Markets Weekly June 21, 2025
发布时间 2025-06-21 11:57:06 来源
No, you're our stop. Sorry. Little campfire. Yeah, alright. Good. Good. Good go. Go. Alright, everybody. Welcome back to another round of Edition of Ford Guidance. And we are recording live from Washington, D.C. We're out here at the monetary and Two conference put on by reserve. Super excited to be here. It's myself, Quint Thompson. And we pulled in Joseph Wang, Fed Guy, to join us this week. So super excited to have you guys here, chat in here in Washington, D.C. What's going on guys? How much excited to be here. Good weather. A lot of. Absolutely. Great to meet you again. Quint and Felix. It's great to be here. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Quick show of hands. Who's listening to the Ford Guidance podcast before? Nice. Good for today. Awesome. Cool to see that. For everyone listening, there's thousands of hands raised. Yeah, thousands and thousands. You just hear the roars and claps. That was the most beautiful, the biggest crowd. Yes, huge.
不，不好意思，你就是我们的目的地。小型篝火会。好的，好的，很好。大家好，欢迎回到另一轮的《Ford Guidance》。我们正在华盛顿特区现场录制。这次我们参加的是由储备银行主办的"货币与二"会议，非常激动能来到这里。我是Quint Thompson，我们这周还邀请了"Fed Guy" Joseph Wang加入我们。非常高兴你们也在这里，一起在华盛顿特区聊天。大家怎么样？非常兴奋能来这里，天气不错。真高兴再次见到你们，Quint和Felix。真不错。大家举手表示一下，谁听过《Ford Guidance》播客？太好了，今天真不错。看到这么多人真棒。大家听着，好几千只手都举起来了。是的，数以千计。你能听到欢呼和掌声。那是最多人、最大的观众，真是太棒了。
Okay, so I want to start by talking about the FOMC meeting that just happened yesterday and get the high level takeaways there. Someone interesting one, but also not interesting at the same time. But just going to go through a few data points here. I'm going to pull up my phone just because it was a dot plot, summary of economic projections, updated meetings. So there's a lot of data to get into and start to understand. So just looking at the dots here, in terms of their GDP projection, they actually down ticked their projection for the March meeting for 2025 from 1.7 to 1.4%. So expecting lower growth for the unemployment rate for the March projection was 4.4, looking at 4.5% by the end of the year. And PCE inflation in increase again from 2.7 to 3, which comes off the back of another previous increase from the previous March meeting for the December one further.
好的，我想先谈谈昨天刚刚结束的FOMC会议，并且总结一下主要结论。这次会议有趣但也有点平淡。我会提到一些数据点，我需要看一下手机上的信息，因为有点阵图、经济预测总结和更新的会议记录等很多数据需要理解。
首先，从点阵图来看，他们对GDP的预测有所下降，2025年3月会议的预测值从1.7%下调至1.4%，这意味着他们预计经济增长将放缓。至于失业率的预测，今年三月的预测是4.4%，而年底则预计为4.5%。核心个人消费支出（PCE）通胀率再次上调，从2.7%上升到3%，这基于上次三月会议对十二月数据的再次上调。
So this is an interesting situation. We're seeing growth being down ticked in their forecast. We're seeing inflation taking up higher. But at the same time, we actually didn't see any changes on their projections for Fed funds rate cutting. So most of the policy members basically as you added them all together when you look at the dot plots, we saw that the majority still ticked in for two cuts coming this year. What was interesting, however, is that yes, 10 of them had a two cuts by the end of the year. But there was an increase of FOMC members from 4 to 7 that were projecting no cuts by the end of this year. So lots to get into. Obviously, I'd even mentioned the fact that they didn't cut rates, which shouldn't have been a surprise to anybody. But that's not what we've marked. So what really moves it is obviously these dot plots and the press conference that came forth.
这真是一个有趣的情况。我们看到他们的预测中，经济增长被下调，同时通货膨胀却在上升。但与此同时，我们实际上没有看到他们对美联储利率下调的预测有任何变化。当你查看点阵图时，多数政策制定者还是倾向于今年会有两次降息。但有意思的是，虽然其中10位成员预测今年年底前会有两次降息，但预测今年年底前不降息的联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）成员数从4位增加到了7位。显然，我们要讨论的内容很多。我甚至都没提到他们没有降息的事实，因为这对任何人来说都不应该是个意外。但真正引起市场关注的是这些点阵图和随后的新闻发布会。
So what a pass it to you, Joseph, and just based on all that data, what was your read, what was your takeaways? Well, first off, I think, like you mentioned Felix, and that was a really good summary. What was most interesting to me was the dot plot forecast. It seems like the Fed is a bit more downbeat on the revising down growth, but also it seemed a little bit stagnationary, right? You're revising up inflation and you're rising unemployment. All in all, that seems like not good. Now, the Fed has always been saying for the past few months that they are basically just going to be late. So they're not cutting this time, and they kept their forecast from the last time. So what Paul has been telling us is that there's so many things happening in the economy. We have changes in policy from changes in immigration policy, fiscal policy. Of course, we have changes in regulatory policy and policy as well. And he doesn't know what's going to happen, and so he's just going to wait to see what the data says.
好的，我把它翻译成中文，尽量做到通俗易懂：
那么，我把它交给你了，Joseph。根据所有这些数据，你有什么看法和收获呢？首先，我觉得就像你提到的Felix所说的，这是一个很好的总结。对我来说，最感兴趣的是点阵图预测。看起来美联储对经济增长的预期稍微悲观了一些，同时似乎有点滞胀的感觉，对吧？他们调高了对通货膨胀的预测，也预期失业率会上升。总的来说，这似乎不是个好消息。此外，美联储近几个月来一直在说，他们基本上会滞后一些行动。所以这次他们没有降息，并保持了上次的预测。Paul告诉我们，经济中有很多变化发生，比如移民政策的改变、财政政策的变化。当然，还有监管政策的变化。他也不确定接下来会发生什么，所以他选择观望，看数据如何表现。
That's a little bit different than how he usually acts, where he tries to get ahead of it. Now, remember, he cut 50 basis points right before the election last year, thinking that there was a recession wanting to get ahead of it. But now he's committing to being late. So what that tells me is that he's really not going to do anything until we see the unemployment rate tick up. And it's been trending higher. Right now, the unemployment rate is 4.2%. But maybe, and Quinn will probably talk about this. But we see a lot of indicators in labor market that it's softening. Paul has a different take. He seems to be very happy with 4.2% describing as full employment. But it seems like until that ticks higher, we're not going to get rate cuts.
这与他平常的做法有点不同，他通常会抢先行动。记得去年选举前，他曾将利率下调50个基点，因为他认为经济衰退即将来临，希望提前应对。而现在他却选择延后行动。这让我觉得，他可能要等到失业率上升时才会采取措施。失业率目前已经在上升，现在是4.2%。不过，也许Quinn会谈到这一点，我们在劳动力市场看到很多指标显示市场正在走软。而Paul有不同看法，他对4.2%的失业率感到满意，称之为充分就业。但看来在失业率上升之前，我们不会看到降息。
Yeah, I thought it was interesting when you compared March to June on the dots. Basically, the only incremental change for 2025 was that three people went from one cut to no cut. And one person went from two cuts to one cut. So it was, you know, that's hawkish. And I think one came out of, one cut came out of 26, I believe, or 27, in the backdrop of that revised, worse economic data. And he seemed like, for one, the nearest cut is not priced until September anyways. So, you know, being three months out, does how much does this meeting really have near-term impact on markets? Not a ton.
是的，我觉得你在比较3月和6月的数据时很有意思。基本上，2025年的唯一变化就是有三个人从预计一次降息改为不降息，还有一个人从预计两次降息改为一次降息。所以，这显得有点强硬。我想2026年或2027年的一次降息也被取消了，背景是经济数据变得更糟糕。而且，最近的一次降息预计最早也要到9月才会发生。所以呢，离目前还有三个月，这次会议对市场的短期影响有多大呢？不是很大。
I did think it was interesting because I think we discussed this on last week's how in that recent labor market, labor report, that the unemployment rate barely stuck at 4.2%. So it was like 0.005%, very easily could have been 4.3%. But also that it stayed steady for the wrong reasons, meaning declining total number of employed and lower labor force number. And so someone did ask about the immigration issues, and he noted that this dynamic where you can have a stable, more stable unemployment rate for the reasons of not growing labor, but actually shrinking labor force.
我确实觉得这个话题很有趣，因为我记得我们上周讨论过最近的劳动市场情况。在最新的劳动报告中，失业率几乎维持在4.2%，其实只差0.005%就可能变成4.3%。但这种稳定其实是因为一些不太好的原因，比如就业人数总数下降，以及劳动力总数减少。有人提到了移民问题，并指出这种现象，即失业率稳定并不是因为劳动力增长，而是因为劳动力缩减。
And he basically acknowledged this as being okay. You know, it will hold the unemployment rate lower for longer, and they will not look through that to infer a weaker labor market. So on many accounts, very hawkish, it's very clear they expect at least some meaningful upticket inflation. And, you know, even September is, I don't know, how guaranteed that is at this point off there. I think you really need to see market weakness for them to move.
他基本上认可了这种做法是可以的。你知道，这将使失业率保持在较低水平，并且他们不会因此推断出劳动力市场的疲软。因此，从很多方面来看，这种态度非常强硬。很明显，他们预期通货膨胀会有一定程度的上升。而且，关于九月份的情况，我不太确定到底能有多大的保证。我认为，他们需要看到市场疲软的迹象才能采取行动。
Yeah, my take is just that it feels like, you know, it's clear that Chair Powell is trying to get to the finish line of his term in one piece. Like, I think he would have preferred if he could have just skipped the whole press conference in general and just been like, all right, we're not doing anything, we're just going to sit there and don't talk to me until at least 2026. But he's not in a situation where he can do that, so it has to go up there. And the issue is that, like, monetary policy cannot not do anything. By doing nothing, it's still an intentional policy choice.
