저자: MarcFaber · 외국인
요약 보기
유럽 국가들의 사회복지 부채로 인해 화폐 발행이 늘고 종이화폐 구매력이 떨어져 금·은 등 귀금속 가격이 오를 것이라는 주장. 기술주·반도체 주도 장세가 교체되는 대순환이 올 수 있으며, 중동 전쟁과 유가 상승 시 연준의 통화 발행과 달러 약세로 귀금속이 강세가 될 수 있다고 봄. 자산보호 차원에서 실물자산 중심 접근을 권장.
다듬은 글
The social obligations that all European countries have cannot be fulfilled. They cannot pay social security, pensions, unemployment benefits, etc. To do this, they are forced to print money. And we know what printing money leads to in the long run. Just in case anyone hasn't noticed: printing money usually leads to an increase in the prices of precious metals, or, better said, a loss of purchasing power of paper money.
This is exactly what is happening now. It's not that gold, silver, and platinum are getting more expensive. This is the loss of purchasing power of paper money. This July, the precious metals market is experiencing a massive shift. While gold and silver prices have been showing wild volatility, briefly rolling back before stabilizing, and weak economic data has fueled expectations for future interest rate decisions, astute investors see a much deeper and more troubling scenario.
The real driver of metal prices is not just underlying market demand. This is a structural breakdown of the global monetary system, which is forcing capital to flow en masse into real assets. In this exclusive analysis, legendary investor and publisher of the Gloom, Boom & Doom report, Mark Faber, conducts a harsh reality check.
Faber argues that European countries face huge unmet social obligations—from skyrocketing social security spending to staggering unemployment benefits. To survive, governments have no choice but to print money on an unprecedented scale. Faber warns that what most people call rising precious metals prices is actually an illusion.
This is a direct reflection of how paper currency is rapidly losing its purchasing power. Is your fortune really safe in cash while the printing presses are running at full capacity? Or are you holding on to a piece of melting ice? Stay with us to learn exactly how to protect your portfolio before the next wave of depreciation hit interested in .
When you look at the 1960s or 1970s, the US was the dominant economy in the world. Point. At that time, no one could challenge the United States. They were also probably the leading military superpower in the world. The only ones who had any power were the Russians, the Soviet Union, as long as it existed with its population.
But later, in the 1970s, the United States lost economic competition to Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. And very recently, I mean after 1918, specifically 1978. When Deng Xiaoping in China proclaimed the "open door" policy and China opened up, and after 1990 they truly opened up, China became the dominant manufacturing center of the world, not just the Asian region.
China produces more cement than the rest of the world combined, and they make more steel; So this is a giant economy that didn't exist in the 1960s, 1970s, and it's fundamentally changing the world. And further changes are occurring because not the same, but similar trends are emerging in India, which also has a population of 1.3 billion people.
And you also have, you know, British and French diplomats . They go to India and teach India about economics and democracy. The leaders of the Western world are so behind on everything. They don't understand the new world. They don't want to understand the new world, so they go and teach China and India—countries that are five or ten times their population.
I always laugh when someone, you know, just look at M., what kind of character is he, and he goes and lectures China and India about politics and economics, and it's all a complete farce. You know, Asians are very polite in many ways . Very rarely, I mean, in Thai, they, uh , don't choose to say "no." Uh, they use other ways to say "no." And, uh, Asians are very reserved when it comes to challenging someone's opinion.
They nod and remain silent. But the reality is that behind closed doors...They're sitting there, these people in Asia, I mean, many of them are multi-billionaires, they're scratching the back of their heads, looking at this macro and laughing. They think they are reading an Asterix or Tintin book, or another comic book.
When they see this character walking around telling the world what to do. I always laugh, especially when M., who is not physically very big and tall, etc., lectures on politics, on political philosophy to people, and they come from countries — the best joke is that they come from countries that are bankrupt.
The social obligations that all European countries have cannot be fulfilled. Uh, they can't provide Social Security benefits, pension benefits, unemployment benefits, etc. They are forced to print money to do this. And we know what printing money leads to in the long run. Just in case someone was n't paying attention.
Uh, usually printing money leads to an increase in the prices of precious metals, or, better said, to a loss of purchasing power of paper money. Here's what's happening. It's not that gold, silver, and platinum are getting more expensive. And in the loss of purchasing power of paper money. The global economic balance of power is rapidly shifting, causing significant excitement in the precious metals market this July.
As Western economies struggle with rising debt, gold and silver are becoming the main systemic protection instruments. The real reason is not just market demand. This is a fundamental restructuring of global production and financial dominance, forcing institutional capital to reassess traditional “safe havens” in the face of a new wave of instability.
