特朗普关于伊朗的演讲令市场恐慌 | PBD #768

美。

S.

相比世界其他地区，复苏得好多了。

Has recovered so much better than the rest of the world.

是的，名义上是这样。

Yes, nominally.

但真正发生的情况可以从国际投资头寸平衡表中看出：我们从占GDP负15%的国际投资头寸，变成了如今负87%。

But what really happened can be seen in this net international investment position balance sheet, which is we went from a negative 15% of GDP net international investment position to today we're at negative 87%.

所以我们并没有真正复苏。

So we didn't recover.

我们只是把家里的传家银器典当给了中国、欧洲、日本，以及所有对美保持贸易顺差的国家。

We just hocked our family silver to China, to Europe, to Japan, to everybody that ran trade surpluses against us.

所以普通人关注的只是简化后的数据。

So the average percent are paying attention to the simplified for them.

这为什么如此重要？

Why is this so important?

这之所以如此重要，是因为通过切断欧洲和东南亚的能源供应，这意味着他们现在无法获得足够的能源。

Why is this so important is because by cutting off European energy and Southeast Asian energy, what this means is that they now have no way to get enough energy.

他们将不得不为能源支付更高的价格，并且会不择手段地获取能源。

They're going to have to pay a lot more for energy and they will do anything to get it.

他们会怎么做呢？

What are they going to do?

他们拥有70万亿美元的美国资产。

They own $70,000,000,000,000 in U.

S.

S.

美元资产总额达27万亿美元。

Dollar assets, gross $27,000,000,000,000 in U.

美元资产净额。

Dollar in assets net.

他们会出售股票。

They are going to sell stocks.

他们是谁？

Who's they?

就是世界其他所有地区。

The whole rest of the world.

欧洲、中国，所有能源短缺的地方。

Europe, China, everyone that is short energy.

你们要推动去美元化吗？

Are you going to de dollarization?

你现在是不是正朝这个方向走？

Is that kind of where you're going right now to?

这甚至算不上去美元化。

Well, it's it's not even de dollarization.

这仅仅是一种绝望的反应。

It is simply a desperate reaction.

如果你有一大堆股票和债券，然后你失业了。

If you're, you know, you have a pile of of of stocks and bonds, You lose your job.

你得养活你的孩子。

You need to feed your kids.

你是让孩子们挨饿，还是卖掉股票和债券来养活他们？

Do you let your kids starve or do you sell your stocks and bonds to feed your kids?

这根本不是选择。

That's not even a choice.

是的。

Yeah.

欧洲现在就处于这种境地。

That is the position Europe is now in.

东南亚、日本也是如此。

That is the position Southeast Asia, Japan.

这就是为什么当这场战争爆发时，人们以为美国国债收益率、长期国债收益率会下降。

And this is why you can see in this people thought when this war started that treasury yields, long term treasury bond yields would drop.

对吧？

Right?

风险规避。

Risk off.

他们做了什么？

What have they done?

他们以很长一段时间以来最快的速度直线上升，并且还会继续上涨。

They've gone straight up at the fastest pace in a long time, and they're going to keep going up.

你原本以为会遭遇一次石油冲击，利率上升，股市下跌，但人们却说我们处于最佳位置。

You were going to have an oil shock where rates go up, stocks go down, and it's going to devolve into a severe people are saying, well, we're in the best position.

就能源而言，名义上呢？

Nominally, vis a vis energy?

当然。

Absolutely.

但这个世界是相互关联的，这种局面将蔓延至美国的资产市场、债券收益率和借贷成本。

But this is going the the world is connected in a way it is going to spiral into US asset markets, bond yields, borrowing costs.

它们都将大幅上升。

They're all going to go much higher.

这一切都回到了理查德的观点：如今第二条能源生命线被切断了。

And it all ties back to Richard's point of now the second energy lifeline is cut.

所以现在他们陷入了绝望的境地。

So now they're in a desperate situation.

欧洲人长期以来一直对美国保持顺差，大约五十年、七十年，甚至八十年。

The Europeans have been running surpluses against America for, what, fifty years, seventy years, eighty years.

而这些顺差中的很大一部分都被投资到了美国。

And a lot of those surpluses have been deployed into U.

美国。

S.

股票和债券中。

Stocks and bonds.

现在他们不得不动用这笔资金，这是他们的应急储备。

Now they're going to that's their rainy day fund.

这是他们的储蓄罐。

That's their piggy bank.

你经营什么业务？你做的是什么生意？

And you you you run what business do you run?

你有客户，机构客户。

You have clients, institutional clients.

所以能不能给我们讲讲你从事的是什么行业？

So maybe walk us through what business you're in.

我会提供咨询服务。

I'm going to consult.

我是一名顾问。

I'm a consultant.

我是一名宏观经济学顾问，服务对象是机构、高净值以及成熟的个人投资者。

I'm a macro economic consultant, for institutional high net worth and, sophisticated individual investors.

他们向你询问什么？

What are they asking you?

他们向你提出哪些问题？你是如何为他们提供咨询的？

What questions do they ask you and how do you consult them?

这不是按费用计价的模式。

It's not a fee based model.

这是一种订阅模式。

It's a subscription based model.

所以我每周写两份报告，主要关注时事及其对市场的这种影响。

So it's it's I write two reports a week and I basically am focused on current events and the implications for markets in these types of manners.

你对接下来市场会发生什么怎么看？

Where do you stand with what's going to happen with the market next?

关于汽油，现在油价是112，我们知道汽油很可能涨到每加仑4.25到4.50美元。

With everything with gas for, okay, if it's at 112 right now, we know gas is probably going to $4.25 to $4.50.

我们可能会看到5美元了。

We're going to start seeing five.

如果这种情况持续下去，有些地方会这样。

Some places if it continues like this.

市场在下跌，市场开盘了吗，罗布？

Markets dipping, market Has the market opened up yet, Rob or no?

