Markets Weekly September 5, 2026
发布时间 来源
Episode 设置
本周的《市场周刊》播客于9月5日录制，讨论了两个主要话题：美联储政策的最新进展以及全球债券收益率的飙升。
关于美联储政策，发言人指出，上周主席沃尔什似乎在杰克逊霍尔会议上承诺了9月份的加息。然而，联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）中其他有影响力的声音，尤其是理事沃勒，表达了更为鸽派的观点。纽约联储主席约翰·威廉姆斯，被发言人描述为“被普遍认为是白痴”，在一次采访中表示通胀将在未来一到两年内达到2%。发言人将这一持续的预测归因于威廉姆斯是一位拥有博士学位的经济学家，他的模型是基于通胀目标制央行构建的，这使得他的预测总是指向2%的目标，尽管多年来都没有准确过。威廉姆斯不主张加息，但很可能会追随美联储主席的领导。
理事沃勒，被认为比沃尔什更有影响力，发表了被认为比他之前鹰派立场更为鸽派的言论。尽管他表示如果消费者物价指数（CPI）数据过热，他会支持9月加息，但沃勒强调了通胀趋势的改善，尤其是在核心通胀方面，并暗示由于关税影响的消退，可能出现一个“转折点”。他还提到了个人消费支出（PCE）计算方法即将发生的变化，其中“投资组合管理费”（随股市上涨而增加）将被移除，预计这将导致PCE下降0.2%。沃勒主张“给通胀下降一个机会”，建议等待一次会议。发言人认为沃勒关于“等待成本”的论点并不真诚，指出如果跳过9月，下一次加息很可能会推迟到12月，因为10月临近中期选举，这引发了对政治干预的担忧。
沃尔什发表演讲后，市场预期9月加息的可能性为60%，但在沃勒发表讲话后，这一可能性降至五五开。然而，本周公布的非农就业数据出人意料地强劲，显示新增就业超过15万，失业率为4.1%，将加息的可能性再次推高到略低于60%。尽管劳动力市场表现强劲，劳动参与率有所改善，但工资加速增长的迹象尚未显现。发言人指出，中东冲突推动的油价和能源价格上涨，对通胀，尤其是整体消费者物价指数（CPI），构成显著的上行风险，这可能进一步增强9月加息的理由。即将公布的消费者物价指数（CPI）数据被视为至关重要。
第二个主要话题是全球债券收益率的飙升，10年期收益率接近4.8%，30年期收益率也出现上涨。发言人强调，理解市场波动需要理解不同的看法和投资者限制，而非固定的公式。
讨论了几种关于收益率上升的流行解释：
1. **赤字失控：** 美国财政赤字达6%，全球政府赤字也在上升，这增加了主权债务供应和经济活动，从而推高了收益率。发言人反驳说，美国有简单的解决方案，例如提高税收，与G7其他国家相比，美国的税收相对较低。然而，其他国家财政空间较小。
2. **超大规模公司/科技挤出效应：** 大型科技公司正为人工智能建设大量借贷，可能将投资从国债中分流。发言人对此不以为然，认为投资者不受固定现金量的限制，可以利用杠杆，尤其是在国债流动性高且有回购市场的情况下。
3. **经济强劲增长：** 纽约联储主席威廉姆斯将收益率上升归因于美国经济强劲，特别是人工智能和科技投资，将其视为经济实力的体现而非逆风。发言人认为这很“愚蠢”，指出美国经济增长（1.5-2%）并非异常强劲，而且收益率上升的全球性特征意味着这不可能仅仅是美国的故事。
4. **期限溢价：** 央行政策和通胀未来走向的不确定性，导致投资者要求更高的补偿。考虑到全球经济模式和国内政治的变化，发言人认为这是一个“完全合理”的解释。
发言人认为全球债券收益率飙升“最能解释”的原因是**中东战争推动的能源价格上涨**。他观察到伊朗战争的爆发、油价上涨以及债券收益率提高之间存在直接关联。这种影响在欧洲等高度依赖中东能源的国家更为显著，尽管美国也受到了影响。发言人认为，如果冲突得到解决，债券收益率可能会大幅下降，使其他解释显得“微不足道”。他承认战争结束的时间不确定，并指出政治人物预计战争可能会持续到中期选举。然而，他暗示美国总统可能会“收买伊朗人”，以阻止民主党在中期选举中可能出现的“惨败”。
This week's Markets Weekly podcast, recorded on September 5th, discusses two primary topics: recent developments in Federal Reserve policy and the global surge in bond yields.
Regarding Fed policy, the speaker notes that last week, Chair Walsh seemed to promise a September hike at Jackson Hole. However, other influential voices on the FOMC, particularly Governor Waller, presented more dovish views. New York Fed President John Williams, described by the speaker as "widely regarded as an idiot," stated in an interview that inflation would reach 2% in one or two years. The speaker attributes this consistent forecast to Williams being a PhD economist whose models are built on inflation targeting central banks, making his predictions always lead to a 2% target, despite not being correct for years. Williams is not advocating for rate hikes but would likely follow the Fed chair's lead.