好的，我的观点是，我觉得很明显，美联储主席鲍威尔试图顺利完成他的任期。就像，我觉得他可能更愿意跳过所有新闻发布会，直接说：“好吧，我们暂时不采取任何措施，至少到2026年之前别找我。” 但他现在没有办法做到这一点，所以他必须上台。而问题在于，货币政策不能什么都不做。即便选择不采取行动，这本身也是一种有意的政策选择。
So just by them sitting flat as they are right now and that they hope to do so for quite a bit of time to continue, that's still an intentional policy decision because the economy is dynamic and it's moving all the time. And as they sit, if you just think about like a classic Taylor Rule type model, we see them stay flat at the same time that the unemployment rate takes higher. And to your point, we were very close to 4.3%. So you have that situation and then you have these continuous downsides of prizes in the inflation print. You know, like, we can keep holding out and wait for the tariff inflation to show up in the CPI data.
所以，仅仅通过保持目前的利率不变，希望能够持续一段时间，这实际上是一种有意的政策决定，因为经济是动态的，不断变化着。假如我们用经典的泰勒规则模型来考虑这个问题，我们会发现，当失业率上升时，利率依然维持不变。而且，就像你提到的，我们当时非常接近4.3%的失业率。因此，在这种情况下，我们还面临着通胀数据中物价持续下跌的问题。我们可以继续观望，等待关税带来的通胀出现在CPI（消费者价格指数）数据中。
And yes, maybe the big ones coming next print. But the fact of the matter is, is that, you know, of course, CPI, month over a month came out of 10 basis points. And that's a huge mess. So there's a lot of services disinflation. There's, we can talk about this some more, but there's a lot of fracturing underneath the surface of that unemployment rate in terms of the labor market. So it just feels, and I'm curious both of your thoughts on this, that by just staying flat, it's still restricting, creating even more restrictive monetary policy stance, even though their intention is just to not do anything that goes either hawkish or dovish, but by doing nothing, they're actually being hawkish.
当然，可能下一个大新闻就在即将发布的数据中出现。但事实是，消费者价格指数（CPI）环比上升了10个基点，这是一个巨大的失误。因此，许多服务领域正面临通货紧缩。我们可以再深入讨论这个问题，不过在失业率的表面之下，劳动市场也出现了很多分化现象。因此，尽管他们的意图是不采取任何激进或温和的行动，但通过什么都不做，他们实际上在采取激进的货币政策立场。我对你们两位关于这一点的看法感到好奇。
Yeah, as inflation comes down, gruel rates go higher, right? So I think one of the points that he mentioned was that if you were back we're looking at the data, you'd probably be cutting by now. Like you mentioned, the market is softening. We have four, we could have been 4.3%. If you look at continuing employment claims, that continues to rise, right? That means the stock of the unemployed people are rising. So if you lose your job, it's harder, harder to find a new one. Now this past week, there was also a very interesting story in the Wall Street Journal showing how new grads are having a lot of trouble finding a new job.
好的，随着通货膨胀下降，利率上升，对吧？所以我认为他提到的一个观点是，如果我们现在回头看数据，可能早就开始降息了。就像你提到的，市场正在趋软。我们可能达到了4%，本可以是4.3%。如果你查看持续失业救济申请的情况，它仍在上升，对吧？这意味着失业人口的总数在增加。因此，如果你失去了工作，将更难找到新工作。就在上周，《华尔街日报》上有一个非常有趣的报道，讲的是应届毕业生找工作有多困难。
So the unemployment rate for young people is also rising. So definitely clear weakening in the labor market. Now inflation has been on the coming in softer as well. Not just CPI, like you mentioned Phoenix, but the Fed's goal, headline PCE came in at 2.1% year every year in April, 2.1%, 2%, that's pretty close to me, right? So the Fed is not acting in response to this data because it's telling us, like you mentioned, that we have inflation from tariffs coming down the pipeline.
因此，年轻人的失业率也在上升，这明显表明了就业市场的疲软。与此同时，通货膨胀率也在下降。不仅是消费者价格指数（CPI）下降，就像你提到的凤凰城那样，联邦储备目标的总体个人消费支出（PCE）在四月份的年度增长率为2.1%。2.1%，2%，在我看来，这两个数值非常接近，对吧？因此，联邦储备局并没有对这些数据做出反应，因为这告诉我们，正如你所说，我们面临的通胀压力是由即将实施的关税引起的。
So in the press conference, what really struck me was that, you know, Chair Powell was like, you know, the professional forecasters, basically the experts are telling me that inflation is coming down the pipeline from tariffs and so forth. And that's so super reasonable, but it's also not consistent with how he's behaved the past few years, right? The past few years, let's listen to the forecasters that got us nowhere. And so it's like, oh, hey, let's listen to the data, let's be data dependent. Okay, let's do that. Now that the data is like, we should cut, let's listen to the forecasters now, right? So he just wants to be hawkish. That's he's finding reasons to be hawkish. So yeah. It's pretty funny. I don't know which press member asked Powell about this, but they brought up that point that, you know, okay, well you were saying that your data dependent, the data right now is saying that you should probably be cutting.
在新闻发布会上，让我印象深刻的是，鲍威尔主席表示，专业预测人士，也就是专家们告诉他，关税等因素正在使得通货膨胀下降。这听起来很合理，但与他过去几年的表现并不一致。过去几年，我们听取这些预测者的意见也没有取得什么效果。所以现在他说，我们应该关注数据，依赖数据。好吧，那我们就这样做。但现在数据表明我们应该降息时，他又转向听取预测者的意见。他似乎就是想要保持强硬的立场，并正在找理由支撑这种态度。很有趣的是，我不知道是哪位记者询问了鲍威尔这个问题，但他们提到你的立场是依赖数据，而现在的数据表明你可能应该降息。
Yeah, you got caught up in his words. He's just like, well, you know, now I was saying, well, we're looking into the future and there's inflation coming, but to your point, like that's going against everything. So I mean, yeah, it's just the Fed wants to be hawkish and, you know, we can complain and piece apart, but that's just what they want to do. They just want to get to the finish line of 2026 and the final reason to do that. And, you know, we can talk a bit about the macroeconomic impact of that, but yeah, just seems to be the way it is. I think the case to cut is also not that.
是啊，你被他的话搞晕了。他就像在说，好吧，你知道，我只是想说，我们在展望未来，通货膨胀要来了，但是你的观点是，这与一切背道而驰。所以，我的意思是，美联储就是想采取鹰派立场，我们可以抱怨和分析，但这就是他们想做的。他们就是想在2026年达到目标，并找到这样做的最终理由。我们可以谈谈这样做对宏观经济的影响，但情况似乎就是这样。我认为削减的理由也不那么充分。
Like one of Powell's points was he said something along lines, which he almost never comments on the market, but this so he kind of was, it was one of more interesting pressers I've found in recent few, but he mentioned something along lines of the current market conditions and how things are trading or something of that nature do not reflect very restrictive or extremely restrictive or some language. Which he's kind of got a point. I mean, if stock are back at all time highs, valuations where they're at, like, and I think there is some anchoring bias for all market participants where it's like, you know, in the grand scheme of things for two, if you look back many years and history is pretty low. It's just the underlying nuances is, you know, in the weakening of, you know, the lower middle income class. So it's a tough situation.
其中一个鲜为人知的观点是，鲍威尔几乎从不公开评价市场情况，但他在最近的一个发布会上提到了当前的市场状况，以及交易活动如何反映出并非非常紧缩或极端紧缩的经济环境。他的观点有一定道理。毕竟，如果股市处于历史高点，估值也在高位，市场参与者可能会出现锚定偏差。纵观多年历史，当前的利率实际上处于较低水平。然而，关键问题在于中低收入阶层的经济状况正在恶化，这使得经济环境更加复杂和艰难。
I can't say he's like that wrong to not move. Yeah, that's fair. I think too, like, an interesting situation where I know just how noisy all this economic data is right now. Either it's, you know, we had retail sales last week and the seasonal adjustments were just pretty significant. And we had like, you know, the control group surprised the upside and then everything else surprised at the downside. We have, you know, the NFP has been revised every month quite significantly. So yeah, it's a tough situation like Joseph and Kyrus on your thoughts. Just what do you think are the best reads on the actual state of the economy right now? Because it just feels like every data point has so much noise to it.
我不能说他不行动是错误的。是的，这很合理。我也认为这是一个有趣的情况，因为我知道现阶段所有经济数据的噪音有多大。比如，上周的零售销售数据，季节性调整非常显著。而且，核心数据超过预期，但其他数据却低于预期。此外，非农就业数据每个月都被大幅修正。所以，是的，这是一个困难的情况。Joseph 和 Kyrus，你们有什么看法？你们认为现在对经济状况最好的解读是什么？因为感觉每个数据点都充满了不确定性。
I think that's that's really hard because a lot of people are behaving differently in response to the macro shots we're having, right? So we had widely telegraph tariffs. Everyone was kind of importing a lot beforehand. Maybe consumers also stocking up beforehand. So then we had the big tariffs. Everyone was scared. Trump pivoted. Now we have some 90 day pause. So maybe people are restarting or maybe they stopped too much and now they they run down their inventory. So I think the data is going to be really noisy and I don't really know how to read it the past few months. Yeah, totally.