如果我们现在查一下，市场行情怎么样？

What is the market right now if we look it up?

肯定跌得很厉害。

It's got to be down big.

好的。

Okay.

现在市场就是在下跌。

The market right now down.

道琼斯指数下跌了6.67点。

Dow was down 6.67.

所以该指数下跌了0.42点，标普500指数则下跌了1.46点。

So that was down a 0.42 points, S and P 1.46.

你觉得接下来会发生什么？

What do you see happening next?

如果你去看石油消耗量的降幅的话。

If you look at the drop in oil consumption.

对。

Right.

这是一种隐含情况，因为这是石油消费的供给侧下降。

This is an implied because this is a supply side drop in oil consumption.

这并不是因为我们处于衰退期而导致需求下降。

This isn't because we're in a recession and so demand has dropped.

如果你查看自1965年以来全球每年的石油消费数据，全球石油消费仅出现过三次负增长。

If you look at oil consumption year over year globally, going back to 1965, global oil consumption has only been negative three times.

1973年石油危机期间，我记得下降了1%到2%。

1973 oil shock, it was down one to 2% going from memory.

1980年我们美国经历的双底衰退，

The 1980 double dip recession that we had here in The U.

当时利率高达15%等等，

S, 15% interest rates, etcetera.

石油消费同比下降了4.3%。

It was down 4.3% year over year.

而在新冠疫情时期，当我们关闭了全球运转，石油消费量同比下降了9.2%。

And in COVID, when we shut down the world, it was down 9.2% year over year.

目前，来自海湾地区的石油供应，根据你对战略石油储备释放等调整的不同计算方式，我们已经失去了全球石油供应量的大约7%到11%。

Right now, the oil supply out of The Gulf, depending on what net adjustments you make for strategic petroleum reserve rundowns, etcetera, we have lost roughly seven to 11% of the world's oil and its supply side.

这对市场意味着什么？

What does this mean for markets?

世界将会怎样——这听起来可能有些夸张，但其实并非如此。

The world this is going to sound hyperbolic, but it's not.

这是纯粹的数学计算。

It's literal math.

这是必然的、平衡的、复式记账法下的供应链现实。

It's guaranteed, balanced, double entry bookkeeping, supply chain reality.

世界经济无法承受7%到11%的石油供应损失。

The world economy cannot survive a seven to 11% loss of oil supply.

它无法存活下去。

It will not survive.

我们可以展开讨论。

We can debate.

会是欧洲先陷入崩溃吗？

Is Europe going to go first and collapse?

还是东南亚先走向崩溃？

Is Southeast Asia going to go first and collapse?

又会不会是美国先崩溃？

Will America collapse first?

但全球经济——这是板上钉钉的事——如果我们的石油供应量持续减少7%，它就一定会崩溃。

But the global economy is a it is a certainty it will collapse if we keep oil supplies down seven.

我们走到那一步、并且一直维持那种状况的可能性有多大？

What's the likelihood we go go there and we stay there?

时间线会是怎样的？

What's the timeline?

比如如果供应量降到11%，这个情况会持续多久？

Like if we go to 11%, for how long?

我们已经在那儿待了六个星期。

Well, we've been there for six weeks.

我认为如果我们到四月中旬，你已经能看到航班情况了。

And I think if we get to mid April, like you're already seeing flights.

我今天早上刚醒来，一家从伦敦盖特威克机场起飞的廉价航空取消了所有航班，因为加不到油。

I just woke up this morning, a discount airline out of London Gatwick canceled all flights, can't get fuel.

所以现在你将开始看到旅游业下滑。

So now you're gonna start having tourism fall.

你

Do you

同意供应链的情况。

agree with the supply chains.

这确实是真的。

That's very true.

英国宣布，本周刚刚完成了最后一批煤油的运送，此后已知没有更多煤油运抵英国，这简直太疯狂了。

It was announced, in The UK that, the last shipment of, kerosene was just made this week, and there's no further known shipment arriving in The UK, which is pretty crazy.

但这同时也说明，这是一个政策结果，因为似乎没人关心。

But it also tells you that this is a policy outcome because nobody seems to care.

没有任何应对措施。

There's there's no countermeasures.

其实有其他办法。

There's alternative ways.

如果你愿意的话，有很多事情是可以做的。

There's things you could do if you wanted to.

但他们就是不做。

They don't.

为什么？

Why?

因为这服务于另一个正在进行的议程，我们不能忘记。

Because this feeds into this other agenda that's ongoing and that we mustn't forget.

我们绝不能忽视这一点。

We mustn't take our eyes off that.

而这正是，正如我刚刚解释的，关于欧盟的背景。

And that is you know, I've just explained sort of the background with the European Union.

实际上，这是中央规划者想要越来越多地进行集中规划。

It's actually central planners wanting to centrally plan more and more.

他们似乎打算利用这个机会实施数字管控，以及对个人自由的限制，这些限制至少会像新冠疫情期间的SIOP那样严重，甚至更糟。

And it looks like they're gonna use this opportunity to impose digital controls and the types of restrictions of individual freedoms that will be at least as bad as during this COVID SIOP or worse.

当然，现在他们以‘没有能源’为借口。

Of course, now under the excuse of, oh, there's no energy.

你必须待在家里。

You have to stay at home.

你不能开车。

You can't use your car.

想想这种类型的事情。

Think that kind

有可能吗？

of stuff is possibility?

看起来这就是他们的意图，因为在这一事件之前，已经做出了许多政策决定，比如加强对霍尔木兹海峡的封锁，这已经表明他们确实想限制能源使用。

It looks like that's what they want because there were so many policy decisions actually ahead of this, you know, in a closer closure of the the Strait Of Hormuz that already indicated that actually they want to restrict energy usage.

这是谁？

This is who?

这是，这是

This is a this is

是欧洲人，这是欧洲的行政人员。

European this is the European administrators.

我不称之为领导人，因为他们并不是真正的决策者，但他们

I wouldn't say leaders because they're not really the decision makers, but they're

就是他们。

them.