Governor Waller, seen as more influential than Walsh, delivered remarks perceived as much more dovish than his previous hawkish stance. While open to a September hike if CPI came in hot, Waller emphasized improving inflation trends, particularly in core inflation, and suggested a "turning point" due to fading tariff effects. He also highlighted an upcoming change in PCE calculation, where "portfolio management fees" (which rise with the stock market) will be removed, expecting a 0.2% decline in PCE. Waller advocated for "giving disinflation a chance," suggesting waiting one meeting. The speaker found Waller's "cost of waiting" argument disingenuous, pointing out that skipping September would likely push the next hike to December, due to the proximity of October to the midterms, raising concerns about political interference.
Following Walsh's speech, the market priced in a 60% chance of a September hike, which dropped to 50-50 after Waller's remarks. However, a surprisingly strong non-farm payrolls print this week, showing over 150,000 jobs created and an unemployment rate of 4.1%, pushed the odds back up to just under 60%. While the labor market showed strength and improved labor force participation, wage acceleration was not yet apparent. The speaker noted that rising oil and energy prices, fueled by Middle Eastern conflicts, pose significant upside risks to inflation, particularly headline CPI, which could further strengthen the argument for a September hike. The upcoming CPI print is seen as crucial.
The second major topic is the surge in global bond yields, with the 10-year yield approaching 4.8% and 30-year yields also rising. The speaker emphasizes that understanding market movements involves understanding different perceptions and investor constraints, rather than fixed equations.
Several popular explanations for rising yields are discussed:
1. **Runaway deficits:** The U.S. has a 6% fiscal deficit, and global government deficits are rising, increasing sovereign debt supply and economic activity, thus pushing yields higher. The speaker counters that the U.S. has easy solutions, such as raising taxes, which are relatively low compared to other Western countries. Other nations, however, have less fiscal space.
2. **Hyperscalers/tech crowding out:** Big tech companies are borrowing heavily for AI buildout, potentially diverting investment from Treasuries. The speaker dismisses this, arguing that investors are not constrained by fixed cash amounts and can leverage up, especially with highly liquid Treasuries and the repo market.
3. **Strong economic growth:** New York Fed President Williams attributed higher yields to a strong U.S. economy, particularly in AI and tech investments, viewing it as a reflection of economic strength rather than a headwind. The speaker finds this "silly," noting that U.S. growth (1.5-2%) isn't exceptionally strong, and the global nature of rising yields means it can't solely be a U.S. story.
4. **Term premium:** Uncertainty in the future path of central bank policy and inflation leads investors to demand higher compensation. The speaker finds this a "totally reasonable" explanation given changes in the global economic model and domestic politics.
The speaker's "most responsive" explanation for the surge in global bond yields is **energy prices driven by the Middle Eastern war**. He observes a direct correlation between the start of the Iran war, rising oil prices, and increasing bond yields. This impact is more pronounced in countries like Europe, which are highly dependent on Middle Eastern energy, though the U.S. is also affected. The speaker believes that if the conflict resolves, bond yields would likely fall significantly, rendering other explanations "trivial." He acknowledges uncertainty about the war's end, noting that political figures anticipate it potentially lasting through the midterms. However, he suggests the U.S. President might "buy the Iranians out" to prevent a potential Democratic "blowout" in the midterms.
摘要
#federalreserve #marketsanalysis
00:00 - Intro
00:36 - Doves strike back
09:38 - Bond Yield Stories
For macro courses:
www.centralbanking101.com
My best seller on monetary policy:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0999136771
GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......
中英文字稿 
你好，我的朋友们。今天是9月5号，欢迎收看市场周报。好，上周关于美联储政策的动态非常引人注目。今天，首先我们来谈谈鸽派如何采取立场，我们听到了来自纽约联储主席威廉姆斯和州长沃勒的观点，还有非常火热的非农就业数据。其次，我们来聊聊全球债券收益率的飙升，看起来已经达到了一个高潮，对这一现象有许多解释。我们来讨论其中的一些原因。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Hello, my friends. Today is September 5th, and this is Markets Weekly. All right, so last week was a pretty exciting week when it came to Fed policy. So today, first, let's talk about how the doves are taking a stand, as we've heard from New York Fed President Williams, as well as Governor Waller, and got very hot non-forms payroll sprint. And secondly, let's talk a little bit about the surge in global bond yields, because it seems like it's reaching a fever pitch, and there are many, many explanations for what's happening. Let's go over some of them.
