Markets Weekly December 6, 2025
发布时间 2025-12-06 18:59:25 来源
以下是内容的中文翻译：
这段12月6日录制的“瑞克利市场观察”视频分析了近期市场活动，并深入探讨了两个关键的政策方面：美联储可能的政策变化，以及白宫国家安全战略中概述的美国外交政策的转变，特别是关于欧洲的转变。
演讲者首先观察到过去几周市场表现平静，价格在一定范围内波动，尽管主要股指略微走高。他保持乐观展望，认为标准普尔500指数可能在年底达到7000点。
第一个主要话题是凯文·哈塞特可能成为下一任美联储主席。演讲者指出，特朗普总统似乎已经选定哈塞特，这位他长期以来的经济顾问，担任这一职务。哈塞特的资历完备，拥有经济学博士学位，曾在美联储工作，并在有影响力的保守派智库中担任过职务。他曾担任多位共和党总统候选人的经济顾问，最终成为特朗普总统的经济顾问，晋升为经济顾问委员会主席，现在是国家经济委员会主席。
演讲者认为，哈塞特的任命可能会导致美联储采取更加鸽派的政策。虽然他没有预测激进的降息，但他认为哈塞特可能会以一种更有利于降低利率的方式解读经济数据和美联储的双重任务（就业和通货膨胀）。他承认美联储不是一个人的机构，强调了其他理事和地区银行行长的影响力，其中一些人非常鹰派。
这引出了对贝森部长计划对美联储施加更大影响的讨论。贝森曾表示，他担心一些地区联储主席并不代表他们所在的地区，而是“从纽约空降而来”。他提议制定一项规则，要求地区联储主席必须在其所在地区居住至少三年。演讲者以克利夫兰联储主席和德克萨斯联储主席为例。尽管贝森表示这不会追溯既往，但这些人即将面临重新任命。演讲者推测，这可能是一种旨在获得对美联储更大影响力的手段，类似于针对美联储理事丽莎·库克的待决诉讼。
演讲者总结说，特朗普政府将降低利率作为一项优先事项，并正在积极寻求实现这一目标的途径。该计划可能奏效，但美联储可能会受到政治影响，例如通过收益率曲线控制。
第二个主要话题是白宫的国家安全战略，其中概述了“美国优先”的外交政策。虽然该文件的大部分内容重申了之前已知的立场，但其中一些要素尤其值得注意。演讲者强调了重申的“特朗普时代的门罗主义”，强调美国在美洲的影响力，并暗示警告外国（特别是欧洲）的干预。他引用了向阿根廷提供的紧急贷款以及委内瑞拉海岸的军事存在等例子，作为该战略的行动证据。
该文件还涉及与中国的关系，重申了台湾的现状，但没有明确支持独立或宣布台湾为中国的一个省份。演讲者认为，该战略最具挑衅性的方面是其对欧洲的立场。该文件暗示，欧洲的民主进程已经破裂，导致了诸如乌克兰持续战争等不良后果。演讲者将此与副总统万斯的一次讲话联系起来，该讲话也表达了对欧洲精英类似的蔑视。
本届政府认为，欧洲精英是根深蒂固的在位者，他们操纵体制以维持权力，损害了他们的人民和经济。特朗普政府认为这些既得利益集团正在阻碍机制的运作，并阻止欧洲改变方向。本届政府认为解决这个问题的方法是通过他们所谓的“在欧洲培养抵抗力量”来取代既得利益集团，演讲者将此解读为一场政权更迭的努力。他认为这是跨大西洋关系的一次革命性转变，表明美国可能不再将欧洲视为平等的伙伴，甚至可能正在积极努力用更符合美国利益的个人取代其领导层。这可能导致更加亲商业、监管更少的经济体，与俄罗斯更具合作性，因此可能使欧洲受益。
演讲者最后展望了即将到来的美联储会议，预计会降息，并可能讨论重启储备金管理购买。
This "Market's Reckly" video, recorded on December 6th, provides an analysis of recent market activity and delves into two key policy fronts: potential changes at the Federal Reserve and a shift in US foreign policy, particularly concerning Europe, as outlined in the White House's National Security Strategy.
The speaker starts by observing a quiet market with range-bound price action in the past few weeks, albeit with major equity indexes trending slightly higher. He maintains his optimistic outlook, suggesting the S&P 500 could reach 7,000 by year's end.
The first major topic is the potential for Kevin Hassett to become the next Federal Reserve Chair. The speaker notes that President Trump appears to have settled on Hassett, his long-time economic advisor, for the role. Hassett's credentials are sound, with a Ph.D. in economics, experience at the Fed, and positions in influential conservative think tanks. He has served as an economic advisor to multiple Republican presidential candidates and, eventually, to President Trump, rising to Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors and now President of the National Economic Council.
The speaker believes Hassett's appointment would likely lead to a more dovish Fed policy. While not predicting radical interest rate cuts, he suggests that Hassett could interpret economic data and the Fed's dual mandates (employment and inflation) in a way that favors lower rates. He acknowledges that the Fed isn't a one-person entity, highlighting the influence of other governors and regional bank presidents, some of whom are quite hawkish.
This leads to the discussion of Secretary Bessen's plan to exert more influence over the Federal Reserve. Bessen has expressed concern that some regional Fed presidents are not representative of their districts, being “parachuted in from New York”. He proposes a rule requiring regional Fed presidents to have lived in their district for at least three years. The speaker highlights the President of the Cleveland Fed and the President in Texas as examples. Although Bessen states this would not be retroactive, these individuals are up for reappointment soon. The speaker postulates this could be a play to gain more influence over the Fed, similar to a pending lawsuit against Lisa Cook, a Fed governor.