我觉得这真的很难，因为很多人对我们目前的大环境变化反应不一，对吧？我们之前已经普遍预告了关税，大家都在关税正式实施前大量进口，或许消费者也在提前囤货。然后关税一旦正式实施，大家都感到紧张不安。特朗普转变了策略，现在我们有90天的暂停期。所以可能有些人重新开始进口，也可能有些人在暂停期间减少了库存，现在他们库存用完了。所以，我认为数据会非常混乱，我真的不知道过去几个月的数据该如何解读。是的，完全赞同。
Okay, so something else is happening. I think it's next week is that we got news that the Fed is planning to have a meeting about the supplemental leverage ratio, which when you talked about earlier in your panel today here at the conference, but that's been an interesting one because it feels like this carrot that's been dangling over the market for like the past six months where there's talk, you know, every time it feels like on the treasury side as well, Scott Besson is talking about we want to deregulate the banks. We want to alleviate capital ratios and risk based capital ratios as well.
好的，这里发生了另一件事情。我认为是在下周，我们得知美联储计划召开一次关于补充杠杆率的会议。您今天早些时候在会议的小组讨论中提到了这个问题。这一直是个有趣的话题，因为感觉就像过去六个月来市场上一直悬而未决的一个问题。每次谈到这个问题时，总感觉财政部那边也在讨论，比如Scott Besson说我们想对银行进行放松监管，我们也想缓解资本比率和基于风险的资本比率。
So the Fed have announced that they're planning to have a meeting next week where they're looking at actually implementing some sort of either SLR exemption for trust. So we've got a lot of SLR exemption for treasuries or just a meaningful loosening of those SLR levels. So fortunately we got Joseph here who's been at the Nürk Fed work in that world very deeply. So I'd just be curious if you could just explain to us the whole dynamic. Why are they pursuing this deregulation approach and how does it mechanically work into the market with their talk about?
美联储宣布计划在下周召开会议，他们正在考虑实际上为信托实施某种形式的SLR（补充杠杆率）豁免。我们已经为国债提供了很多SLR豁免，或者只是大幅放宽这些SLR水平。幸运的是，我们有约瑟夫在这里，他曾在纽约联储深耕这一领域。我很好奇能否请他为我们解释一下整个动态。他们为什么追求这种放松监管的做法，这种做法在市场中是如何具体运作的？
Sure. So just taking a step back in 2008 we had a huge crisis in the financial sector and that hurt a lot of people and so the regulators decided we can't let this happen again. So we got to regulate banks in a big way. And so they passed all these regulations, Dodd-Frank and also internationally there's a Basel III. And what these regulations do is at the end of the day impose a whole bunch of costs on banks based on the size and composition of their balance sheet.
好的。简单回顾一下，在2008年金融行业遭遇了巨大的危机，许多人因此受到伤害。因此，监管机构决定不能让这样的事情再次发生，他们必须对银行进行严格的监管。于是，他们出台了很多法规，例如《多德-弗兰克法案》，国际上还有《巴塞尔协议III》。这些法规的最终效果是根据银行资产负债表的规模和构成，对其施加大量成本。
So for example, you have risk weighted assets where let's say that if you hold a riskier corporate loan you have to hold more capital against that capital for a bank is a liability. So it's like a cost. So that makes sense right if you hold and it's used to intended to absorb losses. So that makes sense if you have are making really risky loan you should have lots of capital against that in case that loan goes sour the capital can absorb the losses rather than the depositors that makes sense.
例如，当你持有一个风险较高的公司贷款时，你必须为银行准备更多的资本，因为这被认为是银行的一项负债，也就是说，对银行来说这是一种成本。这是有道理的，因为这些资本的目的是为了吸收损失。因此，如果你发放了一项非常高风险的贷款，你应该准备足够的资本，以防这笔贷款出现问题，这样资本就可以吸收损失，而不是让存款人承担损失。这是合理的。
And also let's say that we don't want banks to ever have like a liquidity run right so that's kind of what happened in 2008. So we're going to mandate them to hold all sorts of liquid assets, tons of reserves and also make sure that their liability structure is more sound so make sure they're not barring too much overnight make sure they have let's say longer dated liabilities that can be run on. So there are depositors can run as easily also we do stuff like stress tests and so forth and to cap it all off just to make sure that we just in case we got anything wrong because as we know from the financial crisis in 2008 sometimes things that are triple A are not actually triple A.
为了确保银行不会出现流动性危机（例如2008年金融危机时的情况），我们会要求银行持有各种类型的流动资产、大量的储备，同时确保它们的负债结构更加稳健。具体来说，就是防止它们过多依赖隔夜借款，确保它们有更长期的负债，这样储户就不会轻易发生挤兑。我们还会进行压力测试等操作。此外，为了确保万无一失，我们会采取额外措施，因为正如2008年金融危机所示，即使是最高评级的资产，其实也可能不如预期那样安全。
So they added something that was a backstop and this is a which is basically leverage ratio where banks have to hold capital against an asset regardless of its riskiness so it's basically completely based on size so for example in this case in the leverage ratio you'd have to hold the same amount of capital against treasors as you would risk risky corporate loan. So this S.O.L.R. right now on the bank holding company holding level it's about 5% on the bank level it's about 6% for the largest banks and this has been a real hindrance for banks that traffic and assets that are very safe like treasuries because it imposes costs on these trading these assets that are that don't really make sense because they're liquid and credit risk free.
他们添加了一种“最后的保障机制”，也就是一种基本上基于杠杆率的规定，无论资产的风险如何，银行都必须为其持有一定比例的资本。这基本上是完全根据资产规模来决定的。例如，在杠杆率的规定下，银行需要为国债持有的资本，与为高风险的公司贷款持有的资本一样多。目前，针对银行控股公司的杠杆率规定大约是5%，而在单个银行层面，对于最大的银行来说，大约是6%。对于那些交易非常安全的资产（如国债）的银行来说，这项规定带来了实际的障碍，因为它对这些本来流动性强且无信用风险的资产交易施加了不合情理的成本。
And it's been widely thought of that raising the costs of banks traffic getting these risky riskless assets has been harming the markets and so we saw that in 2020 when we had a crash in the treasury market and regulators in response suspended the implements suspended S.O.L.R. for a year and that seemed to help a little bit. And now as you know the treasury market continues to grow because we continue to issue a lot of debt it's becoming more of a highlight for the regulators they don't want the market to break and they're also thinking that maybe if we were to decrease the cost of banks and holding these treasuries maybe they would buy more maybe that will put downward pressure on interest rates.
人们普遍认为，提高银行获取这些“无风险”资产的成本会对市场造成伤害。2020年，当国债市场崩盘时，我们就见证了这一点。作为回应，监管机构暂停实施S.O.L.R.（补充杠杆率）一年，这似乎起到了一些作用。现在，如你所知，由于我们持续发行大量债务，国债市场也在不断扩大，这成为了监管者关注的重点。他们不希望市场崩溃，并且考虑如果降低银行持有这些国债的成本，或许银行会购买更多，这可能会对利率产生向下的压力。
So that seems to be the impetus for trying to change these regulatory things and they've been talking about it a lot and now they're finally having some action which is which rules announced and it could be through just toggling the ratio it could be exempting reserves or something like that but that's something they'll try to figure out. So maybe that will have some relief for the market.
这似乎成为推动改变这些监管事务的动力，他们已经讨论了很长时间，而现在终于采取了一些行动，宣布了一些规则。这可能包括调整比例，豁免储备金等，他们会尝试解决这些问题。也许这会给市场带来一些缓解。
Yeah it feels like there's still a bit of debate now on the impact of what this will do and there's a lot of different interesting cross currents when you just look at the composition of all the different decisions or policies that are being made right now. So okay we have a treasury that is issuing a lot more bills than historical standards they are avoiding at all costs increasing the proportion of coupon issuance that they're providing to the market.
是的，现在似乎仍然有人在争论这件事的影响。当你查看目前制定的各种决策或政策时，会发现其中存在许多有趣而复杂的相互影响。目前，财政部正在发行远超历史标准的大量国库券，并且他们竭力避免增加向市场发行债券的比例。
That's been something that people started to call it like activist treasury issuance or the economics but it's clear that Scott Bessens is continuing that. Now we have forward guidance in the quarterly funding announcements basically where they mention that there's no plans to increase the amount of coupon issuance so it's all going to go towards the bill side of issuance. So you have that dynamic happening right now. You have what's going on in terms of the debt ceiling situation where they cannot issue more debt so we go into the situation of extraordinary measures where they do a lot of different tweaks to be able to continue to issue debt and then once that's complete they start to run down the treasury general account.
人们开始称之为“积极式国债发行”或“经济学”的现象已经开始显现，而显然斯科特·贝森斯正在延续这一做法。现在，每季度的资金发布中都有前瞻性指导，明确表示没有计划增加长期债券发行的数量，因此所有的重点将转向短期国库券的发行。这是目前的一个动向。同时，在债务上限问题上，由于无法增加债务，他们进入了“非常措施”的状态，通过各种调整来继续发行债务，一旦这些措施完成，他们就会开始减少财政部的一般账户资金。
And that X date gets to around us early August right now where if they do not come to some sort of resolution on increasing the debt ceiling we would theoretically default obviously there's further protections against that but that's a theory so you have that situation and so what happens is that the treasury general account gets drawn down and then as soon as the debt ceiling gets resolved they got to rebuild it back up to basically a level where I forget the exact number of but effectively they want to be able to keep about a week's worth of treasure. So that gets us to about $800 billion right now so I think you had the numbers of where we at in terms of right now the TGA versus the art because this is the dynamic right is that you have you have a lot of bill issuance that needs to be rebuilt and we need to think about where does those flows come from and that really I'll circle this back onto the S.L.R. thing but do you want to just explain a little bit on terms of where enters the TGA dynamics and where that got funded last time because you have some interesting analysis around that.
