저자: NourielRoubini · 외국인
요약 보기
비트코인 등 크립토 버블 붕괴, 중동 긴장 속 미국 예외주의 지속, 미국 성장률 4% 전망과 강달러 장기 전망, 관세는 시장 압력으로 2026년 더 인하될 것, AI 투자 붐으로 경상적자 확대, 연준은 AI를 이유로 금리 인하할 필요 없다는 견해.
다듬은 글
; Nouriel Roubini now joins us with his wonderful books, all that he's done for me over the years, going way, way back pre-crisis. Is Well, let me just get Bitcoin out of the way. I don't want to waste time on it. We've had not one, but two of our guests emphatically state Roubini's right, it's going to 10,000.
Is Bitcoin going down from 60,000 to 10,000? Um, I think it doesn't matter. I don't make predictions. It could go significantly lower, could stay where it is. But the point is that, you know, Bitcoin is down from its peak by 50%. The other top 10 uh, cryptocurrencies are down between 60 to 90%. You know, Melania coin and Trump coin are down 97, 99%.
Even worse than Fart coin is down only 95%. that out here? Well, you know, it's a it's a traded currency, so and you know, the NFT index is down 95% from the peak. So, it was a bubble, it's burst. Whether Bitcoin goes much lower or not, who cares? Who cares? Nouriel, you were saying that you've just come off 3 weeks of travel.
Yeah. A, where where were you and B, what did you learn? Well, I spent good amount of time between Saudi Arabia, Israel, uh, Dubai and Abu Dhabi. I would say that, uh, foremost on people's mind was the question of whether there will be another conflict between, uh, Israel and US on one side and Iran.
Mhm. Uh, debated in Israel, in Saudi, throughout the Gulf. We don't know, there are negotiations. I would say the Israeli view is that probably, um, it's not just an issue about nuclear bomb, but also about, uh, the missiles, ballistic missiles and the regional proxies. While, uh, Trump might just cut a deal on the on the nuclear bomb alone that will leave Israel in a weaker position, but we'll see what are going to be the results of those negotiations.
Other than geopolitics, there's been a move just kind of feeling that wait, the the US maybe has lost a little bit of of its exceptionalism. There are other opportunities to invest outside of the US. We've seen that over the last 6 to 12 months. Is that something you sense in your travels? Oh, yes or no.
Uh what I feel is people say we don't like the US in public and then they invest in the US. I mean, throughout the Gulf, whether it's Saudis or Emiratis or Qataris, uh there's no alternative to the United States. And I think for a good reason, you know. I've argued that actually I'm a techno-optimist.
The US potential growth by the end of this decade is going to be 4%, not two. And if you had American exceptionalism when growth was 2% and the S&P was returning you 12% including dividends for 20 years and Nasdaq 16%. If growth is even only three, let alone three and a half and four, then returns have to be even higher.
So, yeah, in the short term there is now volatility, but that short-term volatility, if you look in the medium term with 3-4% growth and we'll be there because of technology. The US is number one together with China in all of the industries of the future. It's not just the either, about 15 other ones.
Then American exceptionalism is not over. Actually, it's going to be reinforced over time. And there is no other place to invest than the United States because China is risky and uninvestable for lots of good reasons. Nouriel Roubini, I would just call this bulletproof academics. Whatever your political view is, it's truly outstanding international economics.
Nouriel Roubini on tariffs. I'm reading the Morgan one volume on William McKinley. Trump is fixated on the Gilded Age and the benefits of tariffs. I don't buy it for a minute and I'm looking for McKinley's Buffalo pivot where politicians walk back the talk. Are we going to see in 2026 tariff reduction by the president in some manner like a Buffalo pivot?
Oh. It already happened in 2025, and it's going to be more of it in 2026, you know. On April 2nd, he announced average effective tariffs of 30% uh as opposed to the pre uh April 2nd liberation day 3%. But I said right away that market discipline is going to force him to chicken out and back down. And 2 weeks into that announcement, Nasdaq was down 20%, S&P 15, 10-year Treasury yield were up 80 basis points, high yield spreads up 150, the dollar started to go freefall, and he panicked.
And he panicked, he started to do trade deal, and he gave the job to Scott Bessent. And guess what? The average US tariff right now is not 30%, it's 14 and falling because there is a inflation affordability crisis, and every day they cut back the tariffs on aluminum, on coffee, cocoa, and whatever