清，要么不还。
You either pay back or you don't pay back.
就是这样，没有第三种选择。
That's it, there is not a third option.
当你不偿还时，也有两种选择。
When you don't pay back there also two options.
一种是明确不还，即违约；另一种是通过通货膨胀隐性不还。
You don't pay back explicitly, so you default on it, or you don't pay back implicitly by inflation.
这取决于民众的偏好，你希望如何违约，以及你的债务是否由外国人持有。如果债务主要由外国人持有，那么最好的违约方式就是明确违约，说声非常感谢，你真是个好朋友，谢谢你借给我钱，但很抱歉，你拿不回去了。
This is something which is, and this depends very much on the taste of a population, how you want to default, or things like is your debt held by foreigners, Then the best way to default is explicit default, says thank you very much, you were a great friend, thank you for lending me money, but sorry you're not receiving it.
如果债务是国内持有，那么所谓的最佳方式就是通过通胀将其稀释。
If that is domestic, then quote unquote the best way is to inflate it away.
在未来十年，我们很可能会频繁面临这些逻辑或问题。
Probably we will have to face these logics or these problems quite a lot in next decade.
我认为，目前关于美国债务的讨论很多。
I would say there is a lot of press about debt in The U.
美国。
S.
这并不是好事，坦白说，我认为现在没有必要进一步扩大美国的公共资产负债表杠杆。
It's not a good thing, frankly I think it's not a good idea, again I don't think there is any need at the moment to leverage up the public balance sheet in The U.
美。
S.
经济。
Economy.
正如我们所说，这是一场非常健康的经济。
As we said, it's an economy in very good health.
所以你没有理由这么做。
So there is no why you want to do that.
我不确定为什么。
I'm not sure why.
同时，正如我们所说，生产率非常高。
At the same time, as we said, productivity is very high.
生产率和人口结构——从供给角度看，这就是所谓的实际增长：经济的增长取决于人口数量的增加以及这些人生产率的提升。
And productivity and demographics, which is so called real growth from a supply standpoint, so the economy grows if there is more people around and if these people are more productive.
美。
In The U.
S.
S.
你仍然同时拥有这两者。
You still have both things.
因此，人口仍在增长，虽然可能不如20世纪50年代那么显著，但按国际标准来看依然可观，而生产率增长也非常高。
So still there is population growth, maybe not as much as in the 50s but still decent by international standards, and productivity growth is very high.
我想说的是美国公共债务的可持续性。
I would say the sustainability of public debt in The U.
S.
S.
对我来说，并不令人极度担忧。
I would say to me is not extremely concerning.
我并不是说再次加杠杆是个好主意，但我并不那么担心。
I'm not saying that it's a good idea again to leverage up but I'm not so concerned.
所以，如果有一天政府上台说，看，我想削减开支并加税，人们会抱怨，但经济不会崩溃，美国也不会完蛋。
So if one day the government comes to power and says, look, I want to cut on that and raise taxes, people will complain by the economy, we won't be the end of The U.
是的，他们可以这么做。
S, they can do that.
在其他选区，这个问题更严重。
In other constituencies it's more of a problem.
欧洲在某种程度上，中国在其他方面也是如此。
Europe to some extent and China in other respects.
我认为两者可能都比美国面临更严重的问题。
I would say both have probably worse problems than The U.
S。
S.
已经。
Has.
当然，正如你所知，在欧洲，正如你指出的，有些国家债务相对较低，比如德国虽然有其他问题，但债务仍在可控范围内。
Of course, as you know in Europe, as you pointed out, there are countries with relatively low debt, so Germany has other problems but debt is still manageable.
而像意大利和法国这样的国家，情况则更为困难。
Others like Italy and France where the situation is more difficult.
过去几年情况确实平静了一些，但这并不意味着会永远如此。
Now it was calmer in the last few years but it doesn't mean it will be forever.
这些国家形势更严峻的原因，不仅在于债务水平极高，更重要的是生产力非常低，实际上已经是负增长，经济在下滑，而不仅仅是低速增长。
And the reason why it's a more difficult situation is not only because debt is very high in these countries, but also most importantly, because productivity is very low, actually it's negative, it's falling, so it's not even low growth, it's negative.
人口结构状况非常糟糕。
Demographics are very poor.
因此，这些问题不幸地正集中在这里。
So this is really where the problems could be unfortunately.