目前的形势是这样的：如果他们在“X日期”之前，即大约在8月初，还没有就提高债务上限达成某种解决方案，那么理论上我们可能会违约。虽然实际上有一些保障措施可以防止违约，但这是一个可能发生的情况。在这种情况下，美国财政部的总账户会被耗尽，一旦债务上限问题解决，他们需要将其恢复到一个大致目标水平。我不记得确切的数字，但实际上，他们希望保持大约相当于一周的财政支出需求的资金。这大约是8000亿美元左右。因此，我们需要考虑目前财政部总账户的余额情况和动态。这涉及到大量国库券的发行需要重建，当务之急是思考这些资金流从何而来。我会回到关于补充杠杆率（SLR）的讨论上来，但请你先简单解释一下财政部总账户的动态，以及上一次资金是如何筹集的，因为你对此有一些有趣的分析。
Yeah so this recent tax payment date and actually hitting in the June quarterly of this week refilled the TGA from like 250 to 220 it got down to the back up to around 450 I think for 70 and then I think there's about 150 or so in the RRP so that'll all get drained you know the X date in August is when the TGA basically is zero and you know depending on if it's early July or late July in whatever that is we'll dictate how much of a refills needed but it's from here it's you know however much they refill it's going to get drawn down in the meantime but the interesting thing is that in 2023 the most recent analog where this occurred reaching the debt ceiling and refilling TGA they had massive amount in the RRP to buffer the TGA.
最近的税款支付日期，实际上是在这周的季度中被处理，结果TGA（国库普通账户）的余额从大约250增加到220，然后又回升到大约450。我想大约有150左右的金额在隔夜逆回购协议（RRP）中，所以这些资金会被消耗掉。大约在8月的X日期时，TGA基本上会变为零。至于具体是7月初还是7月底，这将决定需要多少补充资金。目前来看，无论怎么补充，都会在这段时间内被消耗掉。但是有趣的是，2023年最近一次发生类似情况时，达到债务上限并补充TGA时，RRP中有大量资金可以用来缓冲TGA的消耗。
So I believe when they refilled the TGA from June 23 to October 23 is about the time it took so like five months or four or five months they also drained the reverse repo program by about a trillion dollars in that time period to bolster the market. And in this go around they have about 150 there and there's also about 2x the nominal coupon issuance number that needs to be hit so I think best sent is well aware of this and you know the last two times of these TGA refills long duration bond yields rose over 150 base points and so they're trying to pull out all the stops including SLR to bolster that but the tough thing about because I think most of the analysis I've seen around the SLR from the banks and stuff is evaluated in the context of what occurred during COVID when the last time they made this exemption and that's a difficult comparison because at the time no one there was one it was we're potentially in deflation for that short amount of time and the Fed had four guidance stating there's no cuts in the foreseeable future and inflation was trans to et cetera.
我相信，从6月23日到10月23日，大约用了四到五个月的时间填补财政部普通账户（TGA）。同时，他们在这段时间里还提取了反向回购计划中的大约1万亿美元，以支持市场。此次他们大约有150亿美元在那里，而名义票据发行的数量也需要达到约两倍的目标。所以我认为关键决策者对此非常清楚。前两次TGA补充期间，长期债券的收益率上涨了超过150个基点，所以他们正在使用所有可能的手段，包括补充杠杆率（SLR），以支撑市场。但是，这一情况有些棘手，因为我看到的大多数关于银行SLR的分析都是以COVID期间的豁免为背景进行评估的。当时与现在情况不同，因为那时可能短暂面临通缩，美联储还明确表示在可预见的未来内不会降息，而且通胀被认为是暂时性的等因素。
So we saw the repercussions of that mentality and the same thing. Result in the 2023 banking crisis where everyone was stuffed to the guilds with duration treasure yields blew out and all these balance sheets were insolvent and needed to be essentially you know bailed out or massage in a way by the Fed so I think there's probably PTSD on the banking side that restricts them in addition to a less rosy view on yields that limits how effective that's a lot is I think it'll do something but yeah I feel like when you put that all together that's why I know there's a lot of debate around okay well why are we doing this SLR exemption thing because it's not like these banks are actually heading like they're not actually constrained by a SLR right now they're more so I believe correct me from wrong Joseph but they're more so constrained by like the risk weighted like ratios as opposed to the supplementary leverage ratio but the way I think about it is it feels like more so they're trying to you know I remember when we introduced the RIP facility like ramped it up and started increasing the runway they talked about greasing greasing the runway and it feels like they're not going to be able to do that.
我们看到了这种心态带来的影响，以及类似的情况，这导致了2023年的银行危机。当时每个人都被充满了期限延长的国债收益率，这些收益率急剧上升，导致所有这些资产负债表都变得无力偿债，本质上需要美联储以某种方式进行救助或调整。所以我认为在银行业一侧可能有某种创伤后应激障碍（PTSD），这限制了他们的行动。此外，人们对收益率的看法也不再那么乐观，这限制了其有效性。我觉得这虽然会有些效果，但综合来看，我理解为什么会有很多关于“为什么我们要做SLR豁免”的争论，因为这些银行实际上并没有受到SLR（补充杠杆率）的限制，更主要的是被风险加权比例所限制。尽管如此，我认为更像是他们在试图...就好像我记得我们引进了RIP设施，扩大了规模并延长了是否增加相关操作的时间，他们讨论过润滑操作路径，而现在看来他们没有能力做到这一点。
So I'm trying to grease and the runway right now for when this huge rebuild comes forth so you see this dynamic of trying to get these deregulations to happen and then furthermore we're starting to see them try to really pass this genius act bill. That's an interesting one because the fastest growing buyers of treasury debt right now are stable coins like tether they're the ninth largest holding and one of the fastest increasing right now so it feels to me like they're trying to prepare a lot of these to grease it for when we get to this August date to basically effectively rebuild the tether that's what it feels like and you know maybe we can we can talk a little about how we think that impacts the liquidity outlook and generally macro overall because to your point you think that yes these are factors that they can they can start to execute on but regardless it looks like long bond yields would likely increase.
所以，我现在正试图为即将到来的大规模重建铺平道路。你会看到，他们努力推进这些放松管制的动态，并且还在推动这个非常聪明的法案通过。这个法案很有意思，因为目前国债的增长最快的买家是像泰达币这样的稳定币，它们是国债的第九大持有者，并且增长速度非常快。所以我感觉他们正在为8月份这个重建泰达币的计划做各种准备。我们可以讨论一下这如何影响流动性前景和宏观经济，因为尽管这些因素他们可以开始执行，但无论如何，长期国债收益率可能会上升。
I'm curious how you both think about what that would look like is obviously we've hit that 5% level a couple times on the long bond in the last couple months and the first time we hit it in the last couple months is around liberation day and not all impact and that's where we started to see a lot of seizing up in the treasury market a little bit. We've hit it a couple times since and it hasn't been as sketchy but it really feels like the 30 or especially getting above that 5% level is a level that nobody's really interested in happening. So I'm curious how you both think about the possibility of us going above that 5% level.
我好奇你们两个是如何看待这一情况的。显然，过去几个月长债收益率已经有好几次达到了5%的水平。我们第一次达到这个水平是在解放日左右，当时对市场的影响并不大，但之后我们开始看到国债市场有些紧张。虽然后来又几次达到了这个水平，但市场反应没有那么激烈。然而，如果30年期国债收益率真的超过5%，似乎没有人希望看到这样的情况。因此，我想知道你们对于我们可能超过5%这一水平的看法是什么。
So like you mentioned the 30 year has been touching 5% for some time it really doesn't seem like it wants to go lower. I'd also take a step back and note that this is a global issue right the Japanese 40 year was in the news for some time it just keeps going higher and higher but similarly when we think about the Japanese 40 year it's gone down a lot because what they did was they they did a yellowonomics right so they changed the composition of issuance by issuing fewer elongated stuff and more more shorted it stuff and so when we think about elongated yields we have to remember that there's a whole lot of tricks in the back to keep it lower. One of them is just to pull a yellowonomics active as treasury issuance as Stephen Brown would say so that's possible but I think the trend absinal this would be to have higher yields but you know these are things that are carefully managed they can continue to issue more bills or they could say because of S.H.L.R. just go and force the banks to buy a lot more treasuries.
根据你的描述，30年期国债的利率已经持续接近5%一段时间了，这种趋势似乎没有向下的意图。此外，我们也需要认识到这是一个全球性的问题，比如日本的40年期债券曾经引起了媒体关注，因为其利率也是不断攀升。但是，日本通过实施所谓的“黄经济学”（yellowonomics）方法来改变这一情况，它们减少了长期债券的发行，增加了短期债券的发行，使40年期债券的利率下降了很多。因此，当我们考虑长期利率时，一定要记住，有很多方法可以保持利率的低位，其中之一就是采用“黄经济学”策略来调节国债的发行。像Stephen Brown所说的那样，这是一种可行的办法。不过，整体趋势可能是利率会上升，尽管这些都是经过谨慎管理的过程。例如，他们可以继续发行更多的短期票据，或者因为某些金融政策而迫使银行购买更多的国债。
And now this is not something that they're talking about at all but if you take a step back through history whenever a government has too much debt this is not the first time this has ever happened before this happens all the time. Old governments actually run into these problems and one of the most common solutions is to have your commercial banks foot the bill and so maybe not today but maybe next year a couple years forward maybe that plays a bigger role and that puts somewhat of a soft ceiling on yields but until that happens actually in order to precipitate that we probably have to have the long bond continuing to go higher.
