Why 5% Treasury Yields May Be Just the Beginning

于2026年9月17日发布的“特朗普通胀经济学”（Trumponomics）播客节目中，主持人斯蒂芬妮·弗兰德斯（Stephanie Flanders）（彭博社政府和经济事务主管）与嘉宾约翰·奥瑟斯（John Authors）（彭博观点专栏作家）和杰米·拉什（Jamie Rush）（彭博社全球经济总监）讨论了美国10年期国债收益率近期的飙升。讨论的焦点是5%是否会成为这一关键金融指标的新底部，以及它对全球经济的更广泛影响。 弗兰德斯强调，美国10年期国债收益率（代表联邦政府的借贷利率）周一首次突破5%，达到5.04%——这是自2007年以来的最高点。这标志着它比五年前的1.3%有了急剧上升，堪称“有生之年”前所未有的增长。她强调了该收益率的深远重要性，因为它在历史上几乎为美国所有私人贷款利率定下了基调，并严重影响全球的借贷成本，可以说使其成为“世界上最重要的单一价格”。 约翰·奥瑟斯解释说，尽管美联储控制着短期利率，但当前更高的债券收益率是由美联储难以影响的结构性力量推动的。他指出了上涨背后的几个因素：由于去全球化，“世界变得有点更昂贵”；巨额政府债务需要更高的利率来吸引贷方；以及为人工智能数据中心提供资金的大量借款。奥瑟斯指出，人工智能投资是“几十年来真正的新的资本投资”，消耗的美国GDP比例可能与为西欧提供的马歇尔计划或罗斯福新政相媲美。这些私营部门参与者，尽管信誉良好，正在创造巨大的资本需求，推高了贷款利率。他提出，如果当前的紧缩周期继续，10年期国债收益率可能在12个月内达到6%，这是整个里根总统任期内都未曾见过的水平，但仍然不是“世界末日”。然而，他警告说，许多建立在10年期国债收益率这一基石上的金融大厦，尚未在如此高的水平下接受考验，许多当前的市场参与者缺乏应对它们的个人经验。 杰米·拉什详细阐述了推高收益率的长期结构性力量。这些包括人口结构，随着婴儿潮一代为退休而积累的储蓄高峰现在正在劳动力市场中流动，改变了储蓄模式。生产力增长长期缓慢，现在正在加速，可能受人工智能的推动。这种技术正在创造巨大的资本需求，而且由于人工智能带来的潜在回报和生产力增长如此之大，这些投资对利率“非常不敏感”。再加上政府债务持续创新高，这些因素预示着收益率将持续走高。 奥瑟斯还对高收益率提出了“积极的解读”，认为它们表明“一切都在好转”。如果“资金价格需要上涨，以配给人们现在对其的所有不同用途”，并且名义GDP健康增长，这可以被视为一个积极的信号。他指出，由于量化宽松等干预措施，收益率多年来被人为压低，而它们目前的上涨代表着“不自然状态的消除”和回归更高效的资本主义。 讨论随后转向了控制收益率的尝试，特别是唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）及其财政部长斯科特·贝桑特（Scott Besant），他们都表达了降低收益率的愿望。杰米·拉什质疑对抗全球市场基本面的有效性，认为这很可能导致高成本的“金融抑制”。约翰·奥瑟斯将贝桑特的努力（包括增加一项债务回购计划）描述为“哗众取宠”，并“适得其反”，尽管他采取了行动，收益率仍然上涨。奥瑟斯表示，贝桑特的老板甚至建议交易员“看穿贝桑特先生的虚张声势”。 弗兰德斯提出了全球金融抑制的设想，质疑未来的特朗普政府是否可能利用外交压力迫使各国将外汇储备投资于美国国债。杰米·拉什承认这是一个“合理的威胁”，并指出潜在目标包括日本或主权养老基金。然而，他警告说，这可能导致资产重新配置的“旋转木马”，而不会显著影响美国的借贷成本，因为其他美元资产可能会被出售以资助国债购买。 关于潜在的“痛苦转型”，杰米·拉什主要提到了主权国家，因为从低利率转向高利率会大大增加偿债负担。他还提到了疫情后以低利率借款的公司。约翰·奥瑟斯强调美国房地产市场是“头号”担忧，指出它已大致停滞不前，并且疫情期间的低利率抵押贷款即将到期。尽管他不预见2007年那样的危机，但这仍然是一个经济问题。他总结说，尽管人工智能是解决其他问题的宏观经济因素，但如果高收益率扼杀了数据中心经济，那将产生深远影响。最终，小组成员一致认为，尽管世界上存在许多担忧，但5%甚至6%的美国10年期国债收益率本身并非其中之一，“除非你可能是唐纳德·特朗普”。

On a "Trumponomics" podcast episode published on 2026-09-17, host Stephanie Flanders, Head of Government and Economics at Bloomberg, discussed the recent surge in the US 10-year Treasury yield with guests John Authors, a Bloomberg Opinion columnist, and Jamie Rush, Bloomberg's Director of Global Economics. The conversation centered on whether 5% could become the new floor for this crucial financial indicator and the broader implications for the global economy. Flanders highlighted that the US 10-year Treasury yield, which represents the rate the federal government borrows at, had breached 5% for the first time in several years on Monday, reaching 5.04% on Tuesday – its highest since 2007. This marks a dramatic rise from 1.3% five years prior, an unprecedented increase in "living memory." She emphasized the yield's profound importance, as it historically sets the tone for virtually all private lending rates in the US and heavily influences borrowing costs worldwide, arguably making it "the single most important price in the world." John Authors explained that while the Federal Reserve controls short-term rates, the current higher bond yields are driven by structural forces that the Fed cannot easily influence. He identified several factors behind the rise: a world becoming "somewhat more expensive" due to de-globalization, the enormous quantum of government debt necessitating higher rates to attract lenders, and significant borrowing to fund AI data centers. Authors noted that AI investment is a "real new investment in new capital in some decades," potentially consuming a proportion of US GDP comparable to the Marshall Plan for Western Europe or FDR's New Deal. These private sector actors, despite strong credits, are