中国的情况也是如此。
Same thing for China, by the way.
中国是另一个生产力和人口结构都在下滑的地方。
China is another place where productivity is going down and demographics are going down.
他们在2009年应对美国危机时，恰恰在错误的时机加杠杆了。
And they leveraged up exactly the wrong moment in 2009 when they reacted to the U.
S。
S.
金融危机。
Great financial crisis.
这是一个共同特征。
And this is a common feature.
在你提到的那篇论文中，我们称之为奇迹。
In that paper that you mentioned we call about miracles.
自二战以来，已经出现过许多经济奇迹。
So there have been many miracles since World War II, economic miracles.
比萨达奇迹是其中之一，中国奇迹是另一个。
The Bissadian miracle was one of them, the Chinese miracle is another one.
这些奇迹通常由两件事促成。
And usually these miracles are made by two things.
最主要的是人口结构。
Main one is demographics.
第二是生产率。
The second one is productivity.
在意大利，这发生在二战之后；在中国，则是在2001年加入自由贸易之后。
In Italy it was after World War II and in China it was after the accession free commerce in 2001.
但当这些因素放缓、奇迹结束时，人们或政府就会问：为什么必须结束？
But then when these things slow down, when the miracles end, people or governments say why should be the end?
让我们设法延长它。
Let's try to prolong it.
生产力已经不复存在，于是他们只好创造就业。
Productivity is not there anymore, so they'll have a job.
他们说，你知道吗，只要我们像去年之前那样增长，还清债务就很容易。
They say, you know what, if we only grow as we used to grow until last year, it's very easy to pay it back.
但事情并不是这样运作的。
But it doesn't work this way.
我认为中国也面临同样的问题。
And I think China has the same problem.
我认为中国早已陷入我们十二年前那篇论文中所描述的境地，而且远未摆脱困境。
And I think China is in this situation that we depicted in that paper already twelve years ago, and they are not out of the woods at all.
因此，中国确实存在严重的债务问题，而这又是由那些原本无债务创造的资产——主要是房地产——缺乏生产力且现在陷入困境所导致的。
So there is definitely a big debt problem in China, which again is created by the fact that the assets which were created without debt, which is basically real estate, are not very productive and now they are in trouble.
这是一项非传统的业务。
And it's an unorthodox business.
我想知道，你是否认为具体到美国……
I'm curious if you think whether specifically to The U.
国。
S.
我们正开始看到私营部门资产负债表重新加杠杆的迹象，因为正在发生几件事。
We're beginning to see the start of a re leveraging up of private sector balance sheets because there's a couple of things happening.
这与我们之前讨论的AI、超大规模云服务商、大型科技公司有关，它们首次开始加杠杆，因为它们的大部分自由现金流都用于数据中心建设，现在它们开始发行公司债。
There's specific to what we talked about earlier about AI, the hyperscalers, the meg-7s, big tech companies are starting to lever up for the first As they're, you know, most of their free cash flow has gone to data centre build outs, they're now at the point of beginning to issue corporate debt.
所以它们正在加杠杆。
So they're levering up.
而我看到的另一个重要趋势是，如果你仔细分析沃什和贝松的言论，似乎他们希望放松银行监管，取消一些巴塞尔III相关的规定，以真正促使商业银行重新开始放贷，但自2008年以来，这一直未能真正启动。
And then the other big theme I'm seeing is that it looks like if you read between the tea leaves of what Worsch and Besson have been talking about, it seems like they want to deregulate the banks and take away some of the Basel III related regulations to really get commercial banks to start loaning again, which really hasn't taken off since 'eight again.
而且感觉他们也在期待私人部门再次加杠杆。
And it feels like they're also looking for that private sector leverage up to happen again.
你是否也看到了这些趋势？你对此有何看法？
Do you see those trends and what do you think about them?
非常好的问题。
Very good question.
我想我们可以把它分成两部分来看。
I would say let's try to break it in two pieces.
先从人工智能说起，同时也回到你之前讨论的中性利率问题。
Start with AI and also let's reconnect to what you were discussing before with the neutral rate.
这正是问题所在。
This is exactly the case.
这就是问题所在。
This is the problem.
这就是你理解中性利率问题的关键所在。
This is where you read the problem with neutral rate.