The speaker concludes that the Trump administration views lower interest rates as a priority and is actively seeking ways to achieve this. The plan may work, but the Fed could be politically influenced, for example via yield curve control.
The second main topic is the White House's National Security Strategy, which outlines an "America First" foreign policy. While much of the document reiterates previously known positions, some elements are especially noteworthy. The speaker highlights the reaffirmation of a "Trump-era Monroe Doctrine," asserting US influence in the Americas and implicitly warning against foreign (specifically European) meddling. He cites examples like emergency loans to Argentina and naval presence off the coast of Venezuela as evidence of this strategy in action.
The document also touches on relations with China, reaffirming the status quo on Taiwan without explicitly supporting independence or declaring Taiwan a province of China. The most provocative aspect of the strategy, according to the speaker, is its stance toward Europe. The document suggests that the democratic process in Europe is broken, leading to undesirable outcomes like the ongoing war in Ukraine. The speaker relates this to a speech given by Vice President Vance which noted a similar disdain for European elites.
The administration views European elites as entrenched incumbents who are manipulating the system to maintain power, to the detriment of their people and economies. The Trump administration believes these established powers are blocking the mechanisms and preventing Europe from changing course. The administration thinks the solution to this problem is to replace the established powers through what it calls "cultivating resistance in Europe," which the speaker interprets as a regime change effort. He views this as a revolutionary shift in the transatlantic relationship, indicating that the US may no longer see Europe as an equal partner and may even be actively working to replace its leadership with individuals more aligned with US interests. This could lead to more pro-business, less regulated economies that are more collaborative with Russia, therefore possibly benefitting Europe.
The speaker concludes by anticipating the upcoming Fed meeting, expecting interest rate cuts and the potential discussion of restarting reserve management purchases.
摘要
federalreserve #marketsanalysis 00:00 - Intro 01:16 - Trump Fed Coming 10:33 - Regime Change in Europe For my latest ...
GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......
中英文字稿 
Hello, my friends. Today is December 6th, and this is Market's Reckly. First off, it's great to see everyone again. I hope everyone had a relaxing Thanksgiving week. Over the past couple of weeks, markets have been kind of quiet. Price action has been kind of range bound. We did see the major equity index has trended a bit higher. And personally, I still think there's a good chance that we could hit S&P 500. It's then 7,000 on the S&P 500 by the end of the year. The really interesting stuff will happen on the policy front.
你好，我的朋友们。今天是12月6日，这里是市场焦点。首先，很高兴再次见到大家。希望大家度过了一个愉快的感恩节假期。在过去的几周里，市场相对平静，价格走势一直在一个区间内波动。我们确实看到主要的股票指数略有上涨。就我个人而言，我仍然认为，到年底时标普500指数可能有很大机会达到7,000点。真正有趣的事情将发生在政策方面。
So last week, President Trump all but promise that the next Fed chair would be Kevin Haset. And Secretary Besson seems to be hinting on his next plan to have more control over the Federal Reserve. So let's talk about developments on the Fed front. Secondly, and I think this is super, super revolutionary, was that the White House released its national security strategy. Now, a lot of it was stuff that we've been seeing, America first and so forth. But it had some really interesting things to say when it came to Europe.
上周，特朗普总统几乎承诺下一任美联储主席将是凯文·哈塞特。财政部长贝松似乎也在暗示他计划加大对美联储的控制权。让我们来谈谈美联储方面的发展。第二，我认为这非常具有革命性，白宫发布了其国家安全战略。虽然很多内容仍然是我们此前见过的，例如“美国优先”等，但在涉及欧洲的问题上，有一些非常有趣的观点。
And actually reading between the lines, in honestly, it sounds like a regime change from my perspective. So let's take a look at that document. All right, starting with the Fed. So last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that President Trump basically canceled the second round interviews for Fed chair. And that he had, and President Trump suggested he had narrowed down candidates to one person. And that it would be announced in early February.
实际上，从我的角度来看，仔细分析这些信息，听起来就像是一个政权更迭。我们来看看那份文件。好的，从美国联邦储备系统（Fed）开始。上周，《华尔街日报》报道称，特朗普总统基本上取消了美联储主席的第二轮面试。他暗示自己已经将候选人缩小到一个人，并将在二月初宣布这个消息。
Now, he also had this thing to say at a recent conference. I guess a potential Fed chair is here too. I don't know. We still have to say that potential. Is a respected person that I can tell you. Thank you, Kevin. So basically, there's a, you know, we've already narrowed down the Fed to one candidate. Oh, by the way, Kevin Hasid, potential candidate, great guy. So that kind of tells you all you need to know.
最近在一次会议上，他还有这样一番话。我想可能有一个未来的美联储主席在这里。我不知道，但我们还是得说是个候选人。我可以告诉你，这是一位受人尊敬的人。谢谢你，凯文。基本上，我们已经把美联储主席的人选缩小到一个候选者。哦，顺便提一下，凯文·哈西德是个潜在的候选者，是个很不错的人。这大概就是你需要知道的所有信息了。
If you look at the betting markets, it's very clear that everyone is becoming increasingly confident that Kevin Hasid will indeed be the next Fed chair. So who is Kevin Hasid? Well, Kevin Hasid is basically the president's long time economic advisor, who's actually been there for over a decade now. So if you look at his credentials, he's definitely someone that is well qualified to be Fed chair. He has a, you know, an econ PhD from a fancy university.