谁在和他们争论、反对他们？

Who's arguing with them and disagreeing with them?

没人敢和他们争论，因为这简直就是独裁。

Nobody's arguing with them because, you know, it's a dictatorship.

当欧洲人想做什么的时候，他们就能做到。

When the European they can do anything.

他们可以在没有法律程序的情况下把人关进监狱。

They can put somebody in prison without legal due course.

他们可以在没有法律程序的情况下制裁他人，而这已经正在发生。

They can sanction people without legal due course, and that's what's happening already.

你知道吗？

You know?

这就是为什么他们要打压言论自由。

That's why they're cracking down on freedom of speech.

你知道，这种数字

You know, this digital

服务今天？

service today?

你在哪里

Where do you

你住在哪里？你现在住哪儿？

live where do you live today?

我在瑞士，也会在匈牙利待一段时间。

Switzerland, spending time in Hungary as well.

你觉得那里安全吗？

You feel safe there?

到目前为止，是的。

So far, yes.

但你知道，瑞士也受到美国和欧盟的巨大压力，被迫向他们靠拢，并实施他们的各种做法。

But, you know, Switzerland is also under enormous pressure from The US and from the EU to cozy up to them and essentially implement whatever they are doing.

这里有一个法律框架，你知道的。

There's this, you know, legal framework.

你有没有看到朋友和家人离开？

Are you seeing friends and family leaving?

你有没有看到朋友和家人离开欧盟？

Are you seeing friends and family leaving EU?

我觉得，我看到很多人在思考：我们是否应该留在欧盟？

Well, I think a lot of I what I see is a lot of people thinking, should we stay within the EU?

有很多德国人想搬走，而且他们首先把钱转出去。

There's a lot of Germans who want to move away, and, also, they're sending first of all, they're sending their money out.

这并不是什么隐秘的黑钱之类的东西。

And it's not because it's some kind of hidden money, black money, or anything.

不是的。

No.

这是缴完税之后的合法资金。

This is post tax official money.

他们只是不希望德国政府——他们已经在讨论这件事——去拿走老百姓的钱。

They just don't want the German government to, and they're talking about it, taking people's money.

你知道的吧？

You know?

情况已经糟糕到这种地步了。

That's how bad it is.

换句话说，是的，我们看到的是以这些借口为名实施的管控和限制，仿佛里海海峡的关闭是件好事一样——因为那些为深层政府运作的欧洲管理者似乎被下达了任务，无论如何都要推行管控。

So, so in other words, yes, what we see is the imposition of controls and restrictions under these excuses, almost as if it's welcome that the Strait Of Hormuz is now being closed because the these administrators in Europe, who are running the show for the deep state seem to have been given the task sheet to implement controls anyway.

这简直太棒了。

And it's like, oh, great.

我们现在有了一个绝佳的借口。

We have this fantastic excuse now.

真糟糕。

Oh, it's too bad.

我们现在没煤油了。

We're out of kerosene now.

而且确实如此。

And and yeah.

所以现在别无选择。

So now it's just there's no choice.

我们只能这么做。

We have to do this.

当然，他们会把责任推给特朗普总统。

And, of course, they will blame it on president Trump.

他们会把责任归咎于各种其他势力，但他们乐见其成，却对此毫无作为。

They will blame it, you know, on all sorts of other forces, but they love it, and they're doing nothing against it.

因为，实际上，你可以极大地改变这种状况。

Because, literally, you could change the situation dramatically.

普京总统多次告诉欧洲人，你们注意到了那次行动，对吧？针对北溪二号的恐怖袭击并没有完全摧毁所有管道。

President Putin has repeatedly told the Europeans, you noticed that operation that was done, you know, the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream two didn't completely destroy all the pipelines.

有一条管道仍然完好无损。

There's one pipeline that is intact.

我们很乐意开启它，并以很久以前签订的原始合同价格供应天然气，那价格非常低廉。

We're happy to open it and deliver even at the original price that the contract that was made was signed a long time ago, which is super cheap.

他确实说过这些话。

You know, he said that.

那他们的反应是什么？

What's the reaction?

而且，本质上他们不被允许说：好的，请吧。

And, essentially, they're not allowed to say, yes, please.

你今天会给特朗普总统什么建议？

What advice would you give to president Trump today?

如果你在场，或者他问你问题，你会怎么告诉他？

If you're in this or he asks you a question, what do you tell him?

你和他在一起，你会说：嘿，理查德。

You're with him, you say, hey, Richard.

那你觉得我应该做什么？

So what do think I should be doing?

我认为他应该回到他向美国人民承诺并因此受到他们喜爱的事情上。

Well, I think he should go back to what he promised the American people and what they loved him for.

你知道，他最初说的那些事，他不希望这些永无止境的战争。

You know, the things he said originally that he he doesn't want these forever wars.

这场战争具备了另一场永无止境战争的所有特征。

This one has all the makings of another forever war.

你知道的。

You know?

二十年的阿富汗战争。

Twenty years of Afghanistan.

我的意思是，简直疯狂。

I mean, pretty crazy.

所以回到他们爱你的原因吧，我相信那才是真正的你。

So go back to what they love you for, and I believe that's really who you are.

那才是你真正想要的。

That's what you really want.

让我们共同努力，把真正的特朗普总统带回来说。

Let's all work together and get the real president Trump back.

他还有很多事情可以做。

And there's things he can do.

当然，也有反对势力。

Of course, there's opposition forces.

深层势力非常、非常强大。

The deep say is very, very powerful.

我们已经看到了。

We've seen that.

它掌握着权力，并利用包括欧盟在内的权力基础，作为相当强大的对手。

And is in power and is using the power bases, including the EU, as a as, you know, as quite a serious opponent.

他的赞助者们投入了大量资金，我们知道他们的立场。

There's his sponsors, that have paid a lot of money, and we know how they feel.

