特朗普新任美联储主席会引发市场崩盘吗？| 约瑟夫·王

我有种感觉，美联储几乎是抵抗力量的最后一道防线。

I kind of get the sense that the Federal Reserve is kind of the last bastion of the resistance.

总统基本上被引用说，如果你不降息，我就要告你。

The president is basically quoted as joking that if you don't cut rates, I'm going to sue you.

所以我们可以认为，降息是必然的。

So we can say that we're going to get rate cuts.

对吧？

Right?

沃尔什的不同之处在于，他希望缩小资产负债表。

What Walsh is different is that he wants to have a smaller balance sheet.

单靠缩减资产负债表，本身就会带来风险负面的影响。

By itself, shrinking the balance sheet would be risk negative.

我的基本假设是，如果不影响风险市场，很难实现这一缩减，但确实存在一条可行路径。

My base case is it's not easy to shrink this without having an impact on risk markets, but there is a path towards this.

央行独立性其实是个新事物，而我们现在似乎正回到一种更古老、实际上在历史上大部分时间占主导地位的体系。

Central bank independence is, really a new thing, and it seems like we're just going back to an older system that has actually prevailed for, I'd say, most of history.

因此，对通胀的责任追究将不得不通过投票箱来实现。

And so accountability for inflation is going to have to be through the ballot box.

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，与会资产管理规模超过4.2万亿美元，有150位演讲嘉宾和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 750 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、美联储理事斯蒂芬·莫兰以及Tether首席执行官保罗·阿多尼奥，还有无数其他行业高管、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 Paolo 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级观点，数字资产峰会就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.

本集由Grayscale赞助播出，Grayscale是您通往30多种加密投资产品的可信赖门户。

This episode is brought to you by Grayscale, your trusted gateway to more than 30 different crypto investment products.

稍后在本集中，您将听到更多关于它们的信息。

You'll hear more about them later in the episode.

任何关于前瞻指引的言论均不构成购买或出售任何投资或产品的建议。

Nothing said on for 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，条款和条件适用。

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

请自行进行研究。

Do your own research.

好了，各位。

Alright, everybody.

欢迎回到《前瞻指引》的又一期节目，本周我们邀请到了fedguide.com的Joseph Wang，没有比他更合适的嘉宾了。

Welcome back to another episode of Forward Guidance, and joining me this week is Joseph Wang of fedguide.com, and could not have asked for a better guest for this week.

上周美联储出现了许多动态。

We had a lot of action on the Fed late last week.

我们终于收到了特朗普选定的新美联储主席的正式公告，他就是凯文·沃什。

We finally got the formal announcement of the new Fed chair that Trump has decided on, and it's Kevin Warsh.

约瑟夫，很高兴你来参加我们的节目。

So Joseph, great to have you on the show.

谢谢你的邀请。

Thanks for inviting me.

能回来真是太好了。

It's great to be back.

一如既往，一如既往。

As always, as always.

在开始之前，我想特别提一下，如果你喜欢接下来这一小时的对话，我们将在三月于纽约举行的数字资产峰会上进行现场直播。

And before we get into things, I do want to give a little shout out that if you do enjoy this conversation over the next hour, we're going to be doing it again live in person at the Digital Asset Summit in New York, March.

这一定会非常有趣。

It's going to be a ton of fun.

我们将现场进行一次Forward Guidance的汇总讨论，以及多个专门的Forward Guidance小组讨论，约瑟夫将参与其中一场。

We'll be doing a forward guidance roundup live and a whole bunch of different specific forward guidance panels of which Joseph will be a part of one of those.

所以我们在描述里会放上链接。

So we'll have the link in the description.

去看看吧。

Check it out.

赶紧买票。

Get your tickets.

肯定会特别有趣。

Gonna be a ton of fun.

约瑟夫。

Joseph.

好的。

Alright.

凯文·沃什，他就是我们提名的美联储人选。

Kevin Warsh, that is our nominee for the Fed.

你怎么看？

What's your take?

哇。

Wow.

哇。

Wow.

这有点令人惊讶，因为在所有潜在提名人中，凯文·沃什显然是最鹰派的。

It was kinda surprising because of all the potential nominees, Kevin Warsh was obviously the most hawkish.

对吧？

Right?

我们对凯文·沃什了解很多，因为他曾经是美联储理事。

So we know a lot about Kevin Warsh because he used to be a Fed governor.

回过头来看，所有那些会议纪要都被解密了。

And in retrospect, all those meeting minutes were declassified.

而且我们还有他长期公开的记录，包括他对货币政策的评论、演讲、撰写社论等等。

And we also have a really long public record of him commenting on monetary policy, giving presentations, writing op eds, and so forth.

十多年来，他一直都在重复同样的观点。

And he's really just kind of been singing the same tune for over a decade.

为了提供一些背景，就在金融危机爆发前，凯文·沃什还认为金融体系非常健康。

Now just for some context, like heading into the great financial crisis, Kevin Walsh was all about the financial system was great.

顺便说一句，我们应当担心通货膨胀。

By the way, we should be worried about inflation.

2008年金融危机之后，失业率高达10%左右，凯文·沃什却说：是的，这确实不好，但我们更该担心通货膨胀。

After the financial crisis in 2008, unemployment rate around 10%, Kevin Wirsch was like, yeah, that's not good, but hey, we should be worried about inflation.

因此，他在货币政策上的判断一直不太理想，但同时也始终持非常鹰派的立场。

And so he's someone who has consistently exhibited not very good judgment on monetary policy, but also consistently been quite hawkish.

从他的角度看，他似乎更倾向于货币主义的世界观，因此当他看到美联储扩大资产负债表、增加货币供应量时，就会担心通货膨胀。

From his perspective, he seems to have more of a monetarist view of the world and so when he sees the Fed expanding their balance sheet, you know, increasing the money supply and so forth, he's been afraid of inflation.

而在金融危机之后，这种担忧完全是合理的。

And that was totally reasonable back after the great financial crisis.

当时很多人对此都感到忧虑。

Many people were concerned about that.

你看到黄金价格飙升，许多知名评论员纷纷指出：天啊，美国基本上是在为债务货币化。

You saw the price of gold surge and many prominent commentators come and say, Woah, The US is basically monetizing the debt.

我们会经历恶性通货膨胀，或者情况会变得非常糟糕等等。

We're going to have hyperinflation or things are going to go really bad and so forth.

那是一个合理的思维模式，但那并没有发生。

That was a reasonable mental model, but that just didn't happen.