现在，他们完全没有在讨论这个问题，但如果我们回顾历史就会发现，当政府债务过多时，这种情况并不是第一次发生，实际上常常会出现。旧政府就曾遇到过这些问题，其中一个最常见的解决方案就是让商业银行承担这笔费用。因此，也许不是今天，也许是明年，或者几年后，这个方案可能会发挥更大的作用，并在一定程度上为收益率设定一个软上限。但是在这之前，很可能需要长期债券收益率继续上升，才能促使这种情况发生。
Yeah I'm of the belief that we do break out of the 5% I think it's like a big three year you know sending triangle wedge type thing and I think we might have skirted that move because of the delays in the bill because really the catalyst is when the refill starts but to me if you're a bank Jamie diamonds talked about this a lot of other bank CEOs have talked about this dynamic in the treasury market and and Fulmy wants shame on you Fulmy. I think we're actually headed for a meaningful breakout and in the 30 year and in my opinion would be could be upwards of 100 basis points to like over 6% later this year and you just you know you get the momentum guys you get everybody on that trade once it starts going and in this debt burden problem that has to come post bill passing so for me the real catalyst is when when the bill comes and you know we'll see what we're going to do.
我相信我们确实会突破5%的水平。我认为这就像一个三年的大上升三角楔形结构。我认为我们可能因为法案的延迟而错过了这个走势，因为真正的催化剂是填补开始的时候。如果你是一家银行，Jamie Dimon和其他许多银行的CEO都谈到了国债市场的这种动态，“骗我一次算你的错，骗我两次算我的错”。我认为我们实际上正朝着一个有意义的突破方向前进，特别是在30年期国债上，我认为今年晚些时候可能会向上突破100个基点，超过6%。一旦开始上涨，势头交易者和所有人都会加入进来，而这种债务负担问题必须在法案通过后解决。所以对我来说，真正的催化剂是法案通过的时候，然后我们会看看到底会怎么发展。
I don't think it's good for risk and it particularly don't think that it will be good when people recognize this dynamic of risk down yields up and and how you're kind of stuck in that case because Fed cuts ultimately make things worse. An interesting thing I'm going to throw into the mix here to think about you is the situation that we're going to have to start to think a lot more about which is what happens in 2026 and who replaces chair Powell because that is going to very much start to be considered into the market especially you know something like the two year yield is going to have to start to discount that.
我认为这对风险不利，特别是在人们意识到风险与收益率的动态关系时，这种情况会变得更糟。在这种情况下，美联储降息最终可能会使情况更糟。有一个有趣的问题，我想让你考虑一下，就是在2026年会发生什么，以及谁将接替鲍威尔担任美联储主席。这将是市场开始非常关注的事情，尤其是像两年期收益率这样的指标可能需要开始将这点考虑进去。
So we need to start thinking about what will look like when we get into this regime where if we see a long bond set up and we're going to see what we're going to do. We're going to sell off at the same time that we start to get guidance on who's going to replace Powell and it's probably going to be a dove a very very dovish the dubious dove you've ever seen. You know we could and you started to see this in the sulfur curve start to price it to and start to consider it is what happens in 2026 when we get a super dovish chair that cuts rates by 200 bips regardless of where we are in the economy.
所以我们需要开始思考当我们进入这种状态时会是什么样子，即当长期债券形成时，我们会看到我们的举动。就在我们开始得到有关谁将接替鲍威尔的指引时，我们可能会同时抛售，而接任者很可能是一个非常鸽派的人，是你见过的最鸽派的“疑似鸽派”人物。你可以看到，这种情况已经在SOFR曲线上开始体现并被考虑进去了，这意味着到2026年时，当我们迎来一个超级鸽派的主席时，即使不论经济状况如何，他也可能会降息200个基点。
And how does that get digested because there's a lot of different cross currents there. If you start to wait all your bill issue if you start to wait all your issuance towards bills those are very sensitive to the fed funds rate as opposed to the long end so you can cut your interest expense by a ton but by doing so you're probably going to also lose the long end.
这句话的意思是：这要如何消化，因为这里有很多不同的因素交织在一起。如果你开始将所有的发行集中在短期债券上，它们对联邦基金利率非常敏感，而不是长期债券，这样你可以大幅减少利息支出，但这样做可能会失去长期债券的支持。
And so I'm curious on both of your thoughts on how do you start to think about this fact of what could happen if you know this uses the radical of 200 bips cut in the fed funds regardless of where we are in the economy. How does the market digest that situation and deal with it. You know the president gave an interview last week and he was like you know chirp how he's like a stupid person you know maybe I'll just appoint myself so hey we'll just skip the middleman we'll just have president from the chair after all as you mentioned before it's like the easiest job ever you show up in the office once a month flip a coin and then everyone thinks you're a god so it's such an easy thing to do.
我很好奇你们俩对这一点的看法：如果在经济状况不明的情况下，美联储基准利率突然降低200个基点，会发生什么？市场如何消化这种情况并应对？总统上周在采访中提到，他觉得自己可能会直接任命自己为主席，从而跳过中间人。他认为这份工作非常简单，每月只需到办公室一次，抛个硬币，然后大家就觉得你是神一样的存在。这是一件很简单的事情。
He's a race guy he says. So you're right I think that whoever president should have a point it's going to be someone who's pretty dumbish now to be clear some of the people he's been floating like Kevin wash and as I understand he wanted to to hike rates after the Lehman brothers went down so he's not historically known to be a dove but you know we can involve in our thinking.
他说自己是个竞赛型的人。所以我认为，你说的对，不管谁当总统，他可能都会有一些观点，但现在看来可能会是一个比较愚蠢的人。要说明的是，他推荐了一些人，比如凯文·沃什，据我所知，在雷曼兄弟倒闭后他曾想提高利率，因此他历来并不以“温和”派著称。不过，你知道，我们可以让自己的想法有所变化。
Other people I think whoever he chooses is probably going to have to profess some sort of a double-bushed inclination so yeah we definitely are going to get a double-bushed chair if you were to really cut rates a lot I think what I would be working at is the dollar because I think that could severely depreciate the dollar that would be really bad for all dollar assets. When it comes to longer data bonds yes definitely agree with longer data yields going higher it's going to be really bad for the bond market but again like I mentioned before there are so many tools for the government to manage this at the end of the day this is just a giant database these are just numbers in a computer and the government controls that computer so they can make it so that the their buyers be at the Fed at the very last you know chair Trump will just go and buy long and or something like that I'm not saying this will happen but these are things that they can do to make sure that they're going to be a good job.
其他人，我认为不管他选谁，都可能需要表现出某种双重立场的倾向。所以，如果他真的大幅降息，我们肯定会得到一个双重立场的决策者。我认为我会关注美元，因为这可能会严重使美元贬值，这对所有美元资产来说都是非常不利的。至于长期债券，我同意长期债券收益率会上升，这对债券市场来说非常不利。但正如我之前提到的，政府有很多工具来管理这个问题。最终，这只不过是一个巨大的数据库，这些只是计算机中的数字，而政府掌控着那台计算机，因此他们可以确保自己的购买者，至少在最后一刻，美联储或特朗普会去买入长期资产，或者做类似的事情。我并不是说这一定会发生，但这些是他们可以用来确保经济稳定的手段。
They can do to make sure the long end doesn't get out of control what they have less control of is the currency and so that's what I would place my biggest bet on. Yeah I tend to agree I mean you wonder how much of the psychological benefit of that easing would be priced in ahead of time as well right like I think as Joseph mentioned you would see the moves in the dollar and probably some of these like gold or safe-hook assets. And as well as the bond market really because if you're if you're a 10 20 30 year long-grain bond investor you know the next year kind of doesn't matter too much relative to what's out there so that would be a dramatic steeper and in many ways maybe even go against his actual like the market effects actually might go against his intentions in that sense and what I also would point out just as well as the market is going to be a good job.
他们可以采取措施来确保长期末端不失控，但他们对货币的控制较少，因此我会更倾向于投资于货币。是的，我也有同感，我想知道这种宽松政策带来的心理效应在提前就已被纳入市场价格多少了，对吧？正如Joseph提到的，你会看到美元的变化，可能还有一些像黄金这样的避险资产的波动。此外，债券市场也同样重要，因为如果你是一个投资10年、20年或30年长期债券的投资者，相对于市场上的其他因素，明年的走势可能并不那么重要。因此，这将造成极大变化，甚至在很多方面可能会与他的初衷背道而驰，而市场的实际效应可能会与他的意图相违背。我还想指出，市场方面也会对此进行良好调整。
What I also would point out just on the interest expenses the average way to average maturity of our interest expense of US debt right now I think is like three and a half it's it's under four so even if the guy comes in and cuts 100 from here it actually doesn't really lower interest expense all that much. Yeah so I don't know I'm not buying too much or incorporating that the sort of hysteria around this the shadow fed too much yet because I think there's a lot of unknowns but I do think as we get into like Q4 it starts to become relevant when you're sub six months out.
关于利息支出，我想指出的是，目前美国债务的平均利率到期时间大约是三年半，不到四年。所以，即使利率降低100个基点，实际上也不会大幅减少利息支出。因此，我并没有过多考虑或融入围绕这个所谓“影子美联储”的恐慌，因为我认为还有很多未知因素。但我确实认为，当我们进入第四季度时，这个问题在离到期不到六个月时会变得更加重要。
Putting everything together like you mentioned so we have that stable coin stuff Steve genius act stable coins buying more bills maybe their issue more bills maybe we'll have a fed that cuts rates that yeah that together you end up with short rates lower in the government borrowing more in the short or dated sector so that that would be helpful for interest expense I don't know if that that's what they're actually do but that's that's a potential contours for a plan. Yeah definitely stimulative inflation progress pro inflation pro nominal growth.