好的，先从政策开始。上周我们讨论过，我觉得沃尔什主席在杰克逊霍尔演讲中几乎承诺了9月份会加息。但当然，他不是联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）里唯一有影响力的人，而且相比于其他美联储主席，沃尔什主席的影响力相对较弱。其他有影响力的声音当然包括前主席鲍威尔，以及过去几年对经济状况判断非常准确的沃勒董事，这让他成为FOMC中公认的重要声音。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
All right, starting with policy. So last week, as we discussed, it seemed to me that Chair Walsh all but promised a September hike at his Jackson Hole speech. But of course, he's not the only person on the FOMC, and as far as Fed chairs go, Chair Walsh is pretty weak. Other influential voices, of course, include former Chair Powell and, of course, Governor Waller, who, over the past few years, has been pretty accurate in his assessment of the economy and therefore perceived to be someone who is, you know, an influential voice on the FOMC.
现在，让我们回顾一下上周，首先，我们听到了纽约联邦储备银行行长约翰·威廉姆斯的讲话。值得注意的是，纽约联储行长的职位历来是美国联邦储备系统中最具影响力的角色之一。然而，需要指出的是，威廉姆斯本人被许多人认为不太靠谱，因此我们对他的影响力不能抱太高的期望。在接受CNBC采访时，他基本上表示，他认为通货膨胀正在下降，并将在一到两年内降到大约2%。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, last week, first, we heard from New York Fed President John Williams. Now, the position of New York Fed President is historically one of the most influential roles in the Federal Reserve system. But I'll note that Williams, in particular, is widely regarded as an idiot. So we have to temper down our expectations of his influence. Now, in his interview with CNBC, he basically sat down and he said that, you know, he thinks that inflation is coming down and it will get to around 2% in one or two years.
这当然是温和的态度，因为他没有主张加息，不过如果数据发生变化，他的观点也可能会改变。我还要指出的是，威廉姆斯几乎每年都说同样的话。他每年都会告诉大家，通货膨胀将在一到两年内回到2%。这是因为威廉姆斯是一位经济学博士。在经济学课程中教的模型显示，如果你有一个以通胀为目标的中央银行，那么最终，通胀会回到央行的目标。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, this is, of course, dovish because he's not advocating for rate hikes, although, of course, he would change his view should the data change. Now, I'll also note, though, that Williams basically says the exact same thing every year. Every year, he goes and he tells people that, you know, inflation is just one or two years away from going back to 2%. This is because Williams is a PhD economist. And in the models that they teach you in economist school is that, if you have an inflation targeting central bank, then B, eventually inflation goes to the central bank's target.
翻译如下：
由于他的模型设计本身，总是把通胀率预期定为2%。因此，他总是说同样的话，尽管这在过去很多年中并不准确。但无论如何，现在看起来他并不支持加息，尽管我猜他可能会支持美联储主席的决定。不过，人们真正关心的当然是沃勒州长的言论。在联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC），他被认为比沃尔什更有影响力。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So by construction, his models always have inflation going to 2%. So he always says the same thing, even though, of course, that has not been correct for many years. But in any case, it seems like, again, not advocating for rate hikes, although I suspect that he's someone who would just go along with whatever the Fed chair decides. Now, what people really were cared about, though, was, of course, what Governor Waller would say. He is someone who is actually, I think, perceived to be more influential than Walsh on the FOMC.
现在，我们上次听到沃勒的看法时，他显得相当鹰派，认为如果消费价格指数（CPI）数据过高，他基本上会加息。然而，他最近的言论被认为比预期更为鸽派。当然，他明确告诉大家，如果下周的CPI数据很高，他会考虑在九月加息。然而，他也提到，通胀情况在改善，他感觉我们正处于一个转折点。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, the last time we heard from Waller, he seemed pretty hawkish that he would basically hike if we had a hot CPI print. Now, his remarks were perceived to be much more dovish than expected. Of course, he explicitly told everyone that if CPI came in hot next week, he would be open to hiking in September. However, he also said things to the extent that, you know, inflation has been improving, and he felt that we are kind of at a turning point.
现在，他认为通货膨胀在一定程度上是由关税推动的，而这种影响正在减弱。他觉得，如果关注核心而不是整体数据，我们可能正处在一个转折点。当然，整体数据包括能源价格，而能源价格一直在上涨，所以他似乎在忽略这一点。他还提出了一个非常有趣的观察，即政府将在接下来的几周内改变PCE的计算方式。PCE是美联储的目标指标。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, he thought that inflation, in part, has been driven by tariffs, and that effect is fading. And focusing on core rather than headline, he felt that we are at a probably a turning point. Now, headline, of course, includes energy prices. Energy prices have been going higher. So, he seems to be discounting that. He also made a very interesting observation in that the government is going to change how it calculates PCE over the coming weeks. PCE is the Fed's target.