我认为，即使在过去十五个月里已经实施的降息，在某种程度上也是出于政治考量。
I think even the reductions which were put in place already in the last fifteen months, would say to some extent were political.
美联储在总统大选前的降息是政治性的，这也是特朗普没有忘记这一点，并因此反噬权力的原因。
They were political by the Fed before the election, the presidential elections, and this is also why Trump did not forget that and he backfired on power and so on.
随后还有一些其他降息，同样是试图取悦新政府。
And then there were some other cuts which again were trying to please the new administration.
但事实上，如果我来自火星，或者生活在另一个年代，我所在交易行业的问题会是：好吧，路易吉，为什么他们不加息呢？
But actually I can tell you, if I was coming from Mars or in another decade, the question in my industry of the trader would be, okay, Luigi, why not they going to hike?
第一次加息会是25个基点还是50个基点？
And the first hike is going to be 25 or 50?
这才是问题所在。
This is the question.
这将成为人们关注的问题。
This will be the question.
正是由于这个原因，因为将利率压得过低——quote unquote——或者相对于中性利率来说过低，尤其是在这类行业中，会促使它们加杠杆。
Precisely because of that, because by putting interest rates too low, quote unquote, or too low relative to neutral rate, especially for these kind of industries, then you encourage them to leverage up.
这正是正在发生的事情。
And this is exactly what is happening.
如果存在风险，我很高兴你指出了这一点，因为否则我之前对人工智能的描述可能过于乐观了。
If there is a risk, and I think I'm very happy that you pointed out because probably the picture I was giving about AI was too rosy otherwise.
顺便说一下，正如我们在你提到的Sub Stack论文中所强调的，我们也指出了杠杆问题。
And by the way, as we highlighted also in the Sub Stack paper that you mentioned, we highlight also that there is a problem with leverage.
所以杠杆率正在上升，这么说吧，杠杆本身并不一定是坏事，但自由现金流正在减少，总体而言目前可能还不是大问题，但对于某些公司来说——我并不想点名任何一家，但我们知道，市场对一些公司已经感到担忧。
So it's increasing, let's put it, it's not that leverage isn't necessarily a bad thing, but free cash flow is decreasing and probably in aggregate is not a huge problem for the time being but for some companies, again I don't want to be main one in any of them, but we know this for some companies the market is getting worried.
市场对某些公司感到担忧，对某些私人信贷也感到担忧。
It's getting worried for some companies, it's getting worried from some kind of private credit.
私人信贷市场正在紧张。
The private credit market is nervous.
我认为这种紧张情绪并非毫无根据。
And I think this kind of nervousness I think is not unjustified.
这与风险有关，而非回报，但我认为这并不疯狂。
It has to do with risk rather than return, but I would say it's not crazy.
而这一点正是货币政策的微妙之处。
And again, this is where monetary policy is subtle.
没有人用这样的方式谈论这个问题，但它确实与此相关。
Nobody speaks about this problem in those terms but it has to do with that.
如果利率更高，你就不会那么容易想到加杠杆。
If interest rates were higher, you will not think so easily about leveraging up.
当利率很低时，你就会这么做。
When interest rates are low, you do.
然后你就可能过度刺激某些本不需要如此扩张的事物。
And then you risk to over inflate something which probably will not need that.
它本来就已经在自然增长了。
It was growing already organically.
所以这是一个问题。
So that's a problem.
另一个与此相关、也与人工智能乃至一般技术进步有关的问题是，我们清楚地知道，如今我们看到的这些公司并非都能存活下来。
Another problem which has to do with this and with AI in general, any technological progress in general to multis like the one we are seeing now is that we know that not all of the companies that we see now are going to survive.
这是必然的。
This is a necessity.
会有赢家和输家。
There will be winners and losers.
当然，问题是市场并不知道谁是赢家，谁是输家。
And the problem of course is the market doesn't know who are the winners, who are the losers.
因此，总有一个时刻市场会变得更为动荡，而这可能成为区分这两类公司的关键。
So there is always a moment when it gets more shaky and that could be a discriminant to discern between these two groups.
说到放松监管的问题，我认为单就其本身而言，这并不是坏事。
Going to the bastard wash deregulation story, Well, I would say per se, I don't think that's a bad thing.
问题在于什么样的监管。
The problem is what kind of regulation.