你知道，他们给查理·柯克捐了很多钱，觉得自己拥有他。

You know, they gave a lot of money to Charlie Kirk, and they feel they owned him.

如果你做了他们不喜欢的事，他们就觉得有权做各种事情，你知道，正如 candid zones 所记录的那样，这种事情确实发生了。

And then if you do something they don't like, they feel it seems they have the right to do all sorts of things, you know, suddenly threatened him as Candid Zones has documented, you know, happened.

你和他在同一个地方吗？

Are you the same place where he's at?

总的来说，是的。

Broadly speaking, yeah.

真的吗？

Really?

是真的。

Really.

好的。

Okay.

那你会对总统说些什么？

So what would you say to the president?

我觉得应该回到你当初承诺要做的事上：重新投资美国，稳固国防领域。

I would say get back to what you promised to do, which is reinvest in America, reassure the defense space.

我们……我的意思是，他昨天在另一场演讲里说，我们正处于战争状态，所以没钱支撑所有其他项目。

We are I mean, he said yesterday in a different speech where we can't we're at war, so we don't have money for all these other things.

我这是转述他的话，但美国上下所有人都在反复念叨一件事：我们必须得在发展上超过中国。

I'm paraphrasing, but there's this constant refrain from the from from from everyone in America that we have to we have to outperform China.

中国正在追赶我们。

China is catching Us.

中国要在这件事上赢了，中国要在那件事上赢了，诸如此类的说法层出不穷。

China is at risk of winning in this or China is at risk of winning at that.

那中国是怎么做到的呢？

Well, how did China do that?

中国可没有傻乎乎地把八万亿到十万亿美元砸在毫无意义的对外战争上。

China did not go into and spend 8,000,000,000,000 or $10,000,000,000,000 in stupid foreign wars that really didn't have a point.

他们把钱都投在了本国自身的发展上。

They invested in themselves.

所以我会对特朗普总统说，坚守你当初承诺要做的事。

And so I would say to President Trump, stick with what you said you were going to do.

就专注在这些事上。

Stay here.

把资金重新投入到我们的国内工业基础和国内基础设施建设中。

Redirect money into our domestic industrial base, into our domestic infrastructure.

而且你们也知道，他在边境事务上做得很不错。

You know, he's done a great job with borders.

我认为，在肯尼迪副部长任内所取得的许多成就都非常值得钦佩，也给予了大力支持。

He's done, I think, a lot of what they've accomplished in under Secretary Kennedy has been very admirable, very supportive of that.

这真是一个出人意料的转变。

This is just such a out of left field turn.

我并不完全理解这一点。

I don't don't fully understand it.

我只想劝他重新回到我们为何要在那儿投资2000亿美元这个问题上。

And I would just encourage him to get back to why are we investing, you know, 200,000,000,000 there.

他们正在寻找一些增量资金来支持这一举措。

They're looking for incremental to support this.

我们为何不把这2000亿美元用于国内基础设施建设呢？

Why are we not spending that to 200,000,000,000 in domestic infrastructure growth?

有很多方式可以花这笔钱。

There's a whole lot of ways you could spend the money.

我以为他会出来表示海湾国家会承担这2000亿美元的费用，我以为他会说，嘿，这场战争的费用将由海湾国家承担，毕竟你们知道那18万亿美元。

See, I thought he was going to come out and say the Gulf States are paying for the 200,000,000,000 I thought he was gonna come out and say, hey, this war is gonna be paid by the Gulf States because you know the $18,000,000,000,000.

你刚才想说点什么。

You were gonna say something.

当然，我同意卢克的观点。

Well, of course, I mean, agree with Luke.

我想补充的是，实际上有很多事情你不需要花钱，或者几乎不用花钱，就能真正改变世界历史，也就是提供人们渴望的东西——繁荣与富足。

And and I would add that actually there's a lot of things you can do where you don't have to spend money or essentially almost no money, and you can really just change the change world history, namely, you know, deliver what people would love, and that is prosperity and abundance.

怎么做？

How?

那么，什么能带来繁荣呢？我们之前讨论过，你也提到过，那就是需要建立更多的银行。

Well, what delivers prosperity, and we talked about this, and you've talked about this, is you need to create more banks.

这其实很简单，因为这是一种杠杆模式，你只需要一点资本。

And that's very easy because, you know, it's a leveraged model where you just you you just need a little bit of capital.

你设立一家新银行，这家银行就能放出20倍于其资本的贷款。

You set up a new bank, and the bank will be able to lend 20 times as much.

中国就是这样做的。

China did this.

这就是中国成功的秘密。

This is the secret of the Chinese success.

那为什么只有中国每年都能实现10%的GDP增长？

Well, why is only China delivering 10% growth every year, GDP?

美国也可以做到。

The US can do it.

没有任何东西能阻止美国。

There's nothing to stop The US.

但我们需要增加银行的数量。

But we need to increase the number of banks.

实际上，正在发生的是银行数量一直在减少。

Actually, is happening is the number of banks keeps going down.

说来有趣，我要给你点赞。

You know, it's funny, credit to you.

上次我们交谈时，你谈到中国的历史，我为此做了一个视频。

Last time you and I spoke, when you talked about the history with China, I made a video about that.

我注意到，美国的银行数量曾一度高达14000家。

And what I noticed is that US went all the way up to 14,000 banks.

我不确定具体数字，但我们现在只有4500家左右，或者4300家。

I don't know what number, we're at 4,500, 4,300 today.

很多这些银行正被收购。

And a lot of these guys are being picked up.

很多大银行正在收购小银行。

A lot of the bigger banks are picking up the smaller banks.

所以你们又开始增加贷款，以促进更多小企业的发展。

So you're going back to start lending more money to create more small businesses.

你们又回归到基本的基本面了。

You're going back to basic fundamentals.

没错。

Exactly.