如果你查看一下博彩市场，就会很明显地发现，大家越来越有信心认为凯文·哈希德会成为下任美联储主席。那么，凯文·哈希德是谁呢？简单来说，凯文·哈希德是总统长期以来的经济顾问，他已经在这个职位上工作了十多年。从他的资历来看，他绝对是一位有资格担任美联储主席的人。他拥有知名大学的经济学博士学位。
He's worked at the Fed before. He's held positions in influential conservative think tanks. He's been in a part of the establishment, I guess mainstream Republican economic thinking for some time. Being economic advisors to presidential candidate Mitt Romney, presidential candidate McCain and so forth. And around the time of the president Trump's first term found his way into president Trump's sphere. And I guess that bet has it really paid off in spades.
他以前在美联储工作过，也曾在有影响力的保守派智库任职。他在共和党的主流经济思想圈子活跃了一段时间，还曾担任总统候选人米特·罗姆尼和约翰·麦凯恩的经济顾问。特朗普总统第一任期的时候，他加入了特朗普的圈子。我猜这次选择真的让他大有收获。
He ruled that Trump trained first as chairman of the council of economic advisors doing from first term. Currently, president of the National Economic Council, president Trump's current term. And now it looks like he's going to be Fed chair. So all these positions, very much what you would expect for to see in someone who ends up as Fed chair. For example, Bernanke and Yelena were also previously chairman of council of economic advisors, you know, fancy academic credentials and so forth.
他曾担任特朗普总统第一任期的经济顾问委员会主席。现在，他是国家经济委员会的主席，这也是特朗普总统当前任期内的职位。看起来，他现在有可能成为美联储主席。所有这些职位都是成为美联储主席所需的典型背景。例如，伯南克和耶伦以前也曾担任经济顾问委员会主席，并且拥有高学历等等。
So on paper, totally, totally reasonable choice. Now, president will often say that he really prefers secretary of best to be Fed chair and so forth. But secretary of best and just is an interested really likes being charge of secretary. And if the announcement is not made until early January, it looks like Trump still has a few weeks to convince him. Doesn't look like it's going to happen though.
从表面上看，这是一个完全合理的选择。现在，总统经常会说他非常希望让"最佳秘书"来担任美联储主席等等。但是，"最佳秘书"真的很喜欢做秘书的工作。如果这个任命要到一月初才宣布的话，那么看起来特朗普还有几周的时间来说服他。不过，看起来事情可能不会如愿以偿。
So what does it mean to have chair has it? Well, obviously it's going to mean that the Trump, the Fed is going to be a little bit more dovish than you would expect, right? Now, I'm not saying that sinnily chair has it is going to cut rates to zero and you know, everything is going to go to the moon. But when you're making an economic policy, there is always always a lot of flexibility because a lot of judgment is discretionary.
那么，“chair has it”是什么意思呢？显然，这意味着特朗普时期的美联储可能会比预期更倾向于“鸽派”立场。现在，我并不是说“chair has it”会把利率降到零，然后经济就会腾飞。但在制定经济政策时，总是存在很大的灵活性，因为很多判断是需要酌情处理的。
For example, how restrictive is current monetary policy? You know, well, you know, we're around 4% housing is in recession, but then again, equity markets are going to the moon. So I don't know, modestly, moderately, mildly, not restrictive. So you have a wide range of views on this and you could easily just have so much that says that actually we're super restrictive as government of Marin would say and that would argue for lower rates.
例如，目前的货币政策有多紧缩？嗯，你知道，我们的利率在大约4%左右，住房市场处于衰退，但与此同时，股票市场却在飙升。所以，我也不太确定，是有点紧缩、中度紧缩、轻微紧缩，还是根本不紧缩。对此有很多不同的看法，你也很容易找到支持“我们真的非常紧缩”的观点，正如Marin省长可能会说的，那会支持降低利率的主张。
You can also have someone who values the employment mandate much more highly than the inflation mandate. Again, having these two mandates really gives the Fed a lot of flexibility in balancing them. So we could easily have a chair has that who says that, you know, my heart goes out to all the struggling Americans labor market is not good for many people.
您也可以有一个更重视就业使命而不是通胀使命的人。拥有这两个使命确实给予了美联储在平衡它们方面很大的灵活性。所以，我们很可能遇到这样一位主席，他会说，我非常关心那些在劳动力市场中挣扎的美国人，因为对许多人而言，这个市场并不理想。
So I want to cut rates. So, you know, not saying they can cut rates to zero, but you can easily see a path of policy that is lower than it would be under say a power fed. So that I think is very likely to happen. But again, many people also notes that the Fed is not one person. It's just not the fair chair. You have governors, you have presidents at vote on rotating basis and some of them are pretty hawkish. And it looks like secretary best and is suggesting a plan for them. Let's listen to what he said at a New York Times interview last week.
所以我想降息。虽然不是说他们能把利率降到零，但可以轻松看到，比起权力集中的美联储来，一个更低的政策路径是可能的。我觉得这很可能会发生。但同时也有很多人指出，美联储不只是一个人，不只是主席。美联储有众多理事和主席，他们会轮流投票，其中有些人是相对强硬的。而且看起来秘书长Best正在为他们建议一个计划。我们来听听他上周在《纽约时报》采访中说了些什么。
The Federal Reserve presidents in the regional banks were meant to be from their district. And now there's this idea of importing a like bright shiny object and three of the Federal Reserve member. They for the regional banks to them used to work at the New York Fed. One of them was on a committee at the New York Fed was in a New York investment bank. So do they represent their district? So I am going to start advocating going forward, not retroactively, that regional fed presidents must have lived in their district for at least three years.