在个人消费支出（PCE）中，有一个叫做投资组合管理费的部分，这个费用通常会随着股市的上涨而增加。因此，PCE通胀率升高的部分原因是股票市场的不断上涨。当然，我们其实不认为这个因素应该被纳入通胀的衡量标准中，因此他们打算改变计算方法。在这个改变之后，PCE预计将下降约0.2%，所以这也是他认为通胀即将下降的另一个原因。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, in PCE, there's a component there called portfolio management fees, which basically goes up when the stock market goes up. So, part of the reason that PCE inflation has been elevated is because the stock market has gone up and up and up. Now, of course, we don't really think of that as something we want to measure in inflation, so they're going to change how they calculate it. Now, after this change, PCE is expected to decline by about 0.2%, so another reason why inflation is, according to him, about to come down.
用他的话来说，他希望给通货紧缩一个机会。让我们来听听他的说法。是的，我的意思就是这样。我们都期待这个地区会降低这一点。所以，如果再加上数据中的实际情况，你可能会看到个人消费支出（PCE）有明显下降。当然了，如果下降到两个百分点，从3.3降到3.1。那么，如果有一些不错的数据，年化率会降到3以下，每月下降到接近3，甚至更低。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
In his words, he wants to give disinflation a chance. Let's listen to what he says. Yeah, that's what I mean. We're all anticipating that the region is going to drop this down. So, if that plus what's actually happening in the data, you might see a significant drop in PCE, of course. So, if it's two-tenths, it's 3.3, it'll drop to like 3.1. Then, if you get some decent data, this thing goes under 3 on an annual basis and down around 3 a month, even lower.
好的，我的意思是，我愿意冒这个风险，因为，我要引用一下约翰·列侬的话，让通缩有个机会。我们可以等一次会议，我看不出我们为什么非得现在行动。如果我们确实处在一个转折点，通缩开始像我们长期预测的那样发生，或者至少我是这样认为的，那你就在通缩时期加息，这样做就是依赖过去而行动过晚或过早。这就是我说的，等一次会议有什么损失？在这次会议上加息25个基点并不会让消费者价格指数（CPI）降到2%。所以，我认为这就是风险管理，你想看看通缩是否会继续。但我没有冒很大的风险。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Right. So, that's what I mean. I'm willing to take the chance to see, you know, I'm going to paraphrase John Lennon here. Give disinflation a chance. Okay. And we can wait one meeting. I just don't see why we have to do it. The mistake you run is if, in fact, we're at a turning point and disinflation is starting to happen like we've long thought it was going to, or I certainly long thought it would, you're raising rates into disinflation. You're late at the, I mean, you're just, or you're too far ahead of, you're depending too much on the past. So, that's why I'm saying, look, what's the cost of waiting one meeting? Hiking 25 basis points, one meeting right now is not going to bring the CPI down to 2%. Sure. So, let's just, I think this is risk management. You want to take a chance to see if disinflation continues. But I'm not taking a big chance on it.
所以，瓦勒再次表达了他认为情况正在好转，他希望暂时观望。当然，观望的代价是什么呢？我觉得这有点不太真诚，因为很多人认为美联储不可能在中期选举前加息。但我认为九月加息其实是可以的。你仍然有大约六周的时间，从九月的加息到中期选举，这段时间市场可以消化。但是如果他们现在不加息而选择十月加息，那就离中期选举只有几天，这样太接近中期选举了，容易被认为是政治干预。所以，我不认为可以仅仅等待一个会议然后加息。如果错过了九月，我认为下次加息可能要等到十二月。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, again, Waller is basically saying that he feels that things are turning around and he wants to just kind of wait. What's the cost of waiting, of course? Now, I actually perceive that to be a little bit disingenuous because many people think that the Fed can't hike right in front of the midterm. I actually think that September is still okay. You still have, say, six weeks between a September hike, a theoretical September hike, and the midterm. So, there's plenty of time for the market to digest. But if they were to not hike now and to hike in October, now, that would be literally a few days before the midterm. And that, I think, is just too close to the midterms, too much of a perception of political interference. So, I don't actually think you can just, you know, maybe wait a meeting and hike. If you skipped September, I think you would have to be thinking of December as the next time that you could hike.
所以，不管怎样，这在市场上被认为是偏鸽派的。当时，在沃尔什的讲话后，市场预计9月加息的可能性为60%。在沃勒的演讲后，这个概率又回落到大约一半一半。沃尔什和沃勒都淡化了就业的重要性，他们认为我们基本上已经达到了充分就业目标，真正关心的是通货膨胀。所以，所有人都关注下周的CPI。然而，本周的非农就业数据意外强劲。如果数据疲软或者温和，市场可能会忽略它。但数据显示新增的职位数比预期高得多，超过了150,000个。观察数据的深层次内容，可以看到失业率依然很低，保持在4.1%，还有劳动力参与率的某些提升。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, anyway, perceived to be dovish by the market. So, at that point, after Walsh's speech, market was pressing in a 60% chance of a hike in September. After the Waller speech, it was back down to about 50-50. Now, both Walsh and Waller downplayed the importance of employment. They were talking about employment. Yeah, we're basically meeting our full employment mandate. We're really just concerned about inflation. So, all the focus was on next week's CPI. However, this week's non-farm sparrows print was surprisingly strong. Now, if it were weak, if it were lukewarm, I think the market would just ignore it. But the print was much higher than expected, showing over 150,000 jobs created. Now, if you look at the underlying aspects of the print, you can notice that the unemployment rate remains really low, 4.1%. And you even have some improvement in the labor force participation rate.