把所有你提到的因素放在一起，我们能够看到这样的情况：稳定币的相关操作——可能是Steve的天才之举，稳定币可能会购买更多的债券；也许他们会发行更多债券，也许美联储会降低利率。在这样的组合下，短期利率会下降，而政府会更多地在短期债券领域进行借款，这对利息支出有帮助。我不确定他们是否真的会这样做，但这可能是计划的一个潜在方向。这无疑会刺激经济，并推动通胀以及名义增长。
Another theme to all of this is the theme of fiscal dominance which is a word that gets thrown out I think a little too easily versus what could really happen but it's been interesting to see what's going on on the fiscal side right now where we've started to see it's been led by Senator Ted Cruz about removing interest on reserve balances which is something that they implemented in no eight and you know effectively the banks can park a bunch of their reserves at the fed and they're in a pretty good yield and that yield is basically we we are subsidizing effectively bank revenues and profits from printing money that's effectively what happened so that's the discussion at hand right now but it's a really interesting situation because we implement monetary policy very differently from from back in 2008 where the interest on reserve balances is a very important factor for protecting that range of the fed funds range so that's the same.
所有这些讨论中另一个主题是“财务主导权”（fiscal dominance），我认为这个词被过于随意地使用，而没有真正探讨它可能的影响。不过，观察近期在财政方面发生的事情还是很有趣的。目前的讨论是由参议员特德·克鲁兹（Ted Cruz）发起的，关于取消对储备余额的利息，这个措施是在2008年实施的。实际上，银行可以将大量储备资金存放在美联储，并获得相当不错的收益，而这种收益基本上是我们通过印钞变相补贴银行的收入和利润。这就是当前正在讨论的情况。不过这确实是个有趣的局面，因为我们现在实施货币政策的方式与2008年时大不相同，其中储备余额的利息在保护美联储基金利率的范围内起着非常重要的作用。这就是现在的情况。
So I would love for you to just explain like obviously this is just a theoretical right now there's just talk at the hill right now but like what would be the impact of something like that if we actually removed interest on reserve balances and what would happen. So like you mentioned we started paying interest on reserve balances after the great financial crises before that reserves had no interest so we started paying because at that time the Fed was doing kiwi flooding the system with reserves and banks were stuck with the interest of the fed and they were also in bad shape so if we gave them a little bit of interest that would support their income and they wouldn't have to be basically taxed by this and the Fed also uses the control interest rates.
我希望你能解释一下，这目前只是一个理论上的讨论，还处于国会山的讨论阶段，但如果我们真的取消储备余额上的利息，那会有什么影响呢？你提到，自金融危机以来，我们才开始对储备余额支付利息。在此之前，储备金是没有利息的。我们开始支付利息是因为当时美联储正在通过量化宽松（QE）向系统注入大量储备，银行面临美联储利率的压力，同时它们的财务状况也不佳。因此，如果我们给它们一些利息，就能支持它们的收入，避免让它们在这个过程中被“征税”。美联储也利用利息来控制利率。
Now there's a lot of ways to do this if we just you know win cold turkey and turn off IOR I think it would be tremendously disruptive now think about it you're like a bank JP Morgan you have a few hundred billion dollars worth of deposits at the fed that's suddenly yield nothing what are you going to do. First thing you're going to put a lot in the reverse reable facility you're going to max that out and then you're going to go out to say by bells lend and repel and so forth and that's going to put downward pressure on all short term interest rates and the federal funds market would disappear because there's no point in for that. So it's it'll be chaotic so I it's not going to be how it's done they're going to have to design it in a certain way so right now banks hold about three trillion dollars in reserves.
现在有很多种方法可以解决这个问题。如果我们就这么突然决定关闭 "IOR"（超额准备金利率），我认为会造成巨大的混乱。想象一下，你是像摩根大通这样的银行，在美联储有几千亿美元的存款，突然之间它们不再产生任何收益，你会怎么办？首先，你可能会将大量资金投入逆回购工具并把额度用到上限，然后你可能会买卖短期国债、进行借贷和回购等等。这将对所有短期利率造成下行压力，联邦基金市场也会消失，因为没有继续存在的意义。所以这样做会非常混乱，我认为这不是他们实施该计划的方法。他们需要设计一个特定的方案。目前，银行大约持有三万亿美元的准备金。
So I can't interest rates they're getting let's say a hundred and twenty billion dollars worth of interesting come from the government they don't we the government really doesn't need to be paying all that to them so there's definitely some scope to try to make it so that. Well maybe it's less so I think this is something that Ted Cruz has a point on and you don't actually need Congress to do this you just kind of need the Fed to do this or a new Fed chair. So this is something the Fed has a right to do it doesn't they don't need Congress to do that with.
因此，我认为从政府那里获得的利息收入，比如说有一千二百亿美元，是不必要的。政府实际上并不需要支付那么多利息给他们，所以在这方面有一些调整的余地。好吧，可能这个数额应该少一些。我认为Ted Cruz在这一点上是有道理的，而且实际上这件事情不需要通过国会来实现，只需要美联储或者新的美联储主席采取行动。美联储有权力对此进行调整，而不需要依赖国会的决策。
Yeah I bring that up around this framing of fiscal dominance because that's sort that's these are ideas that are starting to feel like that because that's effectively it feels like the fiscal side of things is is obviously they're always creating the guard rails around monetary policy through congressional approval but it feels like this is getting a lot more heavy handed where it's like hey you know this is what we're doing we're trying to we're trying to narrow the fiscal deficit and. I'm just curious how you both think about that situation of if we see this trend continue of these decisions being made and then the Fed having to to react in these different ways in terms of how they actually implement monetary policy it feels like that's a very different theme from the last 15 years.
我在提到财政主导的背景下谈论这个话题，因为这些想法开始让人感受到财政方面的影响越来越明显。财政方面总是通过国会批准来为货币政策设定界限，但现在感觉到政府在财政政策上变得更加干预。例如，他们试图缩小财政赤字。我很好奇，如果这种趋势继续下去，这些决策不断被提出，而美联储不得不以不同方式应对并实施货币政策，你们怎么看待这种情况。与过去15年的主题相比，这似乎是一个非常不同的发展。
I think fiscal dominance is been with us for the last really since I mean dating back to covid but also the examples in 2022 and in 2023 the March banking crisis the real yield scare in October of 2013. In these cases where they've had to do things to really the reason they've had to step into the markets in these cases is because of the pressure on the long term bond market the worst case thus far was a recent cases. Ben the bank of England guilt crisis in October 23 but October 22 but you've also had the Japanese bond market problems and and you're broadly so. It's kind of where everybody's headed and it's really like playing the game of fiat pairs is almost like who's going to get in a worse situation quicker and the cadencing.
我认为财政主导问题实际上一直伴随着我们，最早可以追溯到新冠疫情期间，以及2022年和2023年的例子。例如，2023年3月的银行业危机，以及2013年10月的实际收益率恐慌。在这些情况下，他们不得不介入市场，原因是长期债券市场承受压力。迄今为止，最严重的情况是2022年10月英国央行的公债危机，但也有日本债市的问题。总体来看，所有人似乎都朝着这样的方向发展。这有点像玩货币对的游戏，就是看谁会更快陷入困境，并让市场按步调整。
The reason the US dollar is so at risk and all this is because of the extreme it's not that. Japan's fiscal situation is great or Europe's or France is in a anywhere decent of a spot it's simply because of the concentration of US asset holdings by foreigners and what I you know saying earlier is this blow off top in US dominance and exceptionalism earlier this year that culminated in. The largest concentrations and asset flows into US dollar US dollar assets and in decades so that's the risk really here for the dollars is that that rewinds as a result of whatever types of confidence crises that that may arise but you know immigration and tariffs are definitely helping accelerate it.
美国美元面临风险的原因在于其极端情况，并不是因为日本、欧洲或法国的财政状况很出色。风险主要来自外国对美国资产的高度集中。今年早些时候，美国的主导地位和例外主义达到了顶点，导致数十年来最大的资产流入美国美元和美元资产中。因此，美元真正的风险在于，一旦信心危机发生，这种情况可能会逆转。此外，移民和关税问题也在加速这一进程。
Yeah okay I want to zoom out a little bit and start to incorporate some of the global impacts of both capital flows and obviously the geopolitical situation happening in the Middle East right now and really just focus on some of the market impacts because I don't pretend to have any sort of meaningful edge in predicting these geopolitical outcomes right now but what we do know is that what's developing in the Middle East is increasing Taylorist for oil which would increase Taylorist for inflation which would increase Taylorist for long blast. So you have that situation and then also this situation around global capital flows until your point about the blow off top in American exceptionalism that we feel sort of happened in January a lot of that is also tied to tariffs and balance of payments resolution whether that be through tariffs or through basically capital controls on the other side you know there's some interesting tidbits in the big beautiful bill right now that are effectively.