我知道这是一个难题，但这就是监管所面临的问题。
I know it's a difficult problem, but this is the problem with regulation.
监管是无用的吗？
Is regulation useless?
不，当然非常有用。
No, of course it's very useful.
过度监管有害吗？
Is over regulation damaging?
当然有害。
Of course it is.
监管者的职责是精准调整合适的监管方式。
The ability of the regulator is to fine tune the right kind of regulation.
我现在还不足以断言这是否清晰明确，还有另一种监管方式。
Now I'm not that much of an expert to tell you that it's so clear cut, there is another regulation.
恐怕在金融危机之后，出现了一股向过度监管倾斜的趋势，而且欧洲可能比美国更明显。
Probably I would say after the great financial crisis, there was a bit of a run towards over regulation, probably by the way more in Europe than in The U.
美。
S.
老实说，我不太确定这是否会带来损害。
I'm not too sure, frankly, whether this will be damaging or not.
当然，如果他们跌破了红线，那绝对是的。
Of course, if they go below the line, the red line, definitely yes.
老实说，我不太确定，我不知道他们是否已经越过了红线。
Frankly, I'm not too sure, I don't know if they are crossing the line or not.
也许他们做得对，但说实话，我也不太确定。
Maybe they are doing the right thing, to be honest with you, that I'm not too sure.
我对货币政策则更乐观一些。
I'm more sanguine or monetary policy.
这一点我觉得更容易理解，尤其是对于像我这样背景的人来说。
That is something I think is, for me is more understandable, I mean for someone with my background.
完全同意，这很有道理。
Totally, that makes sense.
好吧，我们来谈一下这个话题。
Okay, topic of conversation here.
如果我们不谈谈上周末发生的事件，那就太疏忽了。
We would be remiss to not talk a bit about the action that happened over the weekend.
我们是在3月2日星期一录制的，没错，看到了美国的一些重大地缘政治动态。
We're recording this on Monday, March 2, and, yeah, saw some major geopolitical developments of of The U.
和。
S.
以色列对伊朗发动了全面打击。
And Israel striking Iran in in full force.
所以，当然，我们只是宏观领域的空谈者，并不是地缘政治专家，但我很好奇，当周末发生这样的事件时，你会如何开始思考？你现在又是怎么想的？
So, of course, you know, we are just macro pontificators and not necessarily geopolitical experts, but I am curious about how do you begin to think about something like that when that hits over the weekend and how are you thinking about it now?
让我从经济学家或宏观经济学家的角度来谈谈这个问题。
Allow me to take an economist or a macroeconomist perspective on this.
因为对于地缘政治，我们每个人都可以有观点，但观点不等于分析。
Because of course on geopolitics we can all have opinions and opinions are not analysis.
我想强调的是，从经济和市场角度来看，这类情况中一个关键点是可能发生的重大供给冲击，而这可能就是其中之一。
I would say that one thing which is important to keep in mind in these situations from an economics and a market perspective is the possible developing of a major supply side shock and this could be one of them.
这是有可能的，当然我们还不确定，这主要涉及两个因素：能源价格上涨的幅度和持续时间。
It's possible, we don't know of course and this has to do with two things basically, the extent of the shock of the increase in energy prices and its duration, both of them.
这可能就是其中之一，有可能。
And this could be one of them, potentially.
当然，我不确定。
Of course, I don't know.
也许过几周回头看今天的讨论，会觉得这个观点很可笑。
It's possible that if one looks this discussion a few weeks from today, look how silly was this point made.
我们现在是3月2日，这就是我们能说的。
We are sitting on March 2 and this is what we can say.
但这可能是有相关性的。
But this is something which could be relevant.
顺便说一下，对欧洲来说，不幸的是，今天我们看到欧洲的天然气价格一度上涨了50%，现在是40%。
By the way, again, for Europe unfortunately, for instance, we see that today gas prices in Europe have increased by at some stage by 50%, now it's 40%.
这些都是很大的数字。
These are big numbers.
油价距离历史高点还很远，但从12月的低点以来已经大幅上涨了。
Oil prices is, I would say, very far from historical highs but it has increased quite a lot from the December lows.
如果这些动态持续下去，这对央行来说就是一个问题。
So if these dynamics persist, then this is a problem for central banks.
