저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 연준 긴축과 인플레이션 장기화 우려로 성장주·암호화폐가 고점 대비 하락 중이며, 시장 전반은 유동성 축소 국면에 들어섰다는 판단. 인플레이션: 인플레이션은 장기화될 가능성이 크며 행정부의 '일시적' 주장은 빗나갔다고 평가. CPI의 주거비(OER) 산정 방식이 설문 기반이라 과소 집계되며, 단독주택 임대 데이터로 보정하면 근원 CPI가 4.9%가 아닌 더 높고 헤드라인 CPI도 6.8%가 아닌 약 10.1%일 수 있다고 주장. 재정: 빌드백벳 법안은 CBO 기준 2조 달러가 아닌 약 5조 달러 비용, 10년간 재정적자 3조 달러 증가가 예상되며 시한부 설계는 회계 속임수라고 비판. 고용: 대퇴직(Great Resignation)의 구조적 요인으로 이민 감소, 학위 소지자와 일자리 간 불일치, 베이비붐 세대의 대규모 자산에 따른 조기 은퇴를 꼽음. 금리·유동성: 실질금리가 사실상 마이너스였던 환경에서 기관투자자들이 장기 듀레이션 자산과 성장주에 쏠렸고, 금리 상승 시 연금 등이 리스크 축소(디그로싱)를 강요받는 중. 11월 초 연준 매파 발언 이후 성장주는 약 30% 이상, 암호화폐는 30~40% 하락. 종목·자산 언급: 성장주·기술주 전반(미국기술주, 나스닥)에 대해 고점 이후 약세 및 금리 상승에 취약하다는 부정적 인식. 비트코인은 30~40% 하락 중이며 유동성 축소의 영향을 받는다고 언급. 가치투자는 값싼 자산이 아니라 가치 있는 기술 자산 중심이어야 한다는 주장. 기업 구조조정: 감원은 수요 부족이 아닌 과잉 성장·과잉 투자에 대한 조정이라는 관점 제시. 출연자 전망: 금리 인상과 유동성 축소가 자산시장 전반의 조정을 이끌 것이라는 중립~약세적 시각.
다듬은 글
americans are feeling the pain of rising inflation we're paying more for just about everything what milton friedman said that inflation is like alcoholism at first it's kind of fun uh but then the pain comes late saks what are your thoughts on inflation which now seems acute and permanent how not to panic about inflation that did not age well quote our business is actually starting to set prices and wages based on the expectation of high future inflation if they aren't and my bet is they won't be then the lesson of 2010 to 2011 will remain don't panic remember when it was at about 5.1 over the summer that the administration said no big deal this is transitory don't panic um then it went to 6.2 now at 6.8 looks like it's headed to 7 and the real problem here is that these guys the administration have not adjusted course in light of this data what they've tried to instead is now speciously claimed that the same bills that they had written and conceived the build back better bill somehow even though it was conceived at a time that was really deflationary that somehow this is going to fight inflation they're essentially repurposing they're just changing the arguments they're using as opposed to changing their their legislative priorities and just today we got a report from cbo saying that this build back better bill wasn't going to cost 2 trillion like the administration said is going to cost 5 trillion and add 3 trillion to the deficit for 10 years correct over 10 years if those programs are not sunsetted so there's a bunch of budgetary gimmicks that were put in the bill basically a lot of the programs would sunset after one year or three or six years and so that's the only way they've gotten it to this you know 1.9 trillion dollar price tag the reason why that's a gimmick is because once the programs are created there's going to be it will create a special interest or constituency who is now dependent on those programs and no one's ever going to want to cut them well i think we did a pretty good job of unpacking the great resignation i think it was last pod so right remember like there are three structural issues at play in the jobs front one is that you have this really meaningful under immigration that's happened because of trump the second was you've had a big mismatch between the degreed classes in america and the jobs that they can have for what they think they should earn meaning you go to school you get into all this debt you try to become a teacher or something and then you realize you can make more at an amazon warehouse and then the fourth is you have all these boomers with an enormous amount of savings 30 40 50 trillion dollars who are pulling forward their retirement and also subsidizing their kids you put it all together there's less of an incentive to be in the job force unless you pay higher wages now let's just put a pin in that for a second i think the thing that sacks talked about is really important which is that we have to really figure out whether inflation is transitory or it's persistent and it's here something that we've we also mentioned before which is that cpi is horribly calculated and it's really imprecise and if you unpack cpi there's something price index the consumer price index there's something in there a component of it that's very important which is called the owner's equivalent rent right how much can somebody basically charge rent to other people the way that they calculate that which is 30 of the calculation is they just survey a handful of people the problem is you don't need to survey because the actual exact data is available from single-family rentals that report this number so their survey showed basically a uh much much smaller increase than what the actual increase is so the largest owners of nationwide single family rentals are reporting a 17 year-over-year rent increase wow the the oer that was calculated quote-unquote by survey in the cpi was 3.5 if you flow that through it means that core cpi actually went from 4.9 today and the cpi print which was 6.8 was actually 10.1 it just goes to show you we have sources of data that the government is not in a position to collect or measure we have horribly inaccurate econometric models that we use but the numbers that underlie this decision-making is fundamentally flawed and it's flawed in the wrong direction the federal reserve forced a lot of institutional investors to be out as long-dated as possible in buying