好的，我想稍微放开一点视角，开始考虑一下全球资本流动的影响，显然现在中东的地缘政治局势对市场的影响非常显著。我不会假装自己能精准预测这些地缘政治结果，但我们知道，中东的发展正在推高石油价格，这可能会导致通货膨胀上升，进而对长期投资产生影响。此外，还有全球资本流动的状况以及美国在一月份的表现（我们认为这与美国特殊主义的"顶峰"有关）——很多也是由于关税和平衡支付的调整，或者通过资本管制来解决。最近出台的政策中也有一些非常有趣的内容。
Either taxing remittances or you know for withholding taxes on US assets those are those are capital controls that are looking to decrease the flow of funds into US assets so based on those two dynamics I'm just curious where you guys are at in this thesis of American exceptionalism because you know just to think about the market in the last couple of months coming out of liberation day it felt like you know Europe is out performing on their equities a lot of different you know we saw these huge numbers. So much of this has been currency related but the last couple weeks we've seen the US market up for form a little bit and so I'm just curious how you both are thinking about these these dynamics of increasing oil price from Taylorist in the Middle East these balance of payment flows and how that all comes together into thinking about how much do I wait US domestic assets versus rest of the world.
翻译成中文并表达意思如下：
对汇款征税或对美国资产预扣税，这些都是旨在减少资金流入美国资产的资本管制措施。所以基于这两个动态因素，我很好奇你们对美国例外论的看法，因为在过去几个月，欧洲在股票市场的表现优于美国，并且我们看到了这些巨大的数据变化。其中很大一部分与货币有关，但过去几周我们看到美国市场略有回升。因此，我很好奇你们如何看待这些动态，包括中东地区因泰勒增加的油价、国际收支流动，以及如何综合考虑这些因素来决定权衡美国国内资产与世界其他地区资产的比例。
Just just looking past the past few months what we've seen is that you know before what happened in the Middle East there was some some loss of the shiningness of US exceptionalism we saw that after liberation day dollar sold off, charger sold off US equity sold off and then you have tremendous outperformance in say European markets and the theme then was that you know the US we are kind of overexposed so couldn't have a great presentation this morning talking about how foreigners are just super super exposed to dollar out. So I think that's a lot of the vastness and it seems like I was reversing a bit where foreigners were moving back home a little bit. Now since the since what's happened in the Middle East I think well first off that's going to affect regions differently right for example in Europe they're much more dependent upon imported energy than the US who was actually the largest energy producer in the world.
仅从过去几个月来看，我们观察到在中东事件发生之前，美国的卓越性已经有所减弱。解放日之后，美元下跌、充电器（假设是指股市指数或个别股票）下跌、美国股市下跌，而欧洲市场则表现出色。当时的主题是美国市场过度曝光，所以在今天早上我们看到外国投资者对美元的过度依赖有精彩的展示。我认为这反映出了一种转变，很多外国投资者似乎有点回流到本国。现在，由于中东发生的事情，我认为这将对各个地区产生不同的影响。例如，欧洲在能源进口方面比美国依赖得更多，而美国实际上是全球最大的能源生产国。
What's been happening since then is that US assets seem to be doing a bit better than European assets and the dollar seems to be getting tiny tiny bit in strength but my read is that the dollar safe haven bit is not really strong I would have thought that would be stronger given this prospect of significant escalation in the Middle East. So I think this move away from US exceptionalism or as some would say the EM of occasion of the US is a structural theme it's not going to happen one day it's going to be two steps forward once that back so that glimpse of it we saw in the British and I think we'll see it again and I think it will see it more often but it's not just going to happen overnight we have entire framework that's been built up over decades and it's just not going to disappear so suddenly.
自那以后，美国资产似乎表现得比欧洲资产略好一点，而美元的实力好像也稍微增强了一些。然而，我认为美元作为避险工具的作用并不是特别强。本来我以为在中东局势显著升级的预期下，美元会更加强势。因此，我认为美国独特性逐渐减弱，或者说美国有朝着新兴市场化趋势发展的可能，这是一种结构性趋势。这种变化不会在一天之内发生，而是会经历两步前进，一步后退的过程。我们在英国已经看到了这种迹象，并且我相信我们会再次看到这种趋势，而且会越来越频繁。但这种转变不会一夜之间发生，因为几十年来建立的整个框架不会突然消失。
Yeah I think it's always you know there's always a shot across the bone move and then proceeding a bigger bigger thing because the majority of people's rec you know operating in the past regime and environment and you know nine eight times out of ten they're rewarded for that buying the dip or what have you and you know regime shifts don't come along too often but in this case I agree with Joseph that the sort of decline of the dollar is there's many forces influencing that and I think my view in the in the more immediate term is that there's record short positioning in the dollar everybody every bank research report I get is their highest conviction trade for the next six months a short dollar and in the futures market it's the same and then you kind of mix in some of these geopolitical things where you're going to be able to do that.
好的，我认为总是这样，就是会有一些小的震荡，然后才会引发更大的变化。因为大多数人在过去的市场环境中操作，比如在市场下跌时买入，他们十有八九会因此获利。虽然市场环境的转变并不常见，但在这种情况下，我同意Joseph的看法，即美元的价值下降是受多种因素影响的。就目前来看，我认为对美元的空头仓位达到了创纪录的水平。每家银行的研究报告都认为，在接下来的六个月内，最有信心的交易是做空美元，期货市场也是如此。此外，还需要考虑一些地缘政治因素的影响。
So I think that's where you know if oil price does remain elevated even though I don't think that's so much the case because Trump's so focused on it he literally dedicated his first international visit to the price of oil. So I'm not factoring that too much into into my projection but I do see sort of a rinse of that positioning you know when everybody thinks this outcomes going to happen it doesn't always happen linearly and ultimately though when if there is a larger risk of climate and if there is a larger decline in the US assets as a result of this and we just sat here and talked about how foreigners are loaded up to the gills on exposure they're taking nominal wealth hits as well just alongside everybody else and so yes there's a dynamic of repatriation and reallocation away from the US but if you're doing that from a minus ten or minus 20% basis in on top of if the currency gets hit in stocks are down ten or 15 and currencies down five that just adds to it so it's not like they're flourishing and have all this money to bring back home in a good way so I think you could maybe just see a situation where those assets fall less because there's less concentration less holdings and maybe on the other side of it they outperformed because people see this trend that's coming and the valuation differences still there but could be the next leg is just we haven't had the degrosing yet we haven't had the de leveraging yet the musical chairs are still being swapped around and if we do get a broader degrosing event then probably nothing even maybe gold is not safe in some of those cases.
所以我认为，如果油价确实居高不下，那也是因为特朗普对油价的高度关注，他甚至将第一次国际访问专门用于讨论油价。因此，我在我的预测中并没有过多考虑这一点。但我确实看到，当大家都认为某个结果会发生时，事态发展往往并不总是线性地发展。尽管如此，如果气候风险加大，因而美国资产出现较大下降，我们刚才讨论过，外国投资者在美国的风险敞口很大，他们和其他人一样也在承受名义财富的损失，因此确实存在资金从美国撤回和重新分配的动态。然而，如果他们从资产损失10%或20%的基础上进行这样的操作，而与此同时如果货币贬值，股市下跌10%或15%，货币再贬值5%，都会加剧损失。因此，他们并不是在一个良好的条件下带着大笔资金回国。我认为可能会出现一种情况，那就是这些资产的下降幅度较小，因为持有的集中度较低，而在另一方面，由于人们看到未来的发展趋势，价值差异依然存在，表现可能会更好。然而可能下一步就是，我们还没有经历资产去杠杆化，市场上还没有出现大规模的去风险事件，投资者仍在频繁变更投资组合。如果真的出现更广泛的去风险活动，那么即使是黄金在某些情况下也未必能幸免。
It's always so tempting when we get into this type of conversation of talking about the assets of the reserve currency which is the US dollar in present day and it becomes very tempting to start to think about these are a lot of signs that lead to the end of the world. We need to the end of reserve currency status is often like you know this morning we had a really great presentation from Mark dinner who worked at bridge water and he's one of the heads of reddallas investment research team and he walked us through. You know looking at different regimes of previous reserve currencies and how how they fail in the process for them and it's it's really compelling stuff so I'm just I myself I find it very difficult to try to stay level headed. But then also see a lot of these signs and it's like you know we're taking all the boxes right now heading towards this direction of reserve currency change but at the same time that's been a losing trade for many many years now and there's been people talking about unsustainable fiscal deficits for my entire life and we've gone through many phases of that.
当我们进入这类谈话时，总是很容易被吸引去讨论储备货币的资产，目前来说就是美元。我们会很容易开始觉得这些是末日来临的种种迹象。我们需要注意的是，储备货币地位的终结常常令人关注。今天早上，我们听了一个非常精彩的演讲，演讲者是Mark Dinner，他曾在桥水公司工作，现在是Reddallas投资研究团队的负责人之一。他带领我们回顾了历史上不同储备货币的变迁，以及它们失败的过程。这些信息非常引人入胜，我自己发现保持冷静和清醒是很困难的。尽管如此，我们确实看到许多迹象表明我们正在走向储备货币变革的方向。然而，多年来，这一直是一种失败的交易，许多人在我这一生中都在谈论不可持续的财政赤字，而我们已经经历了许多这种情况的阶段。
So I'm just you know curious on a high level how you how you both appropriately discount those two possibilities because it feels irresponsible to not. Even to not consider change reserve currencies because the history shows that they do change in the way that we're seeing right now but at the same time that's you know it's like what's the trade on that you know so I'm just curious like how do you both balance those possibilities. I think that so people have been talking about dollar losing reserve status for some time doesn't seem to be happening but some assets have been benefiting from that gradually over time gold for example right gold just keeps going higher and higher so dollars to reserve currency but gold is still benefiting so I think that will probably continue.
