저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
차마스 팔리하피티야는 2025년 6월 CPI 등 인플레이션이 2%대 초반으로 내려오면 연준이 100bp 금리 인하를 단행할 것으로 보고 있다. 금리 인하 시 연방정부 이자비용 약 3000억 달러 절감, 자본이득세 등 세수 증가 약 3000억 달러 등 합계 약 6000억 달러 규모의 재무 여력이 생길 수 있다고 주장한다. 또한 관세 수입이 예상보다 연 3000~4000억 달러 많을 것으로 본다. 이 경우 위험자본이 미국으로 쏠리고 자산 가격 상승 흐름이 나타날 수 있다고 본다. 다만 연준 판단은 정치적 고려에 좌우된다고 평가한다.
다듬은 글
If Jerome Powell looks at the conditions on the ground, especially when you start to see inflation stay in the low twos and approach 2.0, the real thing that he's going to be under tremendous pressure to justify is why are you not cutting? And just to give you a sense of how important that is, if we cut by 100 basis points, that's another $300 billion.
Now, in that case, that's not money that we get in, but it's money we don't have to spend. So if you add these two things together, we are in the next 60 days going to have to reforcast the American balance sheet where this is or we're actually going to be able to positively forecast an extra 600 billion 300 billion of incremental revenue and 300 billion of savings.
Jason, if that happens, watch out. What if I told you the US government is on the brink of uncovering a hidden $600 billion boost to its balance sheet without printing a single new dollar? That's exactly what billionaire venture capitalist Chamath Palahapidia predicts on the latest All-In podcast. He lays out a scenario that could transform everything.
Falling inflation, aggressive interest rate cuts, and a sudden surge in fiscal breathing room for the US economy. If he's right, a major policy shift with huge market implications could be just weeks away. At the core of Kamatha's prediction is a simple question. Why hasn't Jerome Powell cut rates yet?
With inflation nearing the Fed's 2% target, Powell faces growing pressure to act. Chamath argues that if the Fed cuts rates by 100 basis points, a move markets have been eagerly awaiting, it could immediately save the government $300 billion in interest payments on existing debt. This drastic reduction in expenses would have a swift and powerful effect on the federal budget.
But that's only half the story. The other half comes from a surge in tax revenues, especially capital gains taxes, which Chamath estimates could add another $300 billion to government coffers. Together, this creates a potential $600 billion windfall, enough to force a complete reforcast of the US balance sheet within the next 60 days.
If this plays out, Chamath predicts a massive inflow of capital into the US, fueling a bullish run for asset prices. In this video, we'll unpack how rate cuts, inflation, and market forces are aligning into a perfect storm, what broader macro trends investors should watch, and why the Fed's next move could either ignite markets or throw them into chaos.
This is how you buy and sell crypto the easy way using E Toro, one of the world's leading trading platforms. If you're new to crypto, e Toro makes it super simple. Let me show you how I bought Salana in just a few tap. First, head to the search bar and type in Salana. Tap on it, then hit trade. I'm going to invest $10.
That's the minimum. Now just hit buy and done. I now own Salana. Selling is just as easy. Go to portfolio, tap your Salana asset, then click close and confirm your sale. Super simple. That's how quick and beginnerfriendly E Toro is. But here's why I use E Toro. Earn up to 4.3% interest on non-invested funds, 0% commission on stocks, and you can set up an account in just minutes if you want to start your crypto journey.
Use my link in the description to sign up to E Toro today and start trading. In the early 2000s, I think that there was a war of ideas and there was a group of people that advocated for this reckless form of free trade and this globalist view like every country is going to meld into one mega monolith country organization that'll get governed out of New York by the United Nations and its slave organizations.
And that worldview won, but it was the wrong worldview. And it didn't acknowledge that we have competing philosophies, competing priorities, competing ideals of what the future looks like. And I think that we need to go back and reset all of those things. If you just take where we are, if you can just put the Sanki diagram back up, there's a couple things that are really worth noting that people need to fundamentally understand.
I said a couple weeks ago that I thought the GDP print was going to come in hot. I think everybody now is sort of where I am. Why is it hot? Do you have a thesis on why GDP spikes so much or potentially did? That's obviously a forecast. I don't know the puts and takes yet. And I think when we see the print, we have I have a way of forecasting this stuff, which is a bunch of signals that my team and also many macro teams all around the world, the bond vigilantes to the hedge fund guys, they all feed it to me.
And what I was noticing was that we were going to come in, I said in the low 3s. And I think, you know, if Atlanta Fed is right, I don't think they are, but I think it's going to be in the low to mid-3s. It's going to be meaningfully greater than what people are expecting. So let me just give you my next prediction.
My next prediction are two really important things. What this Sanki diagram looks at which is a snapshot of the balance sheet and the health of the United States in May misses in my opinion two very important things that have to change. The first and this is a positive for the Trump administration and the United States economy is we are run rating 300 to400 billion dollar above forecast in terms of our receipts meaning the revenues that we will take in and you get to that number by looking at the last three months of tariffs and forecasting forward assuming a reasonable balance here.