而且，年复一年，美联储实际上一直难以实现其通胀目标。

And, you know, year after year after year, the Fed actually had trouble meeting its inflation target.

所以我们知道这不是一个正确的思维模式，但凯文·沃施似乎仍然坚持这种观点。

So, we know that's not a correct mental model, but Kevin Worsch seems to still have that anyway.

因此，我们看到，提名凯文基本上从政策角度来看，终于让他有机会实现其长期致力于缩减美联储资产负债表的目标。

So, what we've seen is that the nomination of Kevin is basically, from a policy standpoint, finally has the opportunity to realize his career long quest of shrinking the Fed's balance sheet.

如今，华盛顿方面也承诺将降息。

Now, Washington is also promising rate cuts.

我认为《华尔街日报》有一篇文章引用了总统的话，他开玩笑说，如果你不降息，我就起诉你。

I think there's an article from the Wall Street Journal where the president is basically quoted as joking that if you don't cut rates, I'm going to sue you.

因此，我们可以认为降息将会发生。

So we can say that we're going to get rate cuts.

对吧？

Right?

这个论点显然不是因为总统这么说，而是因为——这是今天一种标准的鸽派论点：劳动力市场表现并不出色，同时我们还经历了巨大的生产率提升。根据官方数据，确实看起来生产率有所增长，而这将使我们能够降息，因为这是通缩性的。

The argument is obviously not because the president said so, but because and this is a standard dovish argument today is that the labor market, you know, not doing that great, and also we have this huge productivity boom, which based on official data, it does look like we do have an increase in productivity and that is going to allow us to cut rates because that's disinflationary.

明白吗？

Okay?

所有美联储提名人选都会给总统想要的。

All the Fed nominees would have given the president that.

沃尔什的不同之处在于，他希望缩小资产负债表。

What Walsh is different is that he wants to have a smaller balance sheet.

现在市场上有很多讨论，关于他是否真的能做到这一点，因为我们都知道总统非常喜爱股市。

Now there's a lot of discussion in the market as to whether he can actually do this because we all know the president loves the stock market.

他也喜欢较低的利率等等。

He also likes lower rates and so forth.

但缩减美联储的资产负债表，似乎与这一点并不一致。

Now shrinking the Fed's balance sheet, that doesn't seem to jive with that.

但我也要指出，缩减美联储资产负债表实际上是特朗普政府的共识立场。

But I will also point out that having a smaller Fed balance sheet is actually a consensus position in the Trump administration.

现任经济政策最高官员贝森特女士去年曾发表过一篇令人印象深刻的专栏文章，批评美联储实施的所谓‘功能增强型’货币政策，尤其抨击了美联储庞大的资产负债表。

Now Secretary Bessent, like the top official when it comes to economic policy, had a very memorable column last year about the gain of function monetary policy and so forth conducted at the Fed, really lambasting a large Fed balance sheet.

此外，鲍曼 governor、迈伦 governor，以及最近的凯文·哈塞特也都公开支持缩减美联储资产负债表。

And then you also had Governor Bowman, Governor Myron, and also recently Kevin Hassett come out and just all endorsed a smaller Fed balance sheet.

所以我认为，他们确实有意这么做。

So I think this is something that they do want to do.

这不会是那种他们为了竞选而说说而已、之后又改变主意的事情。

It's not going to be one of those things that they, you know, say to campaign and then change their mind.

因此，从沃什提名人选的角度来看，这将是最重要的议题。

So I think this is going to be the most interesting topic from a from a Worsch nominee perspective.

如果你考虑投资加密货币，但不想麻烦地设置钱包或开设新账户，Grayscale 让这一切变得简单。

If you're thinking about buying crypto but don't want the headache of setting up wallets or new accounts, Grayscale makes it simple.

十多年来，Grayscale 一直帮助投资者以安全、受监管的方式获得加密货币敞口，无需自行保管或开设新钱包。

For over ten years, Grayscale has helped investors gain secure, regulated exposure to crypto without the hassle of self custody or opening new wallets.

Grayscale 提供超过30种投资产品，涵盖比特币、以太坊以及多样化的主题性加密资产组合，帮助您轻松构建符合投资组合需求的加密资产配置。

With over 30 investment products from Bitcoin and Ethereum to diversified and thematic crypto baskets, Grayscale makes it easy to build a crypto allocation that fits your portfolio.

无论您是通过普通经纪账户投资，还是通过IRA进行投资，Grayscale 的许多产品都已直接集成在您现有的投资平台中。

Whether you're using a regular brokerage account or investing through an IRA, many of Grayscale's products are available right where you already invest.

投资涉及风险，包括本金可能损失。

Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal.

如需更多信息和重要披露，请访问 grayscale.com。

For more information and important disclosures, visit grayscale.com.

是的。

Yeah.

这是一次非常全面的概述。

That's a that's a great overview.

接下来的一个小时里，我想深入探讨很多不同的观点。

Tons of different points I wanna I wanna deep dive into over the next hour.

但我其实想先从梳理沃什在2008年之后提出的那个观点开始，即量化宽松本质上是通胀性的。

But I actually wanna start with, you know, sorting out basically this proposition that that Warsh had back in in o eight onwards about how QE was inflationary basically.

这确实是他的许多观点的基础。

And that was really the baseline foundation of a lot of his perspective.

你在你的书《央行入门》中详细阐述了量化宽松的实际运作机制。

So you've written a lot about the mechanics between how QE actually works in your book, Central Banking 101.

我认为这本书非常值得阅读，尤其是在我们即将展开讨论的时候。

And I think it's a really important book to read, especially as we're going get into the discussions.

在这儿呢，来了，《央行入门》。

There it is, boom, Central Banking 101.

新版即将推出。

New version coming out soon.

瞧，就是这样。

Boom, there you go.

你在这里最先听到了。

You heard it here first.

也许你不是第一个听到的，但你确实是在这里听到的。

Maybe not you didn't hear it first, but you heard it here anyway.

好的。

Okay.

所以请你从你的角度，详细解释一下如何理解量化宽松对经济的影响，你是否同意它可能具有通胀性？

So walk us through like your perspective on how to think about quantitative easing in terms of its impact on the economy, in terms of do you agree that it could be inflationary?

因为显然在2010年代我们经历了大量量化宽松，但通胀却为零。

Because obviously we had a of QE happening in the 2010s and we had zero inflation.

这正是凯文·沃尔什在2000年代末的理论完全错误的根本原因。

And that's really the bedrock of why Kevin Walsh's thesis was so incorrect in the late 2000s.

所以，是的，请你详细讲讲该如何理解这一点。

So yeah, walk me through how to think about that.