你看不到的是工资增长加速。如果劳动力市场升温，你会预期工资会加速增长，但我们尚未真正看到这种情况。现在，这可能是有所滞后的。如果你退一步看失业率的时间序列，很明显它在逐渐下降。因此，在未来几周，劳动力市场可能真的在升温，工资增长将会更强劲。但到了那时，美联储可能会更加关注劳动力市场可能过热的问题，这将使他们更难控制通胀。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
What you don't see, though, is an acceleration in wages. If you had a heating up labor market, you would expect wages to accelerate. But we don't really see that yet. Now, it could be lagging. Now, if you take a step back and you look at the time series for the unemployment rate, it's unmistakable that it's gradually trended lower. So, it is possible that in the coming weeks that maybe the labor market really is hitting up and will have stronger wage growth. At that point, though, you could actually have the Fed care more about the labor market potentially overheating and making it harder and harder for them to get inflation under control.
现在，由于就业数据的激增，市场预期9月份加息的可能性再次增加至接近60%。基本上，在沃尔什发表言论后，9月份加息的预期上升到60%；而沃勒的讲话使这一预期下降到大约50%；但在非农就业数据激增后，又回升至约60%。因此，下周的CPI数据发布可能会对市场产生重大影响。我还需要指出，石油和能源价格由于中东局势持续上涨。因此，如果美联储是前瞻性考虑，而不是完全忽视能源价格的话，那么通胀面临上行风险，尤其在考虑柴油等精炼产品时，因为柴油在美国已达到历史新高。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, the beat in the payroll sprint was so large that, of course, the market price, again, increased the odds of a September hike to, you know, a little bit below 60%. So, basically, after Walsh, 60% September hike, after Waller, down to about 50% after non-formance payroll sprint, up to around 60% again. So, it seems like a lot will be riding on what happens in next week's CPI print. Now, I will also note, though, that it seems like oil and energy prices continue to move higher and higher due to what's happening in the Middle East. And so, if you're the Fed and you actually are forward-looking and just not completely discounting energy prices, I think there are serious upside risks to inflation, especially if you, say, focusing on refined products like diesel, which hit an all-time high in the U.S.
因此，如果在我们录音的时候，中东地区似乎又爆发了新的军事冲突。那么，我认为，如果劳动力市场持续表现良好，并且由于能源价格的关系，通胀率至少在表面上会上升，我认为这确实增强了在9月份加息的理由。所以，我猜测在我们看到消费者价格指数（CPI）公布后，市场会对此有更明确的方向。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, if, and as we're recording, it seems like we have additional military conflict in the Middle East. So, I think it's, if you have a labor market that continues to, I think, surprise to the upside, and inflation that, due to energy prices, at least on headline basis, will trend higher. I think that really strengthens the argument for a September hike. So, I guess we'll, I guess the market will have more resolution on that after we get the CPI print.
好的。那么，我要谈的第二件事是全球债券收益率的上涨。我们当然会关注10年期收益率，它接近4.8%。30年期债券的收益率似乎也在不断上涨。但我认为了解这是一个全球性现象也很重要。现在，这件事情是真的，我觉得它逐渐变得更加狂热，因为我在各种媒体，包括那些面向大众的媒体上都听到关于它的讨论。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
All right. So, the second thing I want to talk about is the surge in global bond yields. So, we focus, of course, on the 10-year yield, approaching 4.8%. The 30-year bond yields seem to go up and up and up. But I think it's important to also know that this is a global phenomenon. Now, this is something that has, honestly, I think it's becoming more of a frenzy because I hear it talked about in all sorts of media outlets, even those for the broader public.
现在，有很多人们讲述的故事。当然，基本原则是，人们买卖的原因各不相同。因此，要理解市场变动，就必须理解不同的人的行为，他们互相讲述的故事，以及他们如何看待市场。市场变化不是某种方程式，也不是物理定律，没有自然法则在推动价格。市场总是关于人们的认知，以及投资者所面临的限制。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, there are many stories people tell. Now, of course, first principles, people buy and sell for different reasons. So, it's understanding market movements is always understanding how different people are, the stories that they tell each other, how they perceive the market, right? It's not some kind of equation. It's not physics. There are no natural laws that move prices. It's always about perception and, of course, constraints that investors have.