So, back to Tucker's point, yeah, we all thought that this was like a boogeyman, that you weren't allowed to touch it, and that if you touched the stove, you were going to get burned. The mathematical reality is that this is actually going to work out much better for us than we anticipated, and it's going to be somewhere in the range of 300 to 400 billion of extra revenue per year.
That's a huge win. So, why is that important? That then sets up this next cataclysmic thing that we're going to see over the next 60 days. which is what does Jerome Powell do? If Jerome Powell stays politicized, his incentive will be to keep interest rates where they are. If Jerome Powell looks at the conditions on the ground, especially when you start to see inflation stay in the low twos and approach 2.0, the real thing that he's going to be under tremendous pressure to justify is why are you not cutting?
And just to give you a sense of how important that is, if we cut by 100 basis points, that's another $300 billion. Now, in that case, that's not money that we get in, but it's money we don't have to spend. So if you add these two things together, we are in the next 60 days going to have to reforcast the American balance sheet where this is or we're actually going to be able to positively forecast an extra 600 billion.
300 billion of incremental revenue and 300 billion of savings. Jason, if that happens, watch out. What does that mean? Watch out. It means that every single risk dollar is going to run to America. Every single one. Yum. Yum. Forget Japan. Forget Europe. There is no place to put your money except the United States.
So I think that we have to figure out how to get Jerome Powell on the side of America versus on the side of what could happen politically because I think that there's probably a version in his head that says, "My gosh, if I do this, it helps Trump and if I don't do it, it hurts Trump." Practically that is true.
But the reality is the conditions on the ground justify cutting. I I believe that these decisions are political. I think that the Federal Reserve has veered away from actually controlling the money supply in the best long-term interests of the United States and more towards what benefits the short-term.
And this ties back to how I started this. What is Powell's motivation? Somewhere in the 2000s, Jason, we transitioned away from having the strategic 20-year conversation about what's in the best interest of America. And instead, we started to have these uniolar globalist conversations. And the people that got into these centers of power, the IMF, the World Bank, the Federal Reserve, the central banks around the world, they all worked towards an agenda that is now being undone.
I'll give you an example of where this is now being undone. Just today, the World Bank undid a rule around being able to fund nuclear energy. And you would have thought, well, hold on a second. The World Bank steps in to backs stop all these developing countries when they're in the middle of all this nonsense, right?
And if you think about a country that's developing, what is the single biggest input to that country? Energy. And you think for the last 40 years of multi-trillion dollar bailouts, we never demanded abundant clean energy in the developing world? Of course not. because it was a political decision. To understand why this potential $600 billion shift matters, we need to zoom out from the raw numbers and consider the broader macro landscape.
The US economy has been delicately balancing high interest payments on record national debt, slowing inflation and uneven growth. What Chamath is pointing to is a rare and timely opportunity where falling inflation gives the Federal Reserve political cover to cut rates, allowing both markets and federal revenues to respond in tandem.
A rate cut wouldn't just be a monetary adjustment. It would be a powerful signal that the tightening cycle is over. If Jerome Powell initiates aggressive cuts, it could unleash a ripple effect across the economy. Asset prices would likely climb, borrowing costs for consumers and businesses would fall, and investor sentiment could turn sharply bullish.
The impact wouldn't be limited to traditional markets. It could spark a renewed appetite for risk in equities, crypto, and venture capital. But Kamatha's insight extends beyond monetary policy. He's highlighting a fiscal turning point. If the US can save $300 billion on interest payments while pulling in another $300 billion from increased capital gains taxes, the federal balance sheet shifts dramatically, creating room for new stimulus, public investment, or even strategic debt reduction.
However, this scenario hinges on several critical factors. Continued disinflation, a Fed willing to act decisively, and markets that respond with optimism. None of these are guaranteed. But if those elements align as Chamomath predicts, the second half of 2025 could mark the beginning of a new economic chapter, one of renewed momentum and opportunity.
It's not just about rate cuts. It's about unlocking a fiscal and financial reset that could catch many investors by surprise. Well, let me give you another data point. Okay, now let's assume, let's just scenario play. What happens if Powell rips in a 100 basis point cut? Right now, I'll tell you. So one part which is mathematical is the interest on the debt goes down.
We save 300 billion. But there's something else that happens which is the Fed does control the front end of the curve. Meaning how do people borrow money for small amounts of time from one day to about two years. If you make that cheaper we know is it's a test that's true as time. What happens is people borrow more money.
that fuels more growth that will end up in GDP. So what actually happens if you cut rates 100 basis points is not just the 300 but you can get this reflexive positivity in the economy. What that allows you to do is even if that causes a little bit more inflation, you're actually growing yourself out of this whole thing.
So then you ask yourself, well, hold on a second. If the numerical justification is there to lower rates and it has all of these other positive externalities for the United States economy, why don't I do it? The only answer is political. If you're pal, it's better to take the risk of being Paul Vulkar than Arthur Burns.