我甚至想把时间点往前推到2008年之前。

So I would even go earlier than 2008.

宏观经济学中有一派被称为货币主义，他们非常强调货币供应量在决定经济价格水平中的作用。

So there's a school of thought in macro called monetarism, where they place huge emphasis on the money supply in determining a level of prices in the economy.

这一观点在20世纪70年代和80年代由许多人广泛推广。

This was popularized by a lot of people in 1980s, 70s and so forth.

值得注意的是，米尔顿·弗里德曼曾说过，通货膨胀在任何地方都是一种货币现象，这是一个非常有力的思维模型。

Notably, Milton Friedman is quoted as saying inflation is always everywhere a monetary phenomenon and that was, you know, a very, very compelling mental model.

显然，你印了大量货币，价格就会上涨，所以大家都接受了这个观点，因为它看起来太有道理了。

Obviously, right, you print a whole lot of money, prices are going to go up, right, so everyone really kind of bought into it because it just made so much sense.

事实上，在1980年代，美联储曾将货币供应量作为其政策实施的指标之一，而不是控制利率。

In fact, in the 1980s, the Fed actually went to targeting the money supply as one of its policy implementation measures rather than controlling interest rates.

为了追踪这些货币供应数据，他们引入了M1、M2、M3甚至M4等指标，但后来这些指标被取消了，美联储也放弃了以货币供应量为目标，因为他们意识到这行不通。

And in order to track all this money supply stuff, they embedded, you know, MT, M2, M3, even M4, and that stuff was later discontinued, and the Fed also discontinued targeting the money supply because they realized that it doesn't work.

从一个角度来看，货币流通速度是时变的，因此仅仅改变货币数量并不能带来预期的经济效果。

From one way to think about it is that the velocity of money was something that was time varying and so just changing the quantity of money just didn't really get them the economic outcomes.

现在快进到2008年，当美联储实施量化宽松时，又出现了这种极具吸引力的思维模式：天啊，美联储在大量印钞。

Now fast forward to 2008, again, when the Fed is doing quantitative easing, you also have this very seductive mental model come out and saying, gosh, the Fed is printing a lot of money.

显然，我们会经历高通胀。

Obviously, we're gonna have high inflation.

但事实并非如此。

But, that did not happen.

当日本央行这么做时，通胀也没有发生；当欧洲央行这么做时，通胀也没有发生。

It didn't happen when the Bank of Japan did it, and it did not happen when the ECB did it.

我认为人们对量化宽松的误解在于，是的，美联储确实印了很多钱，但更重要的是要明白他们是如何使用这些钱的。

I think what people are misunderstanding when it comes to quantitative easing is that, yes, the Fed absolutely prints a lot of money, but it's also important to realize what they do with that money.

所以，他们印了大量货币，然后用这些钱去购买大量国债，对吧？

So they print out a whole lot of money, and then they take that and they go and they buy a whole bunch of treasuries, right?

他们并没有购买商品和服务，而是购买了国债证券。

So they're not buying goods and services, they're buying treasury securities.

这就像用非常流动的现金类资产与金融系统中的国债进行大规模置换。

It's like a huge swap with very liquid assets, cash like assets, and in exchange taking out treasuries from the financial system.

现在，如果你从私人投资者的角度反过来看待这个问题。

Now you flip it around and you look at this from a private investor standpoint.

假设，费利克斯，你的交易账户里有一百万美元的国债，然后你把它们卖掉了，换回了一百万美元的存款。

Let's say that, Felix, you have a million dollars in treasuries in your trading account and then you sell that and you get a million dollars in deposits.

你的购买力根本没有增加，对吧？

You don't have any more purchasing power at all, right?

美联储印了很多钱，但并没有真正增加私营部门的购买力。

Fed printed a lot of money, but you don't really it doesn't increase the purchasing power of the private sector.

它只是改变了他们资产的构成：国债减少，流动性更强的现金类资产增加。

It just changes the composition of their assets, fewer treasuries, more liquid cash like assets.

那么，你打算怎么处理你那一百万美元的现金呢？

And so what are you going do with those that million dollars in cash you have?

你知道，也许你会去购买公司债券，也许会去买股票，或者干脆就放在那里不动。

You know, maybe you go and you buy corporate debt, maybe you go and you buy equities, or maybe you just leave it there.

所以量化宽松实际上正是伯南克预期的效果：推高国债价格，也就是降低长期利率，并可能产生一点财富效应，刺激金融市场。

So what QE really did was exactly what Bernanke intended it to do: push up the prices of treasuries and that is to say lower longer dated interest rates and maybe have a bit of a wealth effect that goose financial markets.

因此，我认为这其实只是对量化宽松的一种误解，才导致很多人担心通胀，但最终它完全按照伯南克的预期发挥了作用。

So that really, I think it was just a misunderstanding about Kiwi that kind of led to a lot of people concerned about inflation, but in the end it worked exactly as Bernanke intended it to do.

所以

So

为此，我认为，是的，这里有一个重要的区别，我以前听过迈克尔·霍斯描述过，那就是金融通胀和主街通胀是两回事。

to that end, I think, yeah, there's this important distinction between, you know, I've heard Michael Howes describe this before, it's like financial inflation and main street inflation as separate things.

量化宽松在金融资产通胀方面效果非常好。

And QE worked really well at financial asset inflation.

在量化宽松的这个时代，我们看到所有金融资产价格都上涨了，但主街通胀却从未真正跟进。

And, you know, during this era of QE, we've just seen all financial assets head higher, but we never really saw the main street inflation follow through.

我很好奇，你之前提到，特朗普政府的大多数人似乎都希望退出量化宽松和资产负债表操作，正如贝森秘书在社论中所称的，这是美联储政策的一个功能。

And I'm curious, it's interesting about, you mentioned earlier about how most of the Trump administration has this perspective on wanting to get out of the game of QE and balance sheet manipulation effectively, or as Secretary Besson called it in his op ed, gain a function of Fed policy.

我只是好奇，你觉得这种观点有多少是合理的？

I'm just curious, like how much of that perspective do you think is valid?

他们为什么如此极力推动这一点？

Like, and why do you think they're pushing it so hard?

因为同样地，特朗普还表示，他将自己总统任期的成功很大程度上锚定在股市上涨上。

Because in the same vein, you also have Trump talking about, he really anchors his success as a president to the stock market going up.

所以你会想，好吧，量化宽松效果很好，因为它很可能推动金融资产价格上涨，这会让特朗普高兴，因为股市在上涨。

So you would imagine that, okay, well, Kiwi is really great because it's probably going to make financial assets going to go up, which is going to make him happy because the stock market is going up.