所以，让我们来谈谈一个热门话题。这个热门话题当然就是不断扩大的赤字。现在毫不意外，美国正面临一个非常大的财政赤字，大约是6%，而且看起来这种情况会持续下去。这就是为什么收益率不断上升的原因。当然，需要注意的是，这是一种全球趋势，也就是说世界各国的政府赤字都在不断增加。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, let's talk about a popular story. Popular story, of course, is, of course, runaway deficits. Now, no surprise, the U.S. is having a very large fiscal deficit, about 6%, and it looks like it's going to go on and on and on. And so, that is a story why yields keep going higher. Now, of course, notice that this is a global movement, and so you can also make the argument that government deficits throughout the world are rising, rising.
因此，国债收益率上升是有道理的。我认为这样是合理的。一方面是财政赤字增加，另一方面是国家债务的供应增加。这显然会促进经济活动，也会加大需求，所以应该推动收益率上升。至于关于“美国正面临重大的财政危机”这样的说法，我并不赞同。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And so, it makes sense for bond yields to rise. And I think that that does make sense. Higher deficits, on the one hand, higher supply of sovereign debt. On the other hand, obviously, it increases economic activity, increases demand. So, it should push yields higher. Now, one thing I will push back against is any claims of, you know, this is a huge fiscal crisis in the United States, so forth.
现在，特别是在美国，其实有非常简单的解决方案，你知道，就是提高税收，对吧？不需要费尽心思去研究那些名义GDP收益之类的复杂事情。政府是依靠税收来偿还债务的，同时也可以调整税率。美国的特别之处在于，与其他西方国家相比，美国的税收相对较低。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, in the U.S. in particular, there are actually super easy solutions to this, and that is, you know, you just raise taxes, right? There's no need to go do some galaxy brain thing about nominal GDP yields and so forth like that. The government pays its debt based on tax revenues, and it also can adjust the tax rate. What's special about the U.S. is that compared to other Western countries, taxes in the U.S. are pretty low.
在联邦层面，比如说，最高的联邦税率是37%，这个税率只有在你收入达到65万美元时才会生效。另外，你还需要缴纳州税。在佛罗里达州、内华达州和德克萨斯州，这些地方没有州所得税，所以你最多只需缴纳37%的税。而在加利福尼亚等高税收地区，可能还需要额外缴纳大约10%的税，具体多少取决于你的收入水平。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
On the federal level, for example, the top federal tax bracket is 37%, and it only hits when you make, say, $650,000 U.S. Now, you also have to pay state taxes. In Florida, Nevada, Texas, there's no state income tax, so the highest you'll ever pay is 37%. In some high-tax jurisdictions like California, you probably have to pay, you know, about 10% on top of that, depending on where your income is.
所以，再次说明，这个情况是会有所不同的，但如果与加拿大、英国或西欧相比，您会发现，在这些国家，如果您赚取10万或15万美元，就基本上进入了最高边际税率，几乎要支付接近一半的收入。因此，我真的认为他们的财政空间很有限，税率已经很高，无法再加税了。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, again, it does vary, but compared to, say, Canada or the U.K. or Western Europe, you know, in those countries, if you make $100,000, $150,000 U.S. dollars, you're basically at the highest marginal tax rate, and you're basically, say, have to pay close to half your income. So, for them, I really do think that they have limited fiscal space. You really just can't raise taxes anymore because your tax rates are already so high.
但如果美国只是部分提高所得税，他们可以轻松、轻松地增加大量收入。因此，从可以轻松提高税收的角度来看，美国的财政状况其实相当不错。而且如果你观察政治局势，很明显，在民主党执政的地区，趋势是对富人加税。最终，摆动的钟摆将会让民主党重新掌权。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
But if the U.S. were to just partially raise income taxes, they could easily, easily raise a ton of revenue. And so the U.S. has, honestly, a pretty good fiscal situation in the sense that you can easily raise taxes. And if you look at the politics, it's very clear that in Democrat-run jurisdictions, the trend is to raise taxes to tax the rich. And eventually, eventually, the pendulum will swim until the Democrats will be back in power.
我觉得这件事挺容易解决的，所以我也不太担心。我认为在美国，这算不上是什么很严重的问题。然而在一些其他国家，税收增加的空间有限，这就比较麻烦了，比如法国。即便只是稍微提高退休年龄，也会引发大规模抗议。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And so that's something that I think will be pretty easily solved. So I'm not really worried about that as well. I think that's honestly kind of a silly reason in the U.S. Now, for those other countries where you don't really have as much room to raise taxes, if at all, I think it's more of a problem, especially, say, in France. Even just by shifting the retirement age a little bit higher, you get outright protests.
我认为在这些国家，这可能是一个更大的挑战。当然，还有一些人提到，超大规模公司或科技公司占据了市场。过去几个月发生的情况是，大型科技公司一直在尝试建设数据中心，他们已经耗尽了所有可自由支配的现金流，现在正在市场上借钱，以获得额外的资金来支持他们的AI建设。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think in those countries, it's probably more of a challenge. Some other stories people tell, of course, is hyperscalers or tech firms crowding out the market. So what's been happening over the past few months is that as big tech companies have been trying to build data centers, they've spent all their free cash flow and now are out borrowing in the markets to try to get some extra cash to finance their AI buildout.