当美国处于高速增长阶段，增长率达到15%、20%的时候——我们说的是19世纪后半叶——那时有数以万计的银行。

Now, when America was in its high growth phase, 15% growth, 20% growth, and we're talking the second half of the nineteenth century, It had tens of thousands of banks.

我认为在高峰期，大约有四万家银行。

I think at the peak, it was like 40,000 banks.

我们曾经减少到五千家银行，并且在俄亥俄州的每个州都在持续下降。

We were down to 5,000 banks and falling in every state in Ohio.

你知道，银行数量正在不断减少，因为监管机构强迫它们关闭，而他们认为这是好事。

You know, the numbers of, the number of banks is going down and down as they're being forced by the regulators to close, and they think that's a good thing.

不是的。

No.

这并不是好事。

It's not.

这只有利于那些中央规划者，他们希望给我们零增长甚至负增长，因为他们想限制一切。

It's only a good thing for the central planners who want to give us zero growth degrowth because they wanna restrict everything.

稀缺是他们的模式，这增强了分配者的权力。

Scarcity is their model that increases the power of the allocators.

但事实上，我们需要实现美国创立时的目标——个人自由，以及通过辛勤工作实现创造丰裕的能力。

But, actually, what we need is to implement what America was was created for, individual freedom and the ability to implement, you know, through hard work, to implement things that give us abundance.

现在我们需要一套正确的金融体系，而美国曾经是拥有过这套体系的。

Now you need the right financial framework, and America used to have it.

曾有成千上万家银行。

Tens of thousands of banks.

德国在一百多年前也曾经有过近三万所银行。

Germany used to have, almost 30,000 banks just a hundred years ago.

就德国一个国家就有这么多？

Just Germany?

没错。

Yes.

就只有德国是这样。

Just Germany.

哇哦。

Wow.

然后呢，当然，还有谁

And then, of course Who

顺便问一下，还有哪个国家更多吗？

had more, by the way?

因为我不认为中国曾经达到过那样的数量。

Because I don't think China ever got to a number like that.

没错。

That's correct.

谁比哪个国家的银行更多？

Who had more than what what country

嗯，美国在十九世纪末达到峰值时，银行数量更多。

Well, The US had at its peak more, in the end of the nineteenth

世纪，有14,000家。

century, 14,000.

你能输入一下哪个国家银行最密集吗？

Can you type in what's the most bankfitted?

这是最近的数据。

That's a recent number.

那非常近了。

That was very recent.

你知道，四十年前，美国有四万家银行。

You know, forty years ago, America had 40,000 banks.

我谈的是一百二十年前。

I'm talking about a hundred and twenty years ago.

哦，天哪。

Oh, wow.

那是美国实现两位数增长的时候。

That's when America had double digit growth.

一百年前的一笔100美元的小企业贷款。

$100 small business loan a hundred years ago.

甚至那个时代，我认为我们真的应该回溯一下

Even an era, and I think we should really go back

到

to the

自由银行的时代，其中

era of free banking where

每个人都是对的。

everyone is Yeah.

就是这样。

There you go.

在1984年，我们有14,000家。

In 1984, we had 14,000.

但你能帮我个忙吗？

But can you do me a favor?

罗德，问一下问题：一百年前美国有多少家银行？

Ask the question how many banks US had a hundred years ago, Rod?

是的。

Yeah.

1884年。

Eighteen eighty four.

1884年。

Eighteen eighty four.

查一下1884年的情况。

Check like eighteen eighty four.

请继续。

Please continue.

是的。

Yes.

所以，在美国的某个阶段，模型是你可以直接设立一家银行。

And so the the model used to be at some stage in America that you could just set up a bank.

甚至在英国，你也可以去邮局。

Even in The UK, you could just go to the post office.

你付5英镑，当然，那在当时比现在值钱多了，然后你就可以注册一家新银行。

You pay £5, which was, of course, much more money than nowadays, and you could register a new bank.

明白吗？

You see?

你曾经拥有过，而这正是我们需要做的。

You had and that's what we need to do.

我们需要让设立银行变得更简单。

We need to make it easier to set up banks.

我们需要转向注册制度。

We need to switch to a registration procedure.

如果你满足某些标准，完成了相关手续，并由审计师确认，你就能自动获得许可证。

If you meet certain criteria, you've done it, you know, signed off by an auditor that you've got it, you automatically get your license.

目前的情况是，官僚们犹豫不决，但有人

At the moment, it's the bureaucrats humming and hawing, and yet But somebody

可能会反驳说：‘好吧，理查德，你是量化宽松之父，对吧？’

may push back and say, Okay, Richard, you're the godfather of quantitative easing, right?

是你提出了量化宽松。

You came up with quantitative easing.

有些人可能会说，这造成了很多问题，如果我们放松太多的话。

Some may say that created a lot of issues if we loosen up too much.

如果你回过头去看当时的场景，那就是彻底的放松监管。

Like if you go back and look at your scene, hardcore deregulation.

很多做零收入、零资产贷款的银行，比如华盛顿互惠银行，资产规模从3300亿美元飙升到19000亿美元，都是这些人干的。

A lot of these banks that did the no income, no assets, loans, the WAMUs went from 330,000,000,000 to 1,900,000,000.0, all these guys.

这在一定程度上正是问题所在。

That was kind of part of the problem.

不是吗？

No?

是的。

Yes.

那是错误类型的银行放贷。

It was the wrong type of bank lending.

我最初提出的量化宽松政策，是让中央银行帮助那些真正履行职责的银行，也就是从事企业贷款的银行。

And my original quantitative easing was for, the central bank to help the banks that are doing the real job, which is business lending.

有三种情景、三种类型的贷款，以及三种不同的结果。

There's three three scenarios, three types of lending, and three types of outcomes.

当银行放贷时，它们是从无到有地创造货币。

When banks lend, they create money out of nothing.