仅凭缩减资产负债表本身会带来风险，但政府有工具可以减轻其影响，甚至可能完全消除影响。

So by itself, shrinking the balance sheet would be risk negative, but there are tools that the administration can do to make it less impactful or maybe not even that impactful at all.

因此，缩减资产负债表涉及很多复杂的因素。

So there's a lot of moving parts to how shrinking the balance sheet can be done.

我的基本假设是，如果不影响风险市场，很难实现这一目标，但确实存在一条可行路径。

My base case is it's not easy to shrink this without having an impact on risk markets, but but there is a path towards this.

我推测，政府对美联储缺乏信任，看到它通过资产负债表等手段拥有如此巨大的权力，感到不安。

My best guess is that the administration is distrustful of the Federal Reserve, and so seeing its enormous power through its balance sheet and so forth makes it uneasy.

再从更广泛的角度看美国政府，我感觉美联储可以说是最后的抵抗堡垒，而其他所有政府机构都已屈服，但杰伊·鲍威尔却仍对总统保持某种程度的反抗。

Again, looking just more broadly at the United States government, I kind of get the sense that the Federal Reserve is kind of the last bastion of the resistance, quote unquote, whereas all the other government agencies kind of bent the knee, but you have Jay Powell there kind of being somewhat defiant of the president.

因此，我认为这使得政府对美联储感到不自在，并希望削弱其影响力。

And so I think that makes makes the administration less comfortable with the Fed and would prefer that they have less influence.

是的。

Mhmm.

你今天早上发布的一篇文章中提到，如今资产负债表占GDP的比例，自疫情后尤其是最近，大约达到了25%左右，我记得你是这么说的。

You've actually mentioned in a piece you put out this morning about how the balance sheet as a percentage of GDP these days, basically, like since post away and especially lately, you know, we're somewhere around the world of 25% of GDP, think is what you mentioned.

而你知道，我们曾经经历过一个资产负债表仅占GDP约5%的时代。

And, you know, we did live in an era of like a 5% of GDP is what you mentioned in the piece there.

比如在2008年之前、量化宽松之前，美联储运作的是一种储备稀缺的制度，那种方式是有效的。

Like pre-eight, pre QE, the more scarce reserve regime that the Fed operated in, it worked.

我们有实例。

We have example.

我们有实证证据表明它确实有效。

We have empirical evidence of it actually working.

但现在我们处于充裕储备的环境中。

But now we're in this world of ample reserve regimes.

我只是好奇，您能否为观众详细解释一下，那会是什么样子？

And I'm just curious if you could walk through to the audience, like, what would it look like?

因为目前，我们已经经历了量化紧缩，达到了一个点：如果我们进一步减少系统中的储备金，就可能进入稀缺储备的环境，这会非常困难。

Because right now, you know, we went through QT, we got to a point where it's, it would be really difficult for us to really decrease the amount of reserves in the system without us entering that potential scarce reserve regime.

所以我很好奇，您能否详细说明一下，要回到2008年之前的状态会是什么样子，以及实现这一目标的可行性有多大。

So I'm just curious if you could walk through what that would look like to get to that point of where we were pre-eight and how feasible it is to actually get there.

正如您提到的，在2008年之前长达五十年的时间里，我们一直处于储备稀缺的制度，当时美联储的资产负债表约占GDP的5%。

So like you mentioned, pre-eight for like fifty years, pre-eight we were in a scarce reserve regime where the Fed's balance sheet was about 5% of GDP.

所以在我看来，归根结底，中央银行和商业银行体系都拥有弹性资产负债表。

So the way that I look at it is that at the end of the day, the central bank and the commercial banking system have elastic balance sheets.

这意味着它们可以凭空创造信贷，并向非银行部门提供流动性。

What that means is they could create credit out of thin air and go and provide liquidity to the nonbanks sectors.

在2008年金融危机之前，主要是商业银行在扩大资产负债表，创造信贷，向私营部门和更广泛的私人市场提供贷款。

Now, pre Great Financial Crisis, it was largely the commercial banks that were expanding their balance sheet, so creating credit, providing liquidity, making loans to the private sector, to the more private markets.

但在2008年期间，监管机构开始意识到，经过2008年金融危机后，这种做法并不明智，因为当银行相互放贷和提供信贷时，存在很大的传染风险，比如交易对手风险——假设你向一家银行放贷，而这家银行倒闭了，就会引发连锁反应，导致放贷方也可能出现信用问题等等。

During 2008 though, the regulators began to think that, okay, after the two thousand and eight financial crisis, the regulators realized that that was not a good idea because when the banks extend credit and lend to each other and so forth, there's a lot of potential contagion risk where you have counterparty risk where let's say you lend to a bank and then the bank fails and then there's a day chasing effect whereas the bank that lent that money also maybe will have some credit problems and so forth.

而由于整个金融体系高度互联，可能会引发对银行业的巨大挤兑，并波及其他金融部门，这正是当时发生的情况。

And then since everything is so interconnected, you could have a huge run on the banking sector and have that bleed into other financial sectors, which is exactly what happened.

因此，决策是：银行不再将流动性保留在银行体系内部，比如，如果你是一家银行，手头有流动性，原本会存放在联邦基金市场，贷给其他银行，而现在你应该把所有流动性以存款形式存放在美联储。

So the decision was that instead of banks holding liquidity within the banking system, so let's say that if you were a bank and you had liquidity, you would store it, say, the federal funds market where you lend it to another bank, you would instead store all your liquidity as a deposit at the Federal Reserve.

我们称之为准备金。

We call that reserves.

于是，官方部门——美联储——扩大了其资产负债表，开始为私营部门提供所需的流动性。

So instead, the official sector, the Fed, expanded its balance sheet and began to provide the liquidity that the private sector needed.

由于监管、杠杆率等因素，尤其是更高的基于风险的指标，银行扩大资产负债表的能力受到了极大限制。

And the banks in turn, because of regulation, leverage ratio, for example, but also much higher risk based metrics, became much more constrained in its ability to expand their balance sheet.

因此，流动性需求的满足从私营银行体系灵活提供，逐渐转向了美联储主导。

And so basically, was a handoff from the private banking sector having the flexibility to meet the liquidity needs of the economy to more of the Fed.