当然，供需关系始终很重要。但实际上我不太相信这个问题有那么深远的影响。的确，他们在增加债务的发行，但我认为，要挤压国债市场并不容易，因为国债尤其容易获得融资。现在有一种思维模式，就是假设一个投资者拥有X金额，比如十亿美元。当他们在分配更多资金给，比如说，大规模云计算服务商的债务时，可能会剩下更少的资金来购买国债。因此，国债收益率不得不提高。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, of course, supply and demand always matter. But I'm actually not persuaded that this is actually that meaningful. For sure, they're increasing their issuance in debt, but I think it's quite difficult to crowd out treasuries because treasuries in particular, you can easily get financing against it. Now, there's a mental model out there where an investor has, say, X amount of dollars, a billion dollars. And as they're allocating more to, let's say, hyperscaler debt, maybe they have less leftover to buy treasuries. And so treasury yields have to go higher.
现在，这是一种不正确的思维模式，因为你实际上并没有一个固定金额的现金可以投资，因为你实际上可以获得融资。你可以利用杠杆，比如银行可以借钱给你。这尤其适用于国债，因为用国债进行融资是非常容易的。你有回购市场，这个市场的规模以万亿美元计，流动性非常强。所以，如果你想购买国债，你实际上并不会受到你拥有现金数量的限制。你可以轻松借钱并利用杠杆。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, that is an incorrect mental model because you don't actually have a fixed amount of cash to invest because you can actually get financing. You can lever up so banks can lend you, for example. And this is especially true for treasuries where it's very, very easy to get financing against treasuries. You have the repo market. It's, you know, trillions of dollars in overnight size, super liquid. So if you wanted to buy a treasury, you're never really constrained by the amount of cash you have. You can easily borrow and lever up.
所以我认为国债特别不会因为这些私营部门的发行而被挤出市场。并不是说这不重要，它确实有影响，但我不把它列为一个非常重要的因素。还有一个可能性是，由于经济强劲增长，收益率才保持在高位。纽约联储主席约翰·威廉姆斯曾提到过这一点。不过，我认为今天早上和过去几天的大新闻是债券收益率的上升。这是否会对经济造成阻力？但对于任何涉及金融价格或金融市场变化的情况，你都需要考虑其背后的驱动因素。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So treasuries in particular, I think it's very, very unlikely to be crowded out by these private sector issuance. Not to say that it doesn't matter. It does. But I don't rank it as a very high factor. One other thing, one other possibility, of course, is that yields are high because of strong economic growth. We heard that from New York Fed President John Williams. But the big story, I think, this morning and as of the past couple of days has been the rise in bond yields. Does that create a headwind for the economy? Well, with anything with financial prices or financial market developments, you have to think about what's driving it.
我认为这主要由更高的收益率推动，其背后是美国经济的强劲表现，以及由人工智能、数据中心和整体技术的大规模投资所带来的良好经济前景。因此，我认为这更多地反映了经济的实力。我们没有在通胀补偿方面看到这种情况，而主要是在实际利率中体现。所以我觉得这主要是因为经济强劲，你会预期为这些投资融资的成本会上升。因此，我主要是从这个角度来看待这个问题的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I think what's driving it in large part is higher yields is really a strong U.S. economy and a strong economic outlook fueled by big investments in AI and data centers and technology in general. So I see this as more of a reflection of the strength of the economy. We're not seeing it in terms of inflation compensation. We're seeing it mostly in real rates. So I think much of this is really about with a strong economy, you expect the cost of funding this investment tends to go up. And so I see that mostly through that light.
所以，我认为这其实不是金融环境影响经济的问题，而是经济影响金融环境。现在，我觉得这种解释实际上有些荒谬，因为首先，经济增长并不强劲。最近的数据是1.5%，在此之前是大约2%。这只是正常水平，没有什么特别强劲的。而且，要注意全球的收益率都在上升，因此这不仅仅是关于美国增长的故事，而是一个全球性的情况。所以，我认为这种解释不成立。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think it's not really about financial conditions affecting the economy. It's more about the economy affecting financial conditions. Now, I think this is actually a pretty silly explanation because, again, first off, economic growth is not that strong. So most recently, it's at 1.5%. Before that, it was about 2%. Now, that's just normal. It's nothing particularly strong about that. And, of course, note that yields are going up globally. And so it just can't be a story about the U.S. growth. It has to be a global story. So I think that is just not true.