你知道吗，我做了第一个实证研究，基于五千年的银行历史，证明了这一点，因为那些不希望公众了解真相的人把这当成阴谋论——当银行发放贷款，即使是按揭贷款时，贷款的资金是新创造出来的，而银行被允许将其添加到货币供应中。

You know, I did the first empirical study in a five thousand year history of banking proving that because that was considered the conspiracy theory by those who didn't want the public to know the reality that when a bank gives a loan, even a mortgage, the money for the mortgage, the money for the loan is newly created and the bank is allowed to add it to the money supply.

每个人都能明白，如果他们在增加新货币，这必然会产生影响。

And everyone can figure out, well, if they're adding new money, that has an impact.

这会带来后果。

There is a consequence.

后台机制是什么？

What is the back end?

是40比1吗？

Is it 40 to one?

因为我知道保险公司也是从无到有地创造出来的。

Because I know insurance company for every really created out of nothing.

确实是。

It is.

没有比例。

There's no ratio.

但你知道具体数字吗？

But do you know the numbers?

那是部分准备金制度，但那也不是现实。

That's the fractional reserve model, which is also not the reality.

这是假的。

It's fake.

那并不是

That's not the

现实是，贷款资金的100%都是银行新创造出来的。

The reality is 100% of the loan money is newly created by the bank.

这就是运作方式。

That's how it works.

但我需要有多少准备金才能放贷出去？

But how much do I need to have in reserves to be able to lend it out?

每一百万美元，我需要保留多少准备金？

For every million dollars, what do I need to have in reserves?

看吧。

Look.

在许多国家，准备金要求是零，拉吉，你能核实一下吗？

In many countries, the reserve requirement is zero, which Can you check that, Raj?

这证明我记得曾经打过电话

Which proves that I remember calling

几年前打过一次。

to one a few years ago.

英国、瑞典、澳大利亚，准备金要求都是零。

England, Sweden, Australia, the reserve requirement is zero.

准备金其实并不是限制因素。

The reserves are not really what's holding things back.

目前，在许多国家，我们采用的是资本充足率模型，资本才是限制因素。

We have currently, in many countries, the capital adequacy model where capital is a limit.

你知道吧？

You know?

而且，不管怎样，你知道，这其实无关紧要，因为大多数银行的贷款额度远低于允许的上限。

And, anyway, you know, it's that's really beside the point because most banks are far below the maximum they're allowed to lend.

所以根本没必要讨论，哦，你知道的，他们到底被什么限制了？

So there's no point even discussing, oh, you know, how can they you know, what what's holding them back?

实际上，不是资本在限制银行。

Well, it's not the the the capital that's holding banks back.

事实上，监管机构让那些从事生产性贷款的银行日子非常艰难。

Actually, the regulators have, made life very hard for those banks that do the productive lending.

让我来解释一下。

So let me just explain.

贷款有三种类型。

There's three types of lending.

当银行提供用于资产购买的贷款时，比如你购买公寓、土地、房地产，还包括金融资产——所有给对冲基金的贷款，你知道，都是杠杆化的。

When banks give a loan for asset purchases, which is, well, if you're buying an apartment, land, real estate, property, but also financial assets, All the the lending to hedge funds, you know, they're leveraged.

私募股权是杠杆化的。

Private equity is leveraged.

你知道，所有这些贷款都是如此。

You know, all these all these loans.

你创造了货币，但却没有为经济增加价值。

You've got money creation, but you're not adding to value to the economy.

因此，这对GDP没有影响，因为你只是在转移所有权和资产。

Therefore, there's no impact on GDP because you're just transferring ownership and assets.

但与此同时，由于你创造了新的货币，这会产生影响。

But at the same time, because you're creating new money, it has an impact.

会有什么影响呢？

What's the impact?

如果你突然创造大量货币并将其注入房地产市场，你不需要学习经济学就能知道房地产价格会发生什么变化。

If you suddenly create a lot of money and pump it into the real estate market, you don't need to study economics to know what's going to happen with real estate pricing.

当然，由于各种监管影响，银行通常会相互效仿。

And, of course, the banks usually behave like each other because of the various regulatory influences.

所以当他们开始这么做时，就会出现房地产繁荣。

So then when they start doing that, you get a real estate boom.

房价上涨。

Property prices go up.

如果他们开始为对冲基金提供更多贷款，就会引发资产市场繁荣，也就是金融市场的繁荣，然后就是这样。

If they start lending more for hedge funds, you get an asset market boom, you know, financial market boom and then that.

因此，这是一种无生产力且不可持续的信贷创造，它催生了导致银行危机的资产泡沫，过去五十年 alone 就发生了上百次。

So this is unproductive and unsustainable credit creation, which creates the asset bubbles that lead to the banking crisis, and we've had so many, you know, more than a 100 in the past fifty years alone.

这只是三种情景中的一种。

That's just one of three scenarios.

当银行为消费创造信贷时，意味着你有了更强的购买力，对消费品的需求增加，但消费品并没有增加。

When banks create credit for consumption, that means you've got more purchasing power, more demand for consumer goods, but you don't have more consumer goods.

你会遇到通货膨胀，即消费者价格通胀。

You get inflation, consumer price inflation.

2020年他们就是这么做的。

That's what they did in 2020.

我现在想把话题引向接下来会发生什么，因为我认为我们将再次经历一轮通货膨胀。

And I want to actually make the link now to what's going to happen next because I think we're going to see another bout of inflation.

稍等一下。

Just one moment.

先别急。

Hold that thought.

我让你把话说完。

I'm to let you wrap it up.

我刚收到罗布问的问题。

I just had Rob ask the question.

我问了这个问题。

I asked the question.

我把问题发给他了。

I sent him the question.

银行要贷出一百万美元，需要有多少储备金？

In order for a bank to lend a million dollars, how much money do they need to have in reserve?

我知道保险公司有最低要求，但银行的最低要求是多少？

I know there's a minimum for insurance company, but how what is it for banks?

2020年之前的旧规定是存款的10%。

The old rule pre 2020 was 10% deposits.