美联储地区银行的行长通常应该来自他们所在的地区。但现在有一种想法是引入一些"明亮的新星"，而三名美联储成员中，用于地区银行的人曾在纽约联储工作过。其中有一个甚至在纽约联储的一个委员会里，之前还在纽约的一家投资银行工作。那么，他们真的代表他们的地区吗？因此，我将开始倡导一种新规，不追溯既往，要求未来的地区联储行长必须在其所在的地区居住至少三年。
So basically secretary, Besson is complaining that the way that the Federal Reserve big presidents are currently appointed is not in line with how they should be. He's saying that historically, you know, let's say that you are a Federal Reserve president from Cleveland or from from from Texas. Well, you know, you're supposed to represent the interests of your region, just like Congressman of Nevada should be representing interests of Nevada in Washington. But what's happening right now is that say some of these Fed presidents are not actually from their district don't actually know anything about their district. They're just kind of people that are parachuted in from New York. So we should change that.
基本上，Besson在抱怨联邦储备银行总裁的任命方式不够合理。他说，按照历史惯例，比如说你是来自克利夫兰或德克萨斯州的联邦储备银行总裁，你应该代表你所在地区的利益，就像内华达州的国会议员在华盛顿代表内华达的利益一样。但现在的问题是，有些联储总裁实际上并不是来自他们所代表的地区，对该地区也不了解。他们只是从纽约空降过来的人选。所以，我们应该改变这种状况。
Well, that sounds totally reasonable, right? We want to have this regional representation to make sure that interests all across America are represented at the Fed. But when you kind of look into it, you'll see that. Well, who is he talking about? Well, for example, President Beth Hammock of the Cleveland Fed. Don't see doesn't seem to have any connection to that region as far as I can see spent decades in Goldman Sachs, right? Working in Goldman Sachs in New York City, just kind of parachuted there in Cleveland. And by the way, she also happens to be very, very hawkish.
好吧，这听起来完全合理，对吗？我们希望有区域代表确保全美国的利益在美联储得到体现。但当你仔细研究时，你会发现，嗯，他在说谁呢？比如说，克利夫兰联储的主席贝丝·哈莫克。她似乎和那个地区没有任何联系，据我所知，她在高盛工作了几十年，一直在纽约，然后被调到克利夫兰。而且，顺便说一下，她的政策立场非常强硬。
You could probably make the case for President Laura Logan in Texas as well, spend decades living and working in New York at the New York Fed. Stinley finds herself in Texas. Does she have any connection to Nexus? Not that I'm aware of. And now also coincidentally, very, very hawkish. Now Secretary of Besson says he's not going to apply these rules retroactively. So we're not going to have a situation where I like Lisa Cook where he trying to get rid of them. But they all are up for reappointment in February.
你可以在德克萨斯州为总统劳拉·洛根的选举做出一些论点，因为她在纽约联邦储备银行生活和工作了几十年。斯廷利发现自己在德克萨斯州。她和Nexus有什么关系吗？据我所知，没有。而且，巧合的是，她现在非常激进。贝森部长说他不会将这些规则追溯适用。所以我们不会遇到像丽莎·库克这样的情况，即他试图摆脱他们的情况。但他们都将在二月份重新任命。
And I don't know if he's able to enforce this rule to get enough buy-in from the Federal Reserve Board. But I know it's just another kind of pathway to get more control over the Fed, kind of like how there's a lawsuit against Lisa Cook pending before the Supreme Court, whereas the president is alleging that Lisa Cook did something wrong with her mortgage documents. So she shouldn't be a Fed governor and will have the Supreme Court decide that.
我不知道他是否能够执行这一规定，以获得足够的支持来自美联储委员会。但我知道，这只是为了增强对美联储控制的一种途径。有一个针对Lisa Cook的诉讼正在最高法院审理，总统指控Lisa Cook在她的抵押贷款文件上存在问题。因此，她不应成为美联储的理事，将由最高法院来决定这一点。
But again, this is an administration that is very resourceful and very determined to have more control of the Federal Reserve. The review lower interest rates as a high priority. So is this plan going to work? I have no idea. But I suspect that the regional feds much easier to influence than the Federal Reserve governors. Governors are really a position that has to be confirmed by the Senate, higher profile regional big presidents.
不过，这届政府非常有办法，也非常坚定地想要对美联储有更多的控制。他们将降低利率视为一项重要任务。那么，这个计划会成功吗？我不知道。但我怀疑区域性美联储比美联储理事更容易受到影响。理事的职位需要由参议院确认，而区域性的大型分行的主席则更显眼。
At the end of the day are just appointments from the private sector entities. So I do think that Trump will have more influence over the Fed next year. How much more would just have to see how these paths plan out? So when it comes to market reaction, it's kind of hard to see how that could be because some people would say that you'll lose the long end and so forth. But on the other hand, if you do have a politicized Fed, wouldn't they just do like yield control or something like that?