另一个常见的说法当然是期限溢价。期限溢价基本上指的是对中央银行政策预期路径的不确定程度。如果我们处于一个中央银行行为不稳定的世界中，或者你不确定未来的通货膨胀会怎样，那么对于利率走向的不确定性就会增加。因此，你希望得到相应的补偿，这就是人们所说的期限溢价。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Another common story is, of course, term premium. So term premium is basically the degree of uncertainty in the expected path of central bank policy. So if we're in a world where, you know, the central bank is behaving in an erratic way, or, for example, you're not really sure what inflation will be in the future, you will have more uncertainty in what the path of interest rates will be. And so you want to be compensated by that. And that's what people call term premium.
我觉得这样看待问题完全是有道理的。我们不光是在全球经济模式上经历着重大变化，国内政治也同样如此。因此，我认为投资者在预测未来利率走向时，要求稍高的期限溢价是合理的。不过，我认为最值得注意的是，当我看这张全球债券收益率突然飙升的图表时，发现这一变化实际上是由能源价格推动的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I think that's actually a totally reasonable way of looking at it as well. We do have big changes in not just the global economic model, but also domestic politics as well. So I do think it makes sense for investors to demand a little bit more term premium when they're trying to price in the future trajectory of interest rates. Now, what I find most responsive, though, is when I look at this chart of the sudden surge in global bond yields is that this is really driven by energy prices.
好的。所以请注意，伊朗战争一开始，油价就开始飙升，债券收益率也在上升。如果你像我一样整天盯着市场看，你就会发现，当我们在市场上时，收益率会上升。就是这么简单。而当我们不在市场时，收益率就会下降。因此，收益率对中东的事态发展非常敏感，因为这会影响油价，而油价又会影响通货膨胀。这对其他国家的影响比对美国的影响要大得多。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Right. So notice that the moment that the Iran war began, oil prices began to shoot higher and bond yields have been going higher as well. And if you spend your day staring at the market, as I do, you'll notice that when, you know, we're on yields up. Right. It's really that easy. We're off. Yields go down. So the yields are very sensitive to what's happening in the Middle East because of that term is oil prices, which in turn impacts inflation, much more so for other countries than the United States.
现在，让我们以欧洲为例进行思考。在欧洲，他们依赖很多天然气。而其中一部分是通过中东进口的。在美国，我们对此的依赖要小得多。因此，其他国家对能源非常敏感。美国也是如此，但显然不像其他国家那么依赖。所以，我认为全球债券收益率飙升的最大推动力当然是中东战争。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Now, think about, for example, in Europe. Now, in Europe, they depend a lot on natural gas. And part of that is imported through the Middle East. In the U.S., we're a lot less dependent upon that. So other countries are extremely sensitive to energy. The U.S. as well, but, of course, not as much. And so I think the biggest driver in the surge in global bond yields, of course, has been the Middle Eastern war.
我想，我们可以通过观察一个问题是否最终得到解决来判断这个理论是否正确。我预计债券收益率将下降，而且下降幅度会相当大。所以，对于那些谈论财政危机或巨额债务的人来说，我认为，他们将发现这些事实上只是最近收益率上升中的一个微不足道的部分。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I guess the way that we'll figure out if that theory is right is if we eventually have a resolution to that, I would expect bond yields. It's going to come down and come down quite a lot. And so all these people who are talking about, you know, fiscal crises or like hyperscaler debt, I think that's going to be shown to be quite a trivial part of the recent rise in yields.
伊朗战争什么时候会结束？其实我也不知道。而且似乎在政治圈子里，很多人开始认为这场战争可能会持续到中期选举。不过，我对此还是稍微乐观一些。现在看各项民调，民主党在中期选举中大获全胜、横扫众议院并拿下参议院的可能性似乎正在增加。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So when is the Iran war going to end? I actually have no idea. And it seems like a lot of people in the political sphere are beginning to think that, you know, maybe this might go on even through midterms. Now, I'm actually a bit more positive to that. Now, looking at the polls, it really does seem like there is a growing chance that there could be a total blowout in the midterms where the Democrat just sweeps both the House and takes the Senate.
所以我认为这对总统来说将是一个非常危险的结果。因此，我想他可能不希望这种情况发生，可能需要采取一些措施，比如向伊朗方面提供经济补偿，以确保这一问题得到解决。目前看来，这种情况尚未发生，问题仍在不断升级。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think that would be a very dangerous outcome for the president. And so I'm thinking that he probably doesn't want that to happen and will probably have to do something, maybe just basically buy the Iranians out to to make sure that this problem goes away. At the moment, it seems like that's not happening, though. Things are still escalating.
让我们看看会发生什么吧。我认为，如果总统想要在中期选举中获胜，他需要迅速采取行动，因为情况对他来说不太乐观。好的，这就是我今天准备的全部内容。非常感谢大家的收听，下次再聊。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So let's see what happens. I think the president would really need to act fast if he wants to save the midterms because things are just not looking good for him. All right. So that's all I prepared for today. Thanks so much for tuning in. Talk to you guys.