这尤其对所谓的纯通胀目标制定者构成问题，比如欧洲央行、加拿大央行、欧洲央行和英格兰银行，而美联储由于具有双重目标，问题稍轻一些。
It is a problem especially for the so called target, pure inflation targeters like the Europeans or Bank of Canada, the ECB, the Bank of England, a bit less for the Fed which has a dual mandate.
因此，他们必须同时关注通胀和劳动力市场的变化，但即便如此，这对他们来说仍然是一个问题。
So they have to target both what happened with inflation to inflation and to the labor market, but still it's a problem also for them.
那么，这些问题是否源于供给冲击？
And where the problems come from a supply shock?
如果这是一个短期冲击，或者根本不会影响通胀预期或工资动态，那么你就无需对此做出反应。
Well, if it is a short term one or let's say doesn't affect at all inflation expectations or wage dynamics, then you don't need to react to that.
因此，作为央行，你可以置之不理，视其为暂时现象，即使通胀上升，你也知道它是暂时的。
So as a central bank you do nothing, you see through that, even if inflation goes up, you know it's temporary.
但如果是所谓的第二轮效应，情况就不同了。
A different thing is if there is a so called second round effect.
如果这种冲击足够持久，它就会蔓延到能源以外的其他商品和服务，并影响劳动力市场。
So if the shock is persistent enough then it filters through other goods and services outside energy and to the labour market.
那么这对央行来说就是一个问题。
Then this is a problem for a central bank.
那么你就必须通过加息来应对，当然你知道这会对经济造成负面影响，但若通胀冲击更加持久，情况会更糟。
Then you have to react by hacking interest rates and of course you know this is bad for the economy but having a more persistent inflation shock it will be worse.
当然，我们不知道未来几周会发生什么，我们也不知道。
So we don't know of course what will happen in the next few weeks, we don't know.
但我认为风险偏向于上行。
But I would say the risks are tilting to the upside.
顺便说一句，市场这种反应方式很有意思，我们今天早上在每日报告中向客户也是这样解释的，讨论供应冲击时基本是这么说的：现在，几个月后利率可能会上升而非下降的风险已经变得更加显著。
And by the way it was interesting and we have also sympathy for how the markets behave this way, this is also the way we addressed our clients this morning in our daily, tackling supply shock and basically saying look, now the risks that in a few months interest rates actually will have to go up rather than down are more material.
有趣的是，最初市场，尤其是债券市场在周末前和今天交易日开始时因地缘政治风险而走强，但随后开始抛售。
And it's interesting that initially the market, especially the bond market reacted by rallying to geopolitical risks at the end of the, before the weekend and the beginning of today or the trading day today, and then it started to sell off.
因此，收益率飙升了上百个基点，我认为这背后是有原因的。
So yields went up in double digits in terms of 100 basis points and I would say there is a reason for that.
因此，这当然是我们需要关注的事情，再次强调，我们并不确定，但要说完全没有风险，也很难成立。
So this is something that we have to watch of course, and again we don't know, but it's difficult to say there is no risk.
当天然气和油价这样上涨时，不能说它会回落。
When gas, oil prices, go up this way, cannot say, well, it will come down.
也许吧，我希望如此。
Maybe, I hope.
但正如我们之前所说，光靠希望不是好策略。
But again, as we said before, hope is not a good strategy.
太棒了。
Awesome.
路易吉，非常高兴你能做客我们的节目。
Luigi, it absolutely fantastic to have you on the show.
真的很享受这次对话。
Really enjoyed that.
而且，再次说明，我们会在节目说明和描述中提供你新的LB宏观产品的链接，如果大家感兴趣的话。
And yeah, again, we will have links to your new LB Macro offering in the show notes and description if everybody's interested in that.
我只想感谢你加入我们，非常精彩。
And I just want to thank you for joining us, fantastic.
那将是非常愉快的，我猜你希望我们能亲自见面。
That would be very much of a pleasure and I hope to see you in person, I assume.
当然，没错。
Absolutely, yes.
在纽约。
In New York.
那太棒了。
That would be fantastic.
非常感谢你。
And thank you very much.
顺便说一句，我今天过得非常愉快。
I really had a very good time by the way.
希望你喜欢我们的研究和应用，如果你喜欢的话。
I hope you enjoy our research and app if you like it.
那就太完美了。
That would be phenomenal.
非常感谢。
Thank you very much.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。