现在，他们正试图逆转这一趋势：首先放松一些限制商业银行的监管，比如SLR，然后希望平稳过渡到一个规模更小的美联储、更以私营银行为中心的流动性提供模式，类似于2008年之前的情况。

And now they're trying to reverse that by first reducing a little bit of the regulations that have been binding the commercial banks, for example, the SLR, and then hopefully smoothly transitioning from a smaller Fed and back to a more private bank centered way of offering liquidity to the private sector, similar to how it was pre-two thousand and Do

你对哪种体系更好有什么看法吗？

you have an opinion on which system is better?

显然，最近的偏见让我们觉得，过去十年里，我们所处的充足准备金制度下，商业银行根本不愿意放贷或承担风险，要么是因为你提到的基于风险的比率限制了它们，要么是因为2008年危机及其后续影响，包括《多德-弗兰克法案》和《巴塞尔III》等监管措施带来的心理阴影。

Obviously, know, it feels like the recency bias makes us think that the the ample reserve regime we've been in where commercial private banks have just refused to issue loans and take on risk basically over the last ten years either because of, risk based ratios, like you just mentioned, stopping them from two, but also just the hang ups associated with 'eight and what happened there and Dodd Frank and Basel III regulations, all that stuff.

比如，你对哪种体系更好有什么看法吗？无论你怎么定义‘更好’。

Like if, do you have an opinion on which system is quote unquote better for however you want to define what better even looks like?

嗯，你可以，我的意思是，你完全可以调整定义，让‘更好’变成任何你想要的样子。

Well, you can, I mean, that just kind of, you could just shift to the definition to make it whatever better?

所以我认为，两种体系都可以运作。

So I think that either could work.

只是说，任何系统都有很多复杂的组成部分，无论你怎么设计，都可以让其中任何一个系统运行良好。

It's just that, I mean, so there are a lot of moving parts to any kind of system and how you design it and you could always design either system to make it so that it could work well.

回顾过去十年美联储资产负债表大幅扩张的过程，我认为我逐渐意识到——很多人也一样——拥有一个庞大的美联储资产负债表似乎没有任何弊端。

I guess what looking back over the past decade of just having a large fit balance sheet, I think what we've what I've come to realize, and I think many people as well, there just doesn't seem to be any downside in having a large Fed balance sheet.

实际情况是，银行手上有大量现金，因此银行业根本不存在流动性问题。

What happens is that the banks basically have a ton of cash and so there's really no liquidity problems for the banking sector.

这是一件非常好的事，对吧？

And that's a really good thing, right?

所以，你可能会做得过头，但归根结底，这确实让银行体系更安全。

So, it's possible that you could overdo it, but at the end of the day, it does make the banking system safer.

你或许也能在美联储规模较小、银行体系更大的情况下实现同样的安全性，但你还需要更强的监管，以避免2008年那样的情况重演。

You could probably have the same kind of safety in a small Fed, bigger banking system scenario, but you'd also need more regulation so you won't have a repeat of what happened in 2008.

也许你还需要更多紧急的美联储援助机制，让银行能够更轻松、无污名化地使用贴现窗口或其他类似设施，比如回购便利机制之类的。

And maybe you need to have more emergency Fed facilities whereas banks can more easily access in an unstigmatized way facilities like the discount window or others like it, like the repo facility or something like that.

所以，无论哪种方式都可能行得通。

So either it could work.

你只需要添加足够的参数来使其达到最优。

You just have to add enough parameters to make them optimal.

如果你正在考虑购买加密货币，但不想麻烦地设置钱包或新账户，Grayscale 让这一切变得简单。

If you're thinking about buying crypto but don't want the headache of setting up wallets or new accounts, Grayscale makes it simple.

十多年来，Grayscale 一直帮助投资者以安全、受监管的方式获得加密货币敞口，无需自行保管或开设新钱包。

For over ten years, Grayscale has helped investors gain secure, regulated exposure to crypto without the hassle of self custody or opening new wallets.

Grayscale 提供超过30种投资产品，涵盖比特币、以太坊以及多样化的主题性加密货币组合，让你轻松构建符合投资组合需求的加密资产配置。

With over 30 investment products from Bitcoin and Ethereum to diversified and thematic crypto baskets, Grayscale makes it easy to build a crypto allocation that fits your portfolio.

无论你是通过普通经纪账户投资，还是通过 IRA 投资，Grayscale 的许多产品都已直接集成在你现有的投资平台中。

Whether you're using a regular brokerage account or investing through an IRA, many of Grayscale's products are available right where you already invest.

投资有风险，包括可能损失本金。

Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal.

如需更多信息和重要披露，请访问 grayscale.com。

For more information and important disclosures, visit grayscale.com.

本集由 Coinbase 赞助播出。

This episode is brought to you by Coinbase.

如果你是长期持有加密货币的人，但不想出售你的比特币或以太坊，Coinbase 现在提供由 Morpho 驱动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品借款高达 500 万美元，或使用以太坊借款高达 100 万美元，利率通常在 4% 至 8% 之间。

You can borrow up to $5,000,000 using Bitcoin or $1,000,000 using ETH as collateral, all at competitive rates typically between 48%.

无需信用审查。

There are no credit checks.

贷款可在几秒钟内发放，你可以随时还款，没有固定期限。

Loans originate in seconds, and you can repay anytime with no fixed deadlines.

USDC 流动资金可用于首付、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，且该平台已发放超过 10 亿美元的贷款。

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.

如果你想在不出售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。

If you want liquidity without selling your crypto, click the link in the show notes to learn more and get started today.

是的。

Yeah.

我想这引出了一个问题：一旦沃什坐上主席位置，他会对什么是现实的做出确认，因为站在外面批评过度使用资产负债表的主张很容易。

I guess that brings up the question of what will actually happen once Warsh is in the chair and he confirmed about what's realistic because it's it's quite easy to to be on the outside and and criticize these ideas of excessive balance sheet use.

但一旦你真正坐上那个位置，必须做出这些决定时，我相信凯文·沃什是个极其聪明、睿智的人。

But once you're actually in the chair and you have to make these decisions, and, you know, I'm sure Kevin Worsch is an exceptionally smart person, intelligent person.

我相信他有能力反思过去十年，意识到自己2010年的某些观点其实并没有实现。

I'm sure he has the cognitive ability to reflect on the last decade and see that some of his views in 2010 didn't really pan out.

我们并没有因为量化宽松而出现恶性通胀，我相信他对此有清醒的认识。

We didn't get the hyperinflation from QE and I'm sure he's self aware of that.

如果他没有这种认知，我会非常惊讶。

I would be very surprised if he wasn't.