在最终分析来看，这些只是来自私营部门实体的任命。因此，我确实认为特朗普明年可能对美联储有更大的影响。至于具体会有多大影响，还需要看这些安排如何展开。至于市场反应，如何发展并不容易预测，因为有些人可能会说这样会影响长期市场等等。但另一方面，如果美联储被政治化，他们是否就会采取像收益率控制这样的措施呢？
Now the administration is aware that they don't want the market to freak out. And so you do see the Treasury tweeting this out the past week saying that the bottom market loves President Trump. So far at least it's not obvious to me that the market is really concerned about anything about the politicization of the Fed. So far the price action no lower yields, we could all hire gold is also consistent with weaker labor market, which you did have some week labor market news the past week.
现在政府意识到他们不希望市场恐慌。因此，你会看到财政部在过去一周的推文中表示，股票市场很喜欢特朗普总统。至少到目前为止，我没有明显感觉到市场对美联储政治化有什么真正担忧。目前的价格走势显示收益率没有降低，甚至可能会提高，黄金价格上升也符合劳动力市场疲软的预期，而过去一周确实出现了一些不太理想的劳动力市场新闻。
So it could be a situation like a liberation day, which no, as I remember heading into liberation day, many people were telling you that it was going to be a big deal. Market didn't believe it and then and then we had some big moves. So let's let's look forward to see what happens next year.
这可能会像解放日一样。回想起进入解放日的时候，很多人都告诉你这将是个非常重要的日子。然而，市场并不相信，结果我们确实看到了一些大的变化。因此，让我们期待看看明年会发生什么吧。
Now the second thing I want to talk about is this super, super interesting national security strategy document from the White House. Here it is White House spelling out what they mean in terms of America first foreign policy. Now a lot of it is stuff that we already know, you know, balancing global trade, helping workers and so forth. And a lot of the stuff is a lot of things that stuff that we already see them doing, but now they're just, you know, kind of telling telling you how it is.
现在，我想谈的第二件事情是白宫发布的一份非常有趣的国家安全战略文件。该文件详细阐述了何为“美国优先”的外交政策。这里面有很多内容是我们已经知道的，比如平衡全球贸易、帮助工人等等。而且，很多内容实际上我们已经看到他们在实施了，不过现在他们只是明确指出这些策略。
For example, there's a section that very actually spells out there's going to be a Trump core, literally truly Monroe doctrine. The Monroe doctrine was something put forth by a president Monroe in the 1800s. And what the Monroe document said and it was directed towards the European powers at the time was that the America belongs to the United States. This is our backyard. We will have control here.
例如，其中有一部分非常明确地表明将会有一个“特朗普核心”，实际上是真正的门罗主义。门罗主义是由19世纪的门罗总统提出的。当时门罗文件主要是针对欧洲列强而制定的，其核心思想是美洲属于美国。这是我们的后院，我们将在这里掌控局面。
You stay out at that time. Again, there were many European colonies and the Americas, particularly from Spain. And so the America, the United States was just telling European powers to back off. We're not going to meddle in your affairs and you stay out of our sphere of influence. The United States, culturally speaking, for is really more of an isolationist country. We want to want to do our own thing.
那段时间你们就别插手了。当时有许多欧洲殖民地，尤其是来自西班牙的殖民地。因此，美国就是在告诉欧洲列强别干涉我们的事务。我们不会干预你们的事务，而你们也别来影响我们的势力范围。从文化上讲，美国更倾向于孤立主义，我们希望独立自主地做自己的事情。
And it really was the political power is that kind of drag the public into the world wars. So what we see today, America is, you know, kind of an empire is kind of more of an operation when it comes to American history. Trump is basically saying that real firming that we want to have influence over the Americas. And you already see that, right? So we have treasury giving an emergency loan to an ally in Argentina, showing up President Malay, who was a friend of Washington.
这段话的意思是：实际上，正是政治权力在一定程度上将公众拖入了世界大战。我们今天看到的美国在某种意义上更像是一个帝国的运作，这可以从美国历史中看出。特朗普基本上是在重申我们希望对美洲有影响力。而你已经可以看到这一点了，比如，美国财政部向阿根廷的一位盟友提供紧急贷款，这位盟友是与华盛顿友好的总统米莱的支持者。
And you have Trump setting out all sorts of battleships outside of Venezuela. Basically trying to get Maduro out in President Maduro over there is not a friend of Washington. So he, he's already doing these things, right? He's just telling you what we kind of have already inferred in the document.
特朗普已经在委内瑞拉外海部署了各种战舰，基本上是为了逼迫马杜罗下台。委内瑞拉总统马杜罗与华盛顿并不是友好关系。所以，他（指特朗普）已经在采取行动了，对吧？他只是在告诉你我们从文件中已经推测出来的事情。
He also spells out some interesting things when it comes to China. First off, he does note that in Latin America, a lot of these countries have no strong business relationships with China. Does want to encourage these countries to, you know, I'll say think long term and try to make a case that it makes a lot more sense for the United States to be your best business partner.
他还提到了一些关于中国的有趣事情。首先，他指出在拉丁美洲，很多国家与中国没有稳固的商业关系。他希望鼓励这些国家从长远角度考虑，并尝试说明与美国建立商业合作才是更明智的选择。
In the long term than these other people, he doesn't actually name China, I don't believe. But with the Scars of China does have something to give to Uncle Xi. And that is reaffirmed. That Taiwan is just going to say that as it is preserved as a quote, no clear support of Taiwan independence. And of course, no declaration that China Taiwan is a province of China.