你知道新规定是什么吗？

You know what the new rule is?

0%。

0%.

你在开玩笑吧？

Are you kidding me?

我早就告诉过你了。

Well, I told you.

你对这个怎么看？

What do you think about this?

这对你来说根本说不通。

This this doesn't make any sense to you.

这就是他们摆脱2020年的方式。

That's how they got out of 2020.

他们就是这么做的。

That was they did.

当时出现了没有量化宽松的量化宽松。

There was there was a QE without QE.

但事实上，即使在有法定准备金要求的时候，这种情况也早已存在。

But it that's been reality in many ways even when there were official reserve requirements.

因为当你本身就是货币的创造者时，说什么资本充足率有什么意义呢？

Because when you are the creator of money, what is it to say, oh, there's a capital requirement.

说什么准备金。

There's a reserve.

你是在创造整个货币供应。

You're creating the whole money supply.

所以你支持这一点吗？

So if you want supportive of this?

我支持的是这个，好吧。

What I'm support okay.

让我说第三点，然后我就能告诉你我支持什么。

Let me say the third thing, and then I can tell you what I'm supportive of.

第三种可能性是，当银行向企业家贷款时，比如像你这样的企业家，像你观众这样的企业家，那些努力工作、实施新想法、创造价值的商人。

So the third possibility is when banks give a loan to entrepreneurs, entrepreneurs like you, entrepreneurs like your audience, you know, business people who are working hard, are implementing new ideas, are adding value.

那么，这正是银行应该关注的重点。

Then this this is really what banks should focus on.

这样一来，你就会获得繁荣、增长、就业创造，而且没有通货膨胀，也没有负面后果。

What you then get is prosperity, growth, job creation, and no inflation and no negative consequences.

这就是我们所得到的。

That's what we get.

我们获得了更高的GDP增长。

We get higher GDP growth.

所以我们有这三种情景。

So we've got these three scenarios.

我所说的是支持银行向企业投资放贷，尤其是向小企业，因为这几乎总是能创造就业。

And what I'm saying is I'm supporting bank lending for business investment, especially to small firms because that's almost always a job creator.

这几乎总是富有成效的。

It's almost always productive.

大企业嘛，其实并不需要银行贷款。

Large firms, well, they don't really need bank loans.

你知道的，他们会去别的地方融资。

You know, they go elsewhere.

他们可以接触到资本市场等等。

They get access to capital markets and so on.

而且通常，这都是关于合理化，他们会削减库存。

And also often, it's all about rationalization, and they reduce stock.

你知道吧？

You know?

所以真正重要的是小企业。

So it's really the small firms.

小型企业至关重要，因为它们在全球每个国家的就业中占比高达70%。

And the small firms is crucial because they're 70% of employment across the globe in every country.

在一些国家，超过70%的就业来自小型企业。

In some countries, more than 70% of employment is with small firms.

因此，我所说的以及我最初量化宽松政策的核心，就是激活银行信贷，支持具有生产力的企业投资，从而创造就业、促进繁荣和推动GDP增长。

And so I'm saying and and my original quantitative easing was to kick start that bank credit for productive business investment that delivers job creation, prosperity, GDP growth.

这正是我们该做的事情。

And that's what we need to do.

这正是我们需要为银行设定的目标。

And that's what we need to set up banks for.

如果一家银行只专注于为企业投资提供贷款，那为什么还要设置严格的准备金要求、资本充足率要求或繁复的监管规定，让获得牌照变得如此困难？

And if it's a bank that will lend only for business investment, why should there be strict reserve requirements or capital adequacy requirements or regulatory requirements making it hard to get the license?

你知道，历史上从未发生过因小型银行向小型企业过度放贷而导致的银行业危机。

You know that there's never been a banking crisis due to too much lending by small banks to small firms.

你知道，大银行从不向小型企业放贷。

You know, big banks don't lend to small firms.

只有小银行才会向小企业放贷。

Only small banks lend to small firms.

这就是为什么我们需要许多小银行。

It's why we need many small banks.

从未发生过因小企业商业贷款而导致的银行危机，因为这种贷款具有生产性，而且没有任何负面风险。

There's never been a banking crisis due to small firm, you know, business lending because that is productive, and and there's no downside.

这正是我们需要的。

And that's what we need.

如果你要设立一家做这种业务的银行，这是执照。

And if you set up a bank that's gonna do that, here's the license.

审批应该这么快，这么简单。

That's how quick it should be and how easy it should be.

那风险在哪里呢？

What's the risk, though?

你更倾向于0%吗？

You prefer 0%?

你还在谈存款准备金率。

You're talking still about the reserve requirement.

我们为什么还在谈准备金？

Why are we still talking about the reserve?

好吧。

Okay.

这可不是杰弗里·爱泼斯坦的名单。

It's not the Jeffrey Epstein list.

但这是一个误解。

But it is a misunderstanding.

你知道的。

You know?

存款准备金模型曾被写入教科书，直到七十年代被金融中介模型取代，后者说：‘没什么可看的。’

The reserve requirement model was taught in textbooks, until the sort of seventies since it's been replaced by the financial intermediation model where they say, oh, there's nothing to see here.

银行根本不会创造任何货币。

Banks don't even create any money.

从这个意义上说，它比现在所教授的内容更接近真相。

So in that sense, it was more more true than what they're now teaching.

根本没有货币创造。

There's no money creation.

现在他们教的是银行并不创造货币。

Banks don't create money is what they're teaching now.

所有主流教科书、金融学教授和金融期刊都完全错了，而且已被证伪。

All the leading textbooks, finance professors, the finance journals, which is totally wrong and disproven.

以前是这种部分准备金模型，但它只是为了将讨论从信贷创造上转移开。

And before was this fractional reserve model, but it was just a a measure to lead the conversation away from credit creation.

因为这个部分准备金模型仍然认为，每家银行都接收存款，进行这种分析，然后放贷。

Because this fractional reserve model still argued that each individual bank receives deposits, does this analysis, lends out money.