所以我很想知道，我一直在想的是，一旦他上任，我不太认为我们会看到资产负债表大幅缩减，也许会有一点，毕竟还有一些可以调整的工具。

So I'm curious, like, the way I've been thinking about it is once he gets in the chair, I'm doubtful for us to see much more unwind of the balance sheet, maybe a little bit, like there is some levers that can be pulled.

但对我来说，正在被削减的尾部风险是美联储干预的可能性，或者再次实施量化宽松——因为现在，美联储主席决定再次大规模启动量化宽松所需的门槛，显然会高得多。

But to me, the tail that's getting cut here is the possibility for the Fed put or further QE if, you know, the threshold that would need to be met before the Fed chair decides to go guns blazing with QE again feels like it's going to be a lot higher now.

你认同这个分析框架吗？

Do you agree with that framework?

你是说，由于金融市场出现一些波动，我们扩大资产负债表的可能性更高，但这一点没有被充分认识到？

You're saying that we could have a higher probability of expanding the balance sheet because of some hiccups in the financial markets and that's not appreciated?

我是说，要达到触发这一行动的门槛要高得多。

Well, I'm saying that the probability like the threshold we would need to meet is much higher before we get that.

在鲍威尔时期，如果市场下跌10%，实施量化宽松的可能性要大得多。

Like during Powell, probably if if whatever happened and the markets went down 10%, much higher odds of QE occurring.

在沃什任内，这种可能性现在要低得多。

Under Warsh, that probability is probably a lot lower now.

要打开水龙头启动量化宽松，所需的门槛现在显然高多了。

Like, the threshold that needs to be met to to turn on the taps and get QE going feels like that threshold is much larger now.

也许这就是原因。

Maybe that's why

是的。

Yeah.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得是的。

I think so.

我想需要注意的一点是，量化宽松政策一直以来——这也是一个共识观点——都是在利率降至零时才推出的。

I think one thing to note is that QE has always been, and this is a consensus position, something you roll out when interest rates are at zero.

如今，利率远高于零，因此在我们真正实施量化宽松——比如美联储购买更长期限的债券、增加久期——之前，你必须先将政策利率下调至接近零的水平。

Now, interest rates today are far above zero and so before we get proper QE, like the Fed buying longer dated bonds, more duration, you're going to have to cut the policy rate down to towards zero first.

目前来看，这似乎有点牵强，但这也为他提供了很大的回旋余地：如果他想缩减美联储的资产负债表，他可以借此抵消因持续缩表可能带来的任何金融紧缩影响。

At the moment, that seems like it's a bit of a stretch, but that also gives a wash, should he want to shrink the Fed's balance sheet, a lot of leeway to counteract any of the financial tightening that that could arrive if he continues to shrink the balance sheet.

因此，他在这方面有相当大的缓冲空间。

So there is a lot of cushion for him to do that.

现在，我要指出的一点是，美联储众所周知非常珍视其独立性，对吧？

Now, one thing I'll note is that so the Fed, we all know, jealously guards its independence, right?

但这种独立性主要体现在利率政策上，即是否加息或降息，他们愿意为此诉诸法庭来捍卫。

But for that, though, it's really just its interest rate policy, whether or not the hike or cut rates can see that they're willing to go to court to protect that.

但美联储的职责不止于此，共识认为，例如在监管政策方面，最终决定权在行政部门。

But that's not all the Fed does, and the consensus has been that, for example, when it comes to regulatory policy, the executive gets to decide that.

因此，惯例是每当有新总统上任时，美联储负责监管的副主席就会辞职，以便新总统可以任命其他人。

So the custom has been that when you have a new president, the vice chair of supervision at the Fed steps down, and so the Fed so the new president can appoint someone else.

而目前这个人是米基·鲍曼。

And that person right now is Mickey Bowman.

因此，监管政策并不是美联储拥有独立性的领域。

And so regulatory policy is not something that the Fed has independence in.

还有另一件事，当然，这是新出现的情况：我们可以考虑美联储在实施货币政策时是否拥有独立性。

And something else, and this is, of course, this is a new thing, is that we can consider whether or not the Fed has independence in how it implements monetary policy.

因为目前，你是在一个充裕准备金的框架下实施货币政策的。

Because at the moment, you're implementing it in a, you know, abundant reserve framework.

听起来沃什希望以稀缺准备金的框架来实施。

Sounds like Wash would like to implement it with a scarce reserve framework.

你并没有真正侵犯美联储的独立性。

You're not really impinging upon Fed's independence.

你只是在改变它的实施方式。

You're really just changing how it implements.

现在，如果你有一个希望这样做的财政部长，并且你有足够的贝德福德委员会成员，我怀疑即使他们决定这样做，也不会有人抱怨美联储的独立性问题。

Now if you have a treasury who wants to do this and you have enough Bedford board members, I suspect that this is something that can be done without anybody crying about fender dependents and so forth should should they decide to do this.

是的。

Yeah.

我认为接下来需要讨论的重大主题是沃肖所写过的关于新财政-美联储协议的想法。

I think that's the next big theme to discuss here is something that that Warshaw has written on, which is this idea of a new treasury Fed accord.

而且我们还看到了来自特朗普提名人的广泛评论。

And and and we've also seen a lot of commentary across the board from from Trump nominees.

你知道，美联储理事史蒂文·龙也提到过这一点，他说：

You know, we had Fed governor Steven Ron has mentioned this too, which is that, hey.

看。

Look.

我们正处在一个美联储独立性减弱、财政部与美联储合作加强的时代。

Like, we're in this era where there's less independence from the Fed and more cooperation between the treasury and the Fed.

让我们直面现实，真正建立一个围绕这一现实的监管框架，而不是假装它不存在。

Let's just call a spade a spade and actually create a regulatory framework around that and move forward instead of just pretending that doesn't exist.

我只是好奇，如果你认为沃什能在美联储推动他想做的事情，那么这个美联储与财政部的协议实际上可能是什么样子？

And I'm just curious about your perspective of what does that Fed Treasury accord actually potentially look like if Warsh can get through what he wants to do at the Fed?

目前，根据他们所说的，财政部将成为管理公共部门负债期限的机构。

So at the moment, just based on what they're saying is that now Treasury will be the organization that manages the duration of public sector liabilities.

例如，假设财政部发行了大量十年期债券，这意味着私营部门必须吸收这些十年期国债。

So for example, let's say that the Treasury issued a whole bunch of ten years, so that means the private sector has to absorb those ten year Treasury securities.

但如果美联储单方面决定购买所有这些债券，那么私营部门就不再持有这些债券了。

But if the Fed were just independently decide to just buy all those, then what that means is that the private sector doesn't have any more.