从长远来看，尽管他没有明确提到中国，但关于中国的问题，他确实有一些看法要传达给习大大。这里可以确认的是，台湾会继续保持一种状态，即在没有明确支持台湾独立的情况下存在。当然，也不会声明台湾是中国的一个省份。
So, yeah, just affirming we're going to keep things as it is, steady the ship. And I think that is, you know, probably makes Uncle Xi happy. I don't think it's realistic to expect that America would just give Taiwan away, at least without getting something a lot of things in return.
所以，是的，我们只是确认要保持现状，稳定发展。我想这可能会让习近平叔叔满意。我认为指望美国直接放弃台湾是不现实的，至少不可能不获得很多条件的回报。
But I think what was most interesting in this document is Trump's stance towards Europe. In it, he's basically saying that, you know, he thinks that the democratic process in Europe is broken. And so that's why you're getting all these bizarre outcomes.
但我觉得这份文件中最有趣的是特朗普对欧洲的态度。他在文件中基本上表示，他认为欧洲的民主进程已经出现问题。这就是为什么会出现各种奇怪的结果。
And the example he's giving is peace in Europe, whereas, you know, the population in Europe overwhelmingly will like to have peace. But then all these elites who are sitting on very thin margins are just kind of pushing the Ukraine war. He doesn't like it.
他举的例子是欧洲的和平，而欧洲的民众普遍希望和平。然而，那些掌握权力的精英们却在推动乌克兰战争，因为他们的支持基础很薄弱。他对此非常不满。
And it actually reminds me of a speech that vice president Vance gave a few months ago in Munich. Let's listen to it. Where the organizers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing populist parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations.
这实际上让我想起了几个月前副总统范斯在慕尼黑发表的一次演讲。让我们来听听。在那次会议上，这个会议的组织者禁止了来自左翼和右翼的民粹主义政党的立法者参与这些讨论。
Now again, we don't have to agree with everything or anything that people say. But when people represent, when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them.
现在，再说一次，我们不必同意人们说的一切或任何事情。但当有人，尤其是政治领袖，代表着一个重要的选民群体时，我们有责任至少与他们进行对话。
Now to many of us, on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old and trenched interests, hiding behind ugly, Soviet-era words like misinformation and disinformation, who simply don't like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or God forbid vote a different way or even worse, win an election.
对于我们这些大西洋彼岸的人来说，越来越多地感觉到，有一些根深蒂固的利益集团不喜欢有人持有不同的观点，并且隐藏在“错误信息”和“虚假信息”这样的苏联时代的丑陋词语背后。他们不希望有人表达不同的意见，更不希望他们投出不同的选票，甚至更不希望他们在选举中获胜。
So what are you saying is something that I think from his perspective feels kind of like a Dijavu. So what are you saying, of course, is that all these people in Europe, they are basically incumbents. They have the political power. They don't want to give it up. And they're rigging the system so that they stay in power and it's causing tremendous damage to their people, to their economies because their policies just don't work. Now this is something I think he feels strongly about because he thinks that's what happened in the United States.
所以你说的东西让我觉得从他的角度来看有点像"似曾相识"的感觉。你的意思是，当然了，这些欧洲的人基本上都是现任者。他们握有政治权力，不想放弃，并且在操控体制以维持自己的权力。这给他们的人民和经济造成了巨大的损害，因为他们的政策根本行不通。我认为他对此感受深刻，因为他认为这就是在美国发生的事情。
Now this is something that's totally human and we see this all over the world in all of our in any organization, right? If you're a boomer and say a big Fortune 500 company, you have a lot of benefits, you have a lot of power and making a lot of money. You don't want to give it up and so you kind of use your power to protect your position. You see this in the United States Congress as well. You have all these people who are, you know, sometimes seen now, but you know, just clinging on to their seats, not wanting to let go of their power and just kind of using the machine.
这是一种完全人类的表现，我们在世界各地、任何组织中都能看到这种情况，对吧？如果你是出生在婴儿潮时期的人，在一家大型财富500强公司工作，你会享有很多福利，也有很大的权力和丰厚的收入。你不想放弃这一切，所以会利用手中的权力来保护自己的地位。在美国国会中也可以看到类似情况。有些人虽然有时被认为是不再活跃，但依然紧紧抓住他们的位置，不愿放弃权力，并且利用现有体制来维护自己的利益。
They built up the same power, not sure if these guys even understand what they're doing, but you know they don't want to leave and that's obviously not in the interest of the United States. And of course, when Trump was running for election, you had tremendous tremendous opposition from established powers. You have, for example, we had all these officials from state governors come out and say that Trump was a bad person. You had to give them off the ballot. You had all these lawsuits put out against them that were in many cases just totally, totally fabulous.
他们积累了同样的权力，不确定这些人是否真的明白自己在做什么，但显然他们不想离开，而这显然不符合美国的利益。当然，特朗普竞选时，来自既得利益集团的反对非常非常强烈。例如，有很多州长官员站出来说特朗普是一个糟糕的人，应该把他从选票上除名。还有很多针对他的诉讼，这些诉讼在很多情况下都是完全不靠谱的。
So basically the weaponization of different power, the judicial system against Trump. And at the end of the day, he did prevail. And so if you're from the Trump team, you really feel that you know this is something that is a problem. And you look at Europe, what's happening in Europe, you see that, well, you look at in Germany, for example, you see that one of the most popular political parties in Germany, the major opposition party, AFD. Well, the government there's thinking about banning them, right?