I mean, that's that's basically what it comes down to. For people who don't Well, because what happened is Arthur Burns let inflation slip the leash in the 1970s and he's remembered as a horrible Fed chair. And then Paul Vulkar came in and jacked up rates to like I think close to 20%. And caused a vicious recession in 1982.
But by 1983, the economy had bounced back and inflation basically was under control. And then the rate cutting cycle started and that rate cutting cycle went for like 25 years and then Reagan got reelected in 1984. So you you know you rather be a vulker than than a Burns if you're a Fed chair. Now you raised the question is pal political.
Yeah, of course he is. If you go back to uh was it 2021? So the first summer of Biden's presidency we got that shock 5.1% inflation print of in May of 2021 if my memory is correct. What did the Biden administration do? They sent Janet Yellan out to say it was transitory. And Pal got on board with the whole transitory narrative.
Exactly. And as a result of that, he did not raise rates for 6 months. And worse than that, they continued QE. I think they bought like 180 billion of bonds in that time period. And that's what allowed inflation to get so out of control. Now, why is it that pal did that because he wanted to get reconfirmed?
And yes, he was nominated by Trump originally, but Biden renominated him and he basically wanted the reappointment by Biden. He wanted to get confirmed. And then the month after he got confirmed, all of a sudden he shifted gears and started raising rates again once he was safely in Wisconsin's office.
So he did the right thing in terms of raising rates in the face of inflation once he was free from those political incentives. But for 6 months he was intensely political and that cost the United States dearly. I think dearly dearly. So now if you're a pal, you've got PTSD from that whole experience and you're going to heir on the side of not letting inflation come back.
I think what with inflation down to 2.4%. I think it is time to cut rates, but he's fearful because again his incentives are to be a Vulker, not a Burns. Yeah. And uh you want to read a good book, Paul Vulkar's Keeping at It. great uh book about has uh Reagan going to him and trying to get him to cut rates.
So, this is a reoccurring story just on but you know if if he had done the right thing in the summer of 2021, we never would have had that bubble at the end of 2021. Yeah. And that that basically created a huge crash in 2022 and we could have avoided a good part of that if he had done the right thing.
You know, like the Fed chair, it's not a hard job most of the time. I mean, these guys sit in their ivory tower and then once a quarter they come out and do this, you know, and basically testify and say a bunch of, you know, things that no one can understand. But like once in a while you got to get the decision right.
And he totally screwed it up in that one time where he had to get it right. Yep. And I would say this could be one of those moments too where I think he's being a little bit fearful. I think that there's a simpler explanation quite honestly. Like if you look at Powell's history, he was he was nominated as a governor by Obama.
Then Trump picked him out of the Fed to be chair, but then he was reappointed by Biden. If you look at the vice chair of the Fed, Phil Jefferson, he was appointed by Biden. If you look at Michelle Bowman, who's the vice chair for supervision, she was appointed by Trump. Michael Bar appointed by Biden.
Lisa Cook appointed by Biden. Adriana Krueger appointed by Biden. Chris Waller appointed by Trump. So I think the point is that there is a balance of power here. If you look at political affiliations that tend to favor a democratic view of the political landscape and let's be honest, what benefits the Democrats more?
A thriving economy in a shrinking deficit going into the midterms or the exact opposite. Chamath Palahapidia and David Saxs have outlined a highstakes scenario with potentially massive consequences. The Federal Reserve stands at a critical juncture, possibly preparing for a major rate cut while the US government re-evaluates its balance sheet amid shifting political dynamic.
Their argument isn't just theory. It's grounded in historical patterns, economic data, and a clear understanding of how monetary policy and political pressure often intersect. If they're correct, the Fed's next move could spark a regime shift, not just in traditional markets, but across the entire digital asset space.
For crypto investors, this moment may carry more weight than most realize. Historically, Bitcoin and other risk-on assets have thrived during periods of loose monetary policy. In March 2020, the Fed slashed rates in response to the COVID crash and Bitcoin surged from under $5,000 to nearly $65,000 in under a year.
Even in milder cycles like 2019, Bitcoin doubled from its lows. A 100 basis point cut, as Chamath predicts, could reignite institutional appetite for crypto. With lower yields, making traditional assets like treasuries less appealing, capital often flows toward high upside, high volatility sectors. Crypto being the prime destination.
But it's not just about liquidity. There's a deeper shift underway, one that ties together political momentum, innovation narratives, and growing institutional interest in crypto. If the economy starts to rebound, expect renewed excitement around stable coins, tokenized assets, and decentralized finance.
Looser monetary conditions combined with tech forward optimism could usher in crypto's next major bull run. If Kametha's thesis holds true, we could be standing at the edge of a major macro pivot, one where digital assets are not just beneficiaries, but leaders. So, the big question now, will Powell act or will inflation fears keep the brakes on?
Let us know what you think. But you don't have time. Don't miss out this 2025 bull run. Educate yourself first ahead of the crowd. We have created the ultimate step-by-step crypto cheat guide that will guide you this bull run. Unlock the secrets of crypto and make smarter investments today now by clicking on the link below to get your exclusive copy just under $10.
Comments 0