He describes how the global landscape has changed dramatically since the mid- twentieth century. While the United States and the West were once undisputed superpowers, the rise of manufacturing giants like China and new powers like India has completely transformed the global economy. Despite these changes, bankrupt Western countries continue to try to teach these new economic giants a lesson .
Because these Western governments cannot meet their huge social obligations, they are forced to print money, which ultimately destroys the purchasing power of paper currency and pushes up the prices of gold and silver . Let's get back to the interview. As an economist, you might say, okay, let's look at the economy, and if it's improving, stocks will go up, and if it's getting worse, stocks will go down.
Everything is different now. I look at the financial market. Is the financial market growing? I can argue that it is growing due to increased liquidity. But I can also say that the growth of the financial market creates additional liquidity that is available for spending and artificially stimulates the economy.
And when this huge bubble deflates, it reduces liquidity, and then assets fall even more. Well, I have to say one thing here: as an observer and investor, you always think about markets, their function, etc. You always ask yourself: is the market a good mechanism? You know, is the market system, is the capitalist system the best we can have?
And I come to the conclusion: we need markets because a planned economy depends on planners. Here, for example, Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore—he was an exemplary planner. He took over the country, and I saw it with my own eyes. In 1970, Singapore was a dump and mired in poverty, and he took that country and built a functioning state.
The same goes for Sheikh Maktoum in Dubai, the Maktoum family. When I first arrived there in 1973, there was nothing there. Only two large hotels. One was the Hyatt, and the other was the Intercontinental Hotel. And, you know, the tallest building at that time was the International Building, which stands at the entrance to Dubai, if you go from Abu Dhabi.
Today, the International Building is still there, but it looks tiny compared to all the other buildings. You know, the International Building was about 12 or 15 stories high, and now there are buildings with 100 stories, and, I mean, then you scratch your head and ask: is the market system the best?
But I can point to many other economies that suffered from a planned economy. The Soviet Union, China, to some extent India, which was very socialist before Modi came to power . I think, overall, if I look at world history, for all the flaws of the capitalist system, we've never had a world as rich as we have now, and where poverty has been as low as it is today relative to the world's population.
I mean, it took the world population around 1840 to surpass a billion people. So throughout history from 5000 BC. and to this day the population has not grown much. But after the capitalist system was introduced and all the innovations it fostered through the Industrial Revolution, the population exploded to 8 billion people today.
Thanks to the market economy, we have a system where the poorest people can drink the same things as the richest. Everyone drinks Coca-Cola or Pepsi or something else or Red Bull, and everyone in the world can eat at McDonald's. When in history was it possible for the poorest and the richest to eat the same thing and drink the same thing?
So we must admit that the market economy has been very useful in raising people's living standards. But one thing that is likely to happen every time this big rotation happens, and it happens in your lifetime maybe three or four times. When this happens, market leadership and fundamentals change , and the investor must adapt to the new environment, and the only thing I can say for sure is that the old environment no longer works.
And so, if Netflix, Google, Facebook, etc., as well as semiconductors like Nvidia and stocks like Tesla, have worked for the past 5-10 years, then in the next 10 years, a different set of stocks will likely work. This is an environment where it might be worth stepping back and saying: I don't know what the world will look like in 5 years.
This war that has just started in the Middle East could —I'm not saying it will, but it could—become very chaotic and have a huge impact. Was n't the economy in the US weak enough? But if oil prices rise significantly, if the Fed doesn't print money, and if it does, the dollar will fall, precious metals will rise, and so on.
You know Friedrich Hayek, whom Americans hardly ever mention or quote , because he is a sensible economist, he is an intellectual. They prefer simpletons like Keynes and interventionists who intervene in the economy with terrible measures like tariffs. For years, big tech giants and promising semiconductor stocks have completely dominated global wealth creation, leading many to believe that the holiday season would never end.
However, a deep rotation is quietly underway beneath the surface, fueled in large part by escalating tensions in the Middle East and rising market volatility. Traditional financial assets are rapidly losing their edge as artificial liquidity bubbles show signs of strain. If history has proven anything, it's that the market leaders of the past decade rarely remain leaders in the next.
We are entering a completely new economic paradigm, where capital preservation is the key to survival . The old methods no longer work. Simply chasing huge returns in tech stocks will not protect wealth when an overburdened system faces acute geopolitical friction. Instead of blindly following mainstream trends , the real protection of wealth now lies in getting ahead of the crowd and losing less than your neighbor.
Navigating this changing landscape requires a disciplined focus on tangible assets , not speculative paper wealth . If this was helpful .
Comments 0