相反，私营部门持有的是储备金，也就是零期限的公共部门负债。

Instead, the private sector is holding reserves, which are, you know, zero duration public sector liabilities.

因此，实际上美联储在控制私营部门所承担的利率风险程度。

So in effect, the Fed was controlling just how much interest rate risk the private sector was holding.

而现在，如果我们拥有更小的美联储资产负债表，他们就不再这么做了。

And now they now if we have a smaller Fed balance sheet, they're not doing that anymore.

但就你更广泛的观点而言，我确实同意，他们的最终计划是建立一种更具产业政策性质的协调机制，由中央银行为政府提供融资。

But to your broader point, though, I I do agree that their ultimate plan is to have more of an industrial policy kind of coordinated setting where the central bank basically finances the government.

这在历史上其实非常普遍。

And this is actually super common throughout history.

例如，在20世纪80年代日本工业化和经济繁荣时期，日本央行并不独立。

So for example, in Japan during the 1980s, when they were industrializing and booming, the Bank of Japan was not independent.

它们基本上只是推行产业政策，比如向受青睐的行业提供贷款，以促进经济增长。

They basically just kind of implemented industrial policy, maybe offering loans to industries that were favored, for example, to try to spur growth.

直到1998年左右，日本央行才获得独立性。

Was only after 1998, I believe, until the Bank of Japan was independent.

这在西欧国家也同样常见。

And this is actually pretty common to Western European countries as well.

英格兰银行和法国央行直到20世纪90年代才实现独立。

The Bank of England, Bank of France were not independent until the 1990s.

因此，央行独立性其实是个新现象。

So Central Bank independence is really a new thing.

看起来我们正在回归一种更古老、在历史上长期占主导地位的体系——央行实际上是政府的次要伙伴。

It seems like we're just going back to an older system that has actually prevailed for, I'd say, of history, where the central bank is kind of the junior partner to the rest of the government.

因此，对通胀的责任追究必须通过选票箱来实现。

And so, accountability for inflation is going to have to be through the ballot box.

所以，你或许可以想象这种情况正在发生，比如在阿根廷，甚至就在2024年，对吧？

So, maybe you could kind of see this happening, let's say, in Argentina or even just 2024, right?

通胀不受欢迎，执政党因此落选。

Inflation was not popular and the incumbent political party lost.

这个想法太疯狂了，居然说通胀要通过选票箱来解决。

That's a wild idea, that inflation is through the ballot box.

我想知道，你认为市场会如何消化这一点？特别是长期利率、互换利差、期限溢价这些能反映更长期视角的指标，它们会如何体现美联储独立性减弱的影响？

And I'm curious about how you think the market would digest that and specifically either long term interest rates as well as swap spreads, term premiums, these metrics that would reflect a bit more of this long term perspective the impact of Fed independence?

如果我们走向一个美联储独立性更弱的世界，你认为这些市场利率会如何变化？

Like if we move toward this world of less Fed independence, how would you see that be impacted in those market rates?

首先，我想说一个显而易见的事实。

First off, I want to say, sit the obvious.

显然，市场不会崩溃，对吧？

Obviously, the market is not going to implode, right?

就像我刚才说的，央行独立性是一个相对新近的现象。

Like I just said, like central bank independence is a relatively new thing.

所以，你可以想想法国，想想英国，想想上世纪八九十年代的日本，在那整个世纪里，你并不会因为央行不独立而导致债券市场崩溃。

So, you know, you could think about, you know, France, think about The UK, think about Japan 1980s and 1990s, all that time, for all those centuries, you don't have their bond markets implode because your 100 bank is not independent.

好吧，这显然是荒谬的。

Okay, so that's obviously nonsense.

我认为长期利率主要反映了市场对美联储政策路径的预期，但你也需要考虑政策的不确定性，因此存在一定的期限溢价，此外还有持有资产的基本资产负债表成本，这体现为互换利差。

So, I think of longer dated rates as largely the expected path of Fed policy, but you also have uncertainty as to that policy, so you have some term premium, but you also just basic balance sheet costs and holding that, and that would be swap spreads.

对吧？

Right?

如果我们有一个独立性较弱的央行，我认为首先，政策路径显然会更低，因为政府总是希望利率更低，至少美国的这个政府是这样。

So if we have a central bank that is less independent, I think first off, obviously the path of policy is going to be lower, right, because the government always wants to have a lower interest rates, at least this government in The US does.

这一点非常明确。

That's kind of crystal clear.

所以政策路径必须更低。

So you have to have a lower path of policy.

然而，你现在正在做一件全新的事情。

However, you're doing something new now.

你会遇到一些人，他们担心较低的利率可能意味着更高的通胀。

You will have people who are afraid that maybe lower rates implies higher inflation.

因此，他们还会试图猜测，政治上是否真的愿意将利率维持在如此低位，这将导致期限溢价上升。

And so you're going to have them also try to guess whether or not there really is the political willingness to keep rates this low, so you'll have higher term premia.

我还觉得，随着监管措施逐步生效，互换利差会扩大，互换利差将不再那么负。

And I also think as regulations get into effect, you will have wider swap spreads, so swap spreads become less negative.

因此，持有国债的资产负债表成本会下降。

So the balance sheet cost of holding treasuries declines.

把这些因素综合起来，我仍然认为较低的政策利率会压倒所有其他因素，从而导致长期利率进一步走低。

Put that all together, I still think that a lower policy rate outweighs all of this other stuff and we'll get a lower, lower, longer dated interest rates.

为了澄清一下，因为我经常听到这种说法，这让我感到有些惊讶。

Just to set aside, because I hear this so often, it kind of surprises me.

所以我经常听到的说法是，美联储会把利率维持得太低，这会导致通胀加速，因此对债券市场不利。

So oftentimes I hear that, you know, the Fed is going to keep rates too low and that's going to cause inflation to accelerate, and so that's why it's bad for the bond market.

现在，撇开长期利率并非如此决定这一事实不谈，也没有任何理由认为这会导致通胀回落。

Now aside from the fact that that's not necessarily how longer term rates are determined, but there's kind of no reason to think that would actually be have caused inflation to roll back.

因为如果你回顾过去二十年，对吧，金融危机之后，利率处于零水平。

Because if you think back the past two decades, right, so after the great financial crisis, interest rates were at zero.

在一些国家，利率甚至是负的。

In some countries, they were negative.

全球各地的央行都购买了数万亿美元的债券，但世界各地都没有出现通胀。

You had central banks all over the world buying trillions in bonds, and you had no inflation anywhere.