earnings because if you have to remember it's not just that real rates were effectively zero but if you wanted to own inflation-protected securities it was actually a negative yield so we were destroying people's savings and there are a lot of individuals sorry well not individuals institutions that must own some of these inflation protected assets so we were already in a negative yield environment what are those folks supposed to do if they have to fund an eight percent return a year to pay the pensions of you know good people firefighters teachers you know it's you name it policemen etc right they were forced to invest in the kinds of funds that would then go out further and further out into the future to buy the promise of future cash flows and when all of a sudden a whole bunch of other assets that they held which were supposed to be safe implodes on them because all of a sudden inflation changes and the front end of the yield curve goes and all of a sudden all these assets when yields go up prices go down now the fireman's pension is like oh my gosh we just lost all this money we never thought we were gonna lose and we're long all these you know crazy tech stocks and so then they're forced to sell so that their overall exposure goes down that's called degrosing okay and we've been going through a very painful process of this degrossing hedge funds are doing it the the problem with being a value investor over the last 15 years since 2008 is you're basically a dumpster diver because they misunderstood what value was value isn't necessarily things that are cheap value is things that are things that are valuable and over the last 15 or 20 years what was once a question is now definitive which is that the things that are valuable tend to be technological because they're super high margin they grow really quickly they compound they create enormous cash flows at scale so agree the point is you couldn't own that stuff and if you sat on the sidelines you weren't meeting your eight percent hurdle you were all of a sudden looking at some risk of defaulting on your pension obligations well we've seen over the past four or five weeks about the first week of november most the market basically peaked and at least grow stocks did and sas companies did if you look kind of november 8th was sort of the beginning of the downturn and since then most of these growth stocks are down about 30 plus crypto is down now i mean it's sliding as we speak 30 40 percent off off a peak around the same time what happened around the first week of november well you had three fed governors come out and make very hawkish statements about the fact that the fed was going to need to double the speed of its taper and that you're going to have two to three rate increases next year and so basically we went from being in a low interest rate environment which has been the case with not only just low interest rate environment low interest rates with massive stimulus and pumping out of washington by both the fed and by uh by congress the the amazing thing that i'm seeing right now is that every investor i know is having the same conversation it doesn't matter whether you're a sas investor or a real estate investor or a crypto investor they're all having the same conversation which is what are interest rates going to do how much liquidity is that going to suck out of the system and how much of the boom that we've experienced over the last couple of years has been because of this unnatural liquidity that's been pumped into the system i remember when i had to do my first layoff uh at aol and and there was a lot of those rifts and i remember the first one i was in my early to mid 20s as a manager and we had three or four people or whatever and i remember distinctly that aol had this policy at the time because i guess they had maybe like better like tens of thousands of people employees lots of call center as an example and they've had to have rifts before and i just remember being seared in my mind because never having done it before i was like sweating profusely really nervous i didn't know what to say i felt really bad i felt very guilty and then you learn how to do these things and there is a very humane way to try to do these things it's never the best thing to do but you try to give people a fair exit package and all of these things let me put that aside because i think what free brook said is so good and so important the root cause of why this is here as far as i can tell is not a company that doesn't have consumer demand it's a company that may have been mismanaged for growth to meet the consumer demand because of too much money or to actually have the discipline to hit the brakes and say i don't need it i don't know what to do with it i'm not ready to take it i need to figure out my business model those are two different kinds of decisions there's going to be layoffs in both but if he actually came at it from the perspective of listen guys we've been growing methodically and there's just been a structural change or for example rates are ticking up there's a lot less demand and we have to right-size the company that's a very different statement than maybe we overgrew because we were drunk on free money and now we have to realize that we actually have too much capacity for the demand that actually exists you
Comments 0