这段话的意思是：基本上，这种情况就是不同权力被用来对付特朗普，比如司法系统。然而最终，他还是成功了。所以，如果你是特朗普团队的一员，你会感觉到这确实是个问题。当你把视线扩展到欧洲的时候，比如看看德国的情况，你会发现德国最受欢迎的政党之一，也是主要反对党的选项党（AFD），政府正考虑禁止他们。这种情况值得关注。
Just ban your political opposition and there's an seemed democratic, right? You look at Romania where the candidate was poised to win was more sympathetic towards Russia. Well, that connection got annulled. So then you look at maybe France, you know, looks like the pen's party was most popular party in France. And then somehow the establishment works together with other powers to kind of push them out of power.
只要禁止你的政治反对派，就可以看起来像民主国家，对吗？看看罗马尼亚，那里的候选人本来有望胜选，并且对俄罗斯更加友好。然而，这种联系被撤销了。再看看法国，勒庞的政党似乎是法国最受欢迎的政党，但权力机构似乎会和其他势力合作，把他们排挤出权力中心。
So you get the sense that a lot of these guys are running a kind of running policies that don't work. And war and Ukraine, mass migration, shutting down the nuclear energy plants when you have a energy crisis is just not good policy. But usually you would expect there to be some sort of democratic, you know, mechanism where old management can be swept out to get new management in to steer the country towards a better direction.
所以，你会感觉到很多人正在执行一些行不通的政策。而战争、乌克兰、大规模移民以及在能源危机时关闭核能电厂，这些都不是好的政策。但是，通常情况下，你会期望有某种民主机制，可以让旧的管理层被替换掉，以便引入新的管理层来引导国家朝更好的方向发展。
But that doesn't always happen because old management has powerful political powers and it looks like the administration thinks that the reason that Europe can't change course is that these established powers are blocking the mechanisms preventing it from working. And that's kind of a big difference between Europe and the US in the US. We all know that we have a more dynamic economy, right?
但这并不总是发生，因为旧有的管理层拥有强大的政治势力，而且看起来政府认为欧洲无法改变路线的原因是这些既定势力在阻碍其运作机制。这就是欧洲和美国之间的一个重大差异。在美国，我们都知道我们的经济更加充满活力，不是吗？
For example, a company can easily fire all its workers and that dynamism is, you know, it's sad to lose your job, but it also allows businesses to, you know, quickly right size makes the company more competitive and allows workers to go and find skills that more, find jobs that more soothe and more, right? So it's, it's more of a competitive, more of a brutal landscape and competition. It has costs and minuses one of the pluses, of course, is competition breeds more economic growth, more, I guess productivity.
例如，一家公司可以轻松解雇所有员工，这种动态性，你知道，失去工作是令人难过的事情，但它也让企业能够迅速调整规模，使公司更具竞争力，并让员工去寻找更适合他们技能的工作。所以，这是一种更具竞争性、更残酷的环境竞争。它有成本和缺点，但其中一个优点是，竞争会带来更多的经济增长和更高的生产率。
So that's the same in the US political system as well. So for example, President Trump, he went and he challenged the Bush dynasty during the Republican primary, right? At that time, the Bush name was very, very powerful. You had George Bush, George H. W. Bush. There were two presidents from that family and you had Jeb Bush who wanted to be president of candidate in 2016 for the Republican party, former governor of Florida.
在美国的政治体系中也是如此。例如，特朗普总统曾在共和党初选中挑战布什家族。那个时候，“布什”这个名字非常有影响力。家族中先后有两位总统：乔治·布什和乔治·H·W·布什。此外，还有杰布·布什，他曾是佛罗里达州的州长，希望在2016年成为共和党的总统候选人。
And you know, this guy is a huge name, nice guy. And you know, just Trump, this guy from reality TV just kind of totally ate his lunch and it was honestly wasn't even close. And you had basically one set of elites in the Republican party, totally vanquished in that side, that part of the party believed in things like, you know, free trade and so forth. And now the Republican party doesn't believe in that at all.
你知道，这个人是个大名人，也很友好。但是，特朗普，这个从真人秀出来的人，就彻底抢了他的风头，而且说实话，胜负差距非常大。共和党中一部分精英就这样被完全击败了，这群人原本信仰诸如自由贸易之类的理念，但如今共和党已经完全不信这些了。
So you had a very fluid, very dynamic political system where one group of people was able to really take over the Republican party. And of course, take over the nation by defeating another very powerful political dynasty, the Clintons. And today America has a very different trajectory today than it did in the past. You have different people in power, much more influential tech sector. For example, you have, you know, Elon, you have Jensen Huang, all these people hanging out in the White House, a White House policy that's much more pro tech. And you have a White House that's, you know, has very different views on trade. So this is a very different views on energy as well, right? You don't have any more of this green stuff. You have a drill baby drill. We have a nuclear Renaissance.
你曾经拥有一个非常灵活、非常动态的政治体系，其中一个群体成功接管了共和党。当然，他们通过击败另一个非常强大的政治家族——克林顿家族，接管了整个国家。今天的美国与过去相比，走上了非常不同的轨迹。目前掌权的是不同的人，科技行业的影响力也大得多。例如，像埃隆·马斯克、黄仁勋这样的人频频出入白宫，白宫政策对科技的支持也大大增强。而且白宫在贸易方面有着非常不同的观点，对能源的看法也与以往不同。不再强调绿色环保，而是主张“钻井，继续钻井”，并迎来了核能复兴。
So the US political system is fluid. You have elites fighting it out and different sets of elites taking power and changing direction of the country. The downside of this is that there's a lot of policy volatility. You have, you know, tariff on tariff off. Maybe the next president, maybe president, I'll cut a Casio Ortez takes all the tariffs off. I don't know. But this makes it difficult for anyone to plan. And you know, it kind of makes things chaotic. But the good part of this is that if the nation is heading towards a wrong direction, it can change course. Right. So we were having tremendous, tremendous amounts of illegal immigration.