人们拼命想提高通胀率。

People were desperately trying to get inflation up.

但他们就是做不到。

They could not do it.

然后你再快进到2020年。

Then you fast forward to twenty twenty's.

现在你把联邦基金利率提高到了5%，达到数十年来的高点，但你甚至都没有引发衰退，对吧？

Now you get you raised the federal funds rate up to 5% multi decade highs, you didn't even get a recession, right?

今天的通货膨胀率仍然大约是3%。

Inflation today is still like 3%.

因此，我得出的明显结论是，利率与通货膨胀之间的联系并不牢固。

So, the obvious observation that I make is that the link between interest rates and inflation is not very strong.

所以，仅仅基于一种经济论点，认为‘如果利率保持过低，通货膨胀就会卷土重来’，这种说法在过去的二十年经验中是没有依据的。

So just even based on an economic argument saying that, oh no, the wash is going to keep interest rates too low, we'll have the resurgence in inflation, that's not founded in the experience of the past twenty years.

我认为，对这种观点的反驳可能是，有人会说现在的中性利率比十年前高得多。

I guess the devil's advocate to that framework would be a critic would say that the neutral rate is much higher than it was ten years ago.

也就是说，2015年的5%和今天的5%非常不同，因为中性利率已经提高了相当多。

That, you know, a 5% in 2015 is very different from a 5% today because the neutral rate is x amount higher.

你怎么看这个问题？

How do you think about that?

首先，中性利率显然是人为构建的概念，但我们就姑且接受这个说法吧。

Well, first of all, the neutral rate is something that's obviously made up, but let's go let's go with that idea.

是的。

Yeah.

当时，他们认为初始利率实际上非常低。

Well, back then they were thinking, the initial rate is actually really low.

低到甚至应该实行负利率。

So low, in fact, let's have negative interest rates.

一些国家这样做了多年，但并没有取得任何成效。

And they did that for many years in some countries and they didn't get you anywhere.

所以我认为，通货膨胀取决于许多因素，比如财政支出、技术、人口结构、市场情绪等等。

So I think the fact is that inflation is dependent on many things, you know, fiscal spending, technology, demographics, sentiment, and so forth.

当把这些因素全部加总起来时，至少在今天，利率政策所占的影响比例并不大。

And when you sum that all up, the portion of it due to interest rate policy, at least today, is just not very large.

关于为什么会这样，有一些理论，其中赖克·里德提出的一个理论非常好。

There are some theories as to why that's the case, a really good one that was proposed by Rick Reeder.

此外，你也可以在一些学术文献中看到这种观点，即我们现在更偏向于服务型经济，对吧？

And also, you could see this in some academic writing as well, is that we're just more of a services oriented economy, right?

比如说，费利克斯，Blockworks这样的媒体公司，可能并不需要借很多钱。

Let's say, Felix, Blockworks, for example, a lot of media probably doesn't need to borrow a lot of money.

如果你是个通讯撰稿人，你肯定不需要借很多钱。

If you're a newsletter writer, you definitely don't need to borrow a lot of money.

因此，利率高低对你的业务影响并不大。

And so whether or not interest rates are high or low just doesn't impact your business that much.

现在让我们倒回到80年代、70年代、50年代。

Now rewind back maybe to the 80s, 70s, 50s.

那时候经济更偏工业，要建工厂或做类似的事情，你需要借更多的钱。

When you have a more industrial economy where a lot of to build a factory or do anything like that, you need to borrow a lot more money.

那时你的利息支出会更受关注，但在如今以服务业为主的西方经济中——无论是理发店、律师、医生执业等等——都不那么依赖资本投入。

You probably have more of a your interest expense is something that you care more about, but in your services, like, which is what the Western economies largely are today, be it a barbershop, being a lawyer, practicing medicine, and so forth, it's just not that capital intensive.

因此，利率的影响没那么大。

And so interest rates are not as impactful.

对金融市场影响巨大，这一点要明确，但对实体经济似乎就没那么大影响。

Super impactful for the financial markets, to be clear, but not so much, it seems, to the real economy.

是的。

Yeah.

我认为这只是我个人的看法，但正是这一点让我对美联储主席的选择感到失望，比如里德者，我觉得他对现代经济运行方式的理解非常到位。

I think this is just my personal opinion, but that's what makes me kind of disappointed in the choice of the Fed chair here is somebody like Reeder, I felt like he had a framework that was really on point with how the economy is working in this modern day and age.

他上周写过关于这一点的文章，他认为经济对联邦基金利率变化的敏感性已经大大降低，这在我看来非常准确。

He wrote about this, I think, last week where his notion of just how the economy is not nearly as sensitive anymore to changes in the Fed funds rate seemed really accurate to me.

我非常认同拥有一个真正理解这一点的人，而不是现在这种认为量化宽松会导致超级通胀的人，也许他已经修正了自己的观点。

And I pretty compelled by just having somebody that really understood that versus now where we have somebody that thinks that QE is hyperinflationary and maybe he's revised his perspective.

我只是好奇，是否

I'm just curious, does that

你同意吗？

agree with you.

你同意吗？

You agree with it?

比如，

Like,

是的。

yeah.

对我来说，一个优秀的央行官员或金融市场参与者，是那些具备良好判断力的人，这意味着当情况变化时，能够更新自己的思维模型，对吧？

So for me, to be a good central banker or even a financial market participant is someone that has good judgment and that involves being able to update your mental model when things change, right?

在市场和宏观经济中，事物总是在不断变化。

So in the markets, in the economy, macro economy, things are always changing.

变量之间的关系也总是在变化。

Relationships between variables are always changing.

杰伊·鲍威尔在上次会议上明确说过这一点，我很认同。

And so Jay Powell actually explicitly said this at his last meeting, and I like that.

所以，比如，过去那些对利率敏感的人会说，在那种经济环境和银行体系下，利率政策确实影响巨大，但显然现在不是这样了。

So and that's why so for example, like, an interest rate sensitive people mentioned, in the past, with that type of economy, with that type of banking system, maybe interest rate policy was really influential, but it's obviously not today.

人们能够更新自己的模型。

And people are able to update their models.

因此，正因为事物总在变化，你必须保持谦逊和灵活，就像鲍威尔主席所说的那样。

So in a sense, because things are always changing, you have to be humble and nimble, as Chair Powell would say.

也许这也能解释，为什么有时拥有丰富市场经验的人反而会成为一种负担。

And maybe it's also why you sometimes see that people with a lot of experience in markets, that becomes a liability.