所以，我只是想了解一下，在一个较高的层面上，你们如何适当地权衡这两种可能性，因为忽略这些似乎是不负责任的。即使不考虑更换储备货币也是不妥的，因为历史表明，储备货币确实会像我们现在看到的这样发生变化。但与此同时，你也知道，就是在这种情况下有什么可以交易的，所以我很好奇你们是如何平衡这些可能性的。我觉得已经有一段时间有人在谈论美元失去储备货币地位的可能性，但这似乎并没有发生。然而，一些资产逐渐从中受益，比如黄金，黄金的价格一直在上涨。因此，尽管美元仍然是储备货币，但黄金依然在获益，我认为这种情况可能会继续。
I think that we are at a point where I won't say reserve currency status being lost but being weakened and dollar being depreciated and that seems so obvious to me because there's so many things factors going for like you mentioned we got very large fiscal deficit but more importantly we are doing so many things that are just antagonizing people foreigners to discouraging them to hold our assets right rather it to be be perceived to be behaving irrationally. Whether it to be you know just for example basically having trade policies that are might involve some degree of coercion and so forth and I think there's a sense that the administration doesn't actually want to have the reserve currency because they think that there are people in there that think that the burden that comes with being a reserve currency outweighs the benefits.
我认为我们正处于这样一个阶段，我不会说储备货币地位已经丧失，但它确实在被削弱，美元正在贬值。这对我来说非常明显，因为有很多因素在起作用，比如你提到的，我们有很大的财政赤字，但更重要的是，我们正在做很多事情，这些事情让外国人感到不满，从而劝阻他们持有我们的资产。比如说，实施一些可能带有胁迫性质的贸易政策等等。我认为，人们感到政府实际上并不希望拥有储备货币地位，因为他们认为，成为储备货币所带来的负担超过了其带来的好处。
And so for this country to be able to have a stronger manufacturing expert sector we need to have a weaker dollar and I think some perceive that reserve currency status is an impediment to having a weaker dollar so I mean if you don't really want to have reserve currency a lot of people do and maybe that will just go to other places who actually do and that's going to take time but we're definitely doing all the right things to move towards that. Yeah it's such a long moving trend I think you you're better suited playing playing things playing other things right in that case because at the end of the day it is if you're playing fiat pairs that's why you plot gold versus every currency and it's it's a kind of straight line up with very few dips you know global bond yields as a similar chart over a longer time horizon eventually this would this would result in the same way.
为了让这个国家拥有更强大的制造业出口部门，我们需要一个较弱的美元。我认为，一些人认为储备货币地位妨碍了美元变弱。所以，我的意思是，如果你不太希望拥有储备货币地位，很多人会选择其他更愿意担当这一角色的地方。这需要时间，但我们确实在朝着那个方向努力。
是的，趋势变化是一个漫长的过程。我认为，你在这种情况下可能更适合将注意力放在其它事情上。因为到头来，如果你在关注法币对，也就是说，你会将黄金与每种货币进行比较，会发现趋势几乎是一条直线上升的曲线，几乎没有大的跌幅。全球债券收益率在更长的时间范围内也有类似的走势，最终结果也会是这样。
And so I think that's a lot more commodity price appreciation and you know with these things you get geopolitical issues rising which put scarcity concerns and on your supply chains and commodity resources so I think there's a lot of other ways you play it but it is interesting because for many years every fund or investor asset allocator you know in the US but also broad given how much unhaged dollar exposure there are from foreign investors. Have just assumed the dollar to be this kind of rock and stable currency and in the best of the dirty shirts but yeah the reflexivity of if that changes and how many people need to sort of scrap their plans and rethink creates flows that be get flows and it's a very inflationary outcome for us and it creates these pockets of different kinds of different kinds of different kinds of things.
我认为，这导致了大宗商品价格的大幅上涨。当这些问题出现时，地缘政治因素往往会加剧供给链和商品资源的紧张。我认为，还有很多其他方式可以应对这种情况。有趣的是，长期以来，无论是在美国还是其他国家，许多基金经理、投资者和资产配置者都认为美元是一种非常稳定的货币，在不完美的国际货币中算是不错的选择。然而，如果这种看法改变了，很多人可能需要放弃原有计划并重新思考，这会引发资金的流动，进而带来更多的资金流动，这对我们来说是一个非常通胀的结果。这也会导致各种不同类型的问题出现。
Different different circumstances where we've benefited from importing deflation via stronger currency and if you go to like a situation where your currency is depreciating 5% your over your for three years or something that's that means in a in a time where we're importing a massive trade trade imbalance that's very inflationary and has more ramifications. Alright so just to wrap this up here just want to talk a little bit about how to navigate from a portfolio standpoint everything we just talked about because to me it just feels like almost every asset class has some sort of land mine associated with it right now whether that's okay I'm going to go on US equities but oh wait the flows are going to go in the opposite direction for the next few years yes we will get these bounces of changes but overall it's likely going in that direction bond yields are looking like they're going to go higher rest of world equity.
在不同的情况下，我们曾通过更强的货币使得进口商品价格下降，从而获益。如果进入一种货币贬值5%的情况，并持续三年左右，这意味着在我们进口巨额贸易逆差时，会非常通货膨胀，并产生更多的影响。好，简单总结一下，我想从投资组合的角度来谈谈如何应对我们刚讨论的一切。对我来说，现在几乎每种资产类别都有潜在的风险。比如说，如果我想投资美国股票，但未来几年资金流向可能会相反。虽然我们会看到间歇性的反弹和变化，但整体趋势可能会走向相反的方向。此外，债券收益率看起来将会上升，其他国家的股票市场也是如此。
Rest of world equity is interesting but then again to your point Joseph geopolitical tensions are much greater tailors for those countries there's also you know way too much regulatory red tape in Europe to be interested in anything technology related there even though they may get those positive flows to me it sort of feels like you're you're left with gold and Bitcoin gold obviously we talked a bit about already and it just it seems like a really solid bet. Bitcoin to but it also has that correlation to risk off so if we do go into these sort of decroasing moments like you talked about when it's going to get hit with that so you got to be managing your risk of really effectively but aside from that I just. I see holes in everything else I'm curious what you guys think.
世界其他地区的股票确实有吸引力，但就像你提到的，Joseph，那些国家的地缘政治紧张局势更为突出。此外，欧洲的监管障碍过多，很难对那里的科技相关领域感兴趣，即便他们可能会有积极的资金流入。在我看来，最终你可能只剩下黄金和比特币。黄金我们之前已经稍微谈到过，它看起来是个非常稳妥的选择。比特币也是如此，但它也与避险情绪存在相关性，所以如果我们进入你提到的那种风险减少的阶段，它可能会受到冲击，因此需要非常有效地管理风险。除此之外，我觉得其他选项都有问题。我很想知道你们的看法。
Yeah I I hate the risk reward for almost every asset and I think like the most money to be made over the next 12 months is probably on the short side of most assets. And I guess you know if you're in cash you're long the dollar and even that is probably not that safe so I think you know inflation protected securities bonds tips like things like that I think in playing the short side I do think like if you if you don't know your currency if you think about your portfolio and you're like I'm dollar based but well maybe I want to be gold based on always long gold or you know changing that up is probably prudent or playing currencies more often than you would to protect your purchasing power in that way.
是的，我非常不喜欢几乎所有资产的风险回报，我认为在未来12个月内，最有可能赚取最多利润的方式是做空大多数资产。我猜，如果你持有现金，那就等于持有美元，但即便如此，这也可能不太安全。所以，我认为购买抗通胀的证券、债券和国库通胀保值证券（TIPS）等投资是比较可行的。我认为，如果你不确定使用哪种货币，或者在考虑你的投资组合时，你主要是基于美元的，但可能会考虑更多地基于黄金，或者总是持有黄金，把投资模式转换一下可能是明智的。经常进行货币投资可以更好地保护你的购买力。
So I think there's more games to be played there but yeah I mean even Bitcoin you really have to wait till the intervention occurs before the positive read throughs of liquidity make it make it a track. From here because Bitcoin is the liquidity release valve and it powers committing to being three to six months delayed on cutting like that's not an attractive set up either so my my yeah I think like short bond short equities almost and then eventually when the weakness does materialize they will probably cut more than they currently expect and they will turn from hawkish to dovish and and I think that's not going to be a good example.
我认为在这个领域还有很多游戏可以玩，但就连比特币，你也真的要等到有干预发生后，流动性的积极影响才会显现。因为比特币就像是流动性释放的阀门，而其影响可能会延迟三到六个月，因此当前的市场状况并不理想。所以，我的想法是，短期内可能会做空债券和股票，然后当市场疲软真正显现时，他们可能会削减超出目前预期，并从强硬立场转向宽松立场。我认为这并不是一个好的例子。
And in that case I guess the two year note does does really well but yeah there's there's a lot of land mine that's a good way to put it. Yeah so I agree with you guys I think there's a lot of things happening outside so for my subscribers I have a market view portfolio to help people think through about how to position so in that portfolio there's only two things it's cash and gold and hopefully as some of these riskier things materialize and if the currency continues to decline like I think it will. I think there'll be good buying opportunities in the coming months so that's that's something about it now personally I like the short side to yeah sounds good all right well yeah we're out there thanks for guiding Joseph always great to have you on as well. Appreciate you jumping in last I can appreciate that yeah thanks for listening.
在这种情况下，我认为两年期票据表现会很好，但确实存在很多风险，就像踩地雷。是的，我同意你们的看法，我认为外界发生了很多事情。因此，我为我的订阅者准备了一个市场观点组合，以帮助大家思考如何进行投资配置。在这个组合中只有两样东西：现金和黄金。希望随着一些风险事件的发生，如果货币像我预期的那样继续贬值，未来几个月会有很好的买入机会。所以这就是关于它的内容。就我个人而言，我也喜欢做空。嗯，听起来不错，好吧，就这样吧。感谢Joseph的指导，总是很高兴有你参与。感谢你最后的加入，真的很感谢。谢谢大家的收听。