美国的政治体系是具有流动性的。精英们在其中争斗，不同的精英集团轮流上台并改变国家的方向。这样做的坏处是政策波动很大，比如关税政策时有变动。这可能导致下任总统，例如奥卡西奥-科尔特斯总统，可能会取消所有关税。不确定性使人们很难做出计划，也使情况显得混乱。不过，好的一面是，如果国家走上了错误的方向，它可以迅速改变路线。比如，我们曾面临大量的非法移民问题。
That's not happening anymore. And I think the public broadly is happy about that. So get cost of minds to this kind of political system in your land, because I guess the prior to high stability, they can't change course. But look at the economic data. It doesn't, does seem like they're heading to nowhere. Right. Low growth, higher social unrest and, you know, a war that doesn't seem to end. And so what is the administration proposing? Well, it's kind of spelling it out to you. They are quote unquote cultivating some resistance in Europe. What does that mean? What is cultivating resistance in Europe mean? That sounds like regime changed to me.
这已经不再发生了。我认为公众普遍对此感到满意。因此，考虑到你们国家这样的政治制度的局限性，我猜他们过去习惯于高程度的稳定，但现在无法改变方向。不过看看经济数据，这似乎并没有指向好的方向。经济增长缓慢、社会动荡增加，还有一场似乎没有尽头的战争。那么政府在提出什么建议呢？他们实际上向你传达的信息是，他们在"培养欧洲的抵抗势力"。这是什么意思呢？在我看来，这听起来像是政权更迭。
That sounds like, you know, color revolution stuff, which is something the United States has been doing for decades across the world, especially in Latin America. And so what the United States does very well, right. You know, you have this government that pops up in some kind of US spear influence. And, you know, suddenly, you know, we have all this propaganda campaign, bad things happen, or, you know, this guy just disappears. And so we have in place by US puppet. And so that's the US wants to do that to Europe. And I think that's truly revolutionary, because on the surface, you would say that US and Europe are our allies, maybe a few decades ago, you can even see them as equal partners.
这听起来就像是"颜色革命"的事，而这正是美国在世界各地，尤其是拉丁美洲，几十年来一直在做的事情。这是美国非常擅长的。比如，当某个国家突然在美国的势力范围内出现一个新的政府时，我们就会发现大量的宣传活动开始了，出现各种不好的事情，或者某个人物突然消失，然后美国便会扶持一个傀儡政权上台。而现在，美国想要对欧洲施行同样的策略。我觉得这才是真正的革命，因为从表面上看，美国和欧洲似乎是盟友，也许在几十年前，人们甚至可以认为他们是平等的合作伙伴。
But it's very clear today that's not the case. US is going in negotiating peace directly with Russia, totally ignoring Europe's telling them that you guys don't matter. And maybe they're telling them today that, you know, we think you are, we want to get rid of you. And so what is that? I mean, that's just kind of mind blowing and mine and really changing how it's like, and I actually think they'll go to succeed because a lot of the European current elite, they are losing popular support. And, you know, if you had maybe free elections, maybe they would lose today. And maybe if you have a huge pop again, a campaign from the CIA or something like that, maybe they would definitely lose more.
但今天很明显，情况并非如此。美国正在直接与俄罗斯商谈和平，完全无视欧洲，等于在告诉他们：“你们不重要。” 或许他们今天就是在对欧洲说：“我们想摆脱你们。” 这让人震惊不已，改变了现状。我甚至认为美国会成功，因为欧洲的许多现任精英正在失去民众的支持。如果进行自由选举，他们可能会失败。如果再加上来自CIA之类的机构发动一场大规模运动，他们可能会更惨败。
And well, what would replace them? Someone that thinks more like the US and what would that be? That be someone who doesn't like illegal immigration. Who was more business oriented, who would, you know, not so much in green energy, would probably want to emphasize nuclear power, less regulation, more industrialization. And of course, to be more collaborative with Russia, maybe we have Russian gas again and so forth. So maybe it's a good thing for your own land in the long run. And so I don't know how this is going to turn out. I do think that this is a serious turning point in the Atlantic relationship.
那么，谁会取代他们呢？一个更像美国思维的人会是什么样子？那可能是一个不喜欢非法移民的人，更注重商业发展，不那么关注绿色能源，而更强调核能，减少监管，推动工业化的人。当然，这个人也会更倾向与俄罗斯合作，或许我们会再次使用俄罗斯的天然气等等。所以，从长远来看，这对你们自己的国家可能是件好事。我不知道事情会如何发展，但我确实认为这是大西洋关系的一个重要转折点。
And really it's going to be so exciting to see how it turns out. Alright, so next week we have the Fed meeting. Everyone knows Fed is going to cut rates kind of signal that and let's see, I'll be back to talk about what my thoughts when that happens outside chance that we could have some maybe some signaling of when the Fed is going to restart reserve management purchases. Well, alright, I'll talk to you guys then.
真的，很期待看到事情的发展会如何。好的，下周我们将迎来美联储会议。大家都知道，美联储可能会发出降息的信号，让我们拭目以待。到时候我会回来和大家分享我的想法，还有一种不大可能但存在的可能性是，美联储可能会透露何时重启储备管理购买。好的，那我们下次再聊。