creating substantial demand for capital, pushing up lending rates. He suggested that if the current tightening cycle continues, the 10-year yield could reach 6% within 12 months, a level not seen during the entire Reagan presidency, yet still not the "end of the world." However, he cautioned that much of the financial edifice, built on the keystone of the 10-year yield, has not been tested at such high levels, and many current market participants lack personal experience with them. Jamie Rush elaborated on the long-term structural forces pushing up yields. These include demographics, with the baby boomer generation's saving bulge for retirement now moving through the labor market, altering savings patterns. Productivity growth, slow for a long time, is now picking up, potentially accelerated by AI. This technology is creating a significant demand for capital, and because the potential returns and productivity gains from AI are so large, these investments are "very price insensitive" to interest rates. Coupled with government debt consistently hitting new highs, these factors point towards sustained higher yields. Authors also offered a "positive spin" on higher yields, suggesting they indicate "something is going right." If the "price of money needs to go up to ration all the different uses people now have for it," and nominal GDP is rising healthily, it can be seen as a positive sign. He noted that yields were artificially held low for years due to interventions like quantitative easing, and their current rise represents a "removal of an unnatural state of affairs" and a return to more efficient capitalism. The discussion then turned to attempts to control yields, specifically by Donald Trump and his Treasury Secretary, Scott Besant, who have expressed desires to lower them. Jamie Rush questioned the efficacy of fighting global market fundamentals, suggesting it would likely lead to "financial repression" with high costs. John Authors described Besant's efforts, including increasing a debt buyback program, as "histrionics" that "backfired," with yields rising despite his actions. Authors suggested that Besant's old boss had even recommended traders "call Mr. Besant's bluff." Flanders raised the idea of global financial repression, questioning if a future Trump administration might use diplomatic pressure to force countries to invest foreign exchange reserves in Treasuries. Jamie Rush acknowledged this as a "reasonable threat," noting potential targets like Japan or state pension funds. However, he warned it could lead to a "merry-go-round" of asset reshuffling without significantly impacting US borrowing costs, as other dollar assets might be sold to finance Treasury purchases. Regarding potential "painful transitions," Jamie Rush primarily pointed to sovereigns, as going from low to high rates dramatically increases debt servicing burdens. He also mentioned companies that borrowed at low rates post-pandemic. John Authors highlighted the US housing market as the "number one" concern, noting it has largely come to a standstill, and low-rate mortgages from the pandemic era will soon be expiring. While he doesn't foresee a 2007-style crisis, it remains an economic problem. He concluded that while AI is a macroeconomic factor bailing out other problems, if high yields choke off data center economics, it would be profoundly impactful. Ultimately, the panelists agreed that while there are many worries in the world, a 5% or even 6% US 10-year yield is not inherently one of them, "except possibly if you're Donald Trump."