然后在整体上，当它们相互作用时，就会产生这种部分准备金货币乘数和货币创造。

And then in aggregate, as they interact, there's this fractional reserve money multiplier, money creation going on.

这并不正确。

That's not true.

我对此进行了反驳。

And I disprove that.

这已经发表了，我们可以查到。

It's published, and we can look it up.

这是一篇开放获取的论文，也是爱思唯尔所有出版物中下载量最高的学术论文。

It's open access paper, the most downloaded academic paper of any Elsevier publications across all disciplines.

银行能否单独凭空创造货币？

Can banks individually create money out of nothing?

当然，我在我的Substack平台rwerner.substack.com上做了分析，那里我评论时事。

And, course, I do the analysis on my substack, rwerner.substack.com, where I analyze current events.

罗布，把链接放在下面。

Put the link below, Rob.

顺便说一句，如果你现在正在看这个，而且非常喜欢这场对话，理查德·沃纳在MINNECT上。

And by the way, if you're watching this right now, if you're really enjoying this conversation, Richard Werner's on MINNECT.

如果你想问他任何问题，我们会在这里放他的二维码，也会提供链接。

If you want to ask him any questions, we're going to put his QR code around here and the link as well.

你们中51%的人喜欢这个播客，会观看，但却没有订阅。

And the 51% of you that enjoys the podcast, you watch it, but you don't subscribe.

如果我们能点击一下订阅按钮，我们会非常感激，我们离300万只差一点点了。

We would appreciate if you click on that subscribe button, we are this close to 3,000,000.

我们可以和你一起实现这个目标。

We can do it with you.

所以，如果你不介意花一分钟时间，请订阅这个频道。

So if you don't mind taking a minute, subscribe to the channel.

那太好了。

That'd be great.

我这就来问你。

I'm going to come to you.

他刚才说的这一切，你是如何理解这些信息的？

Everything he just said, how do you process the information of what he's saying?

因为对我来说，这让我想到了以下几点。

Because for me, what it's making me think about is the following.

政客们是否在关于可负担性问题上欺骗我们，因为真正需要做的事情可能会导致市场崩溃？

Are politicians lying to us about affordability because what really needs to be done could potentially crash the market?

还是说，存在一种无需让市场崩溃就能真正解决的办法？

Or is there a real fix without needing to crash the market?

因为有时候你会想，下一个当选的人该怎么做才对？

Cause sometimes you're like the next person gets elected, what's the right thing to do this?

如果我这么做，我的民调数据、这个、那个都会受影响。

If I do that, my poll numbers, this, my that.

所以你猜怎么着？

So guess what?

把问题丢给下一个人。

Kick it to the next guy.

下一个家伙上台了。

Next guy comes in.

嗯，等我当选后，我们就解决国家债务问题。

Well, when I get elected, we're to fix the national debt.

推给下一任，可等我当选后，最终还是没人真正去做该做的事。

Kick it to the Well, when I get elected and eventually nobody actually does what they're supposed to be doing.

你怎么看？

What do you think?

他说得完全正确。

What he's saying is exactly right.

你不需要让市场崩溃来实现这一点。

You don't need to crash the markets to do it.

恰恰相反，他的计划会让市场飙升、GDP增长，同时保持低通胀。

His to the contrary, his plan would send the markets soaring, GDP soaring on low inflation.

这简直是

It's literally

富者愈富，穷者愈穷。

the rich, rich or poor poor.

那难道不会让

Wouldn't that make

我不会。

me No.

不会。

No.

实际上，这会产生相反的效果。

It would actually do the opposite.

没人愿意这么做，正是因为这个原因。

And the reason why no one wants to do it is for that exact reason.

这实际上会实现经济的更大程度去中心化。

It's actually a much more decentralization of the economy.

它会改变我们所谓的K型经济，把K的两条腿真正以一种互利的方式收窄。

It would the so called K shaped economy we have, it would take the legs of the K and narrow them actually in a in a mutually beneficial way.

对。

Right.

它基本上就像那样，下腿的增长速度会快于上腿。

It would be basically like that with the lower leg growing faster than the higher leg.

但那将是所有可能性中最好的方案。

But it would be the best of all worlds.

但他们不愿意的原因，归根结底是关于政治权力。

But the very reason they don't want to, it's ultimately about political power.

他真正想说的是，为什么他们——政策制定者、央行官员——不希望讨论这个问题。

What he's really saying and why they don't want you, they they the policymakers, the central bankers don't want this discussed.

信贷创造的发生，正是这里所讨论的内容。

The credit creation discussed is what happens.

有一句来自亨利·福特的精彩名言，我想是大约一百年前说的。

There's a great quote from from Henry Ford, I believe it was a 100 or so years ago.

因此，公众不了解货币是如何创造的，这完全是好事。

So that it's all it is all well that the public does not understand how money is created.

但如果他们真的了解了，第二天早上就会爆发革命。

For if they did, there would be a revolution by morning.

我想，这应该是罗恩·保罗书里的内容，如果我没记错的话。

I think that's in Ron Paul's book, if I'm not mistaken.

是的，我相信确实如此。

Yeah, I think I'm sure I'm sure it is.

BET-DAVID IN THEIR.

BET-DAVID IN THEIR.

AND THERE IT IS.

AND THERE IT IS.

嗯，确实，如果国民能够理解我们的银行和货币体系，那将再好不过；但如果他们真的理解了，我相信在明天早上之前就会爆发革命——这是亨利·福特说的。

Well, yeah, it is well enough that the people in nation do understand our banking and monetary system for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning, Henry Ford.

而这最终才是关键问题，因为想想这对人们心理造成的后果。

And that's that's ultimately issue because think about the implications of it, what this does to people's psyches.

我是个共和党人。

I'm a republican.

我是个民主党人。

I'm a democrat.

该怪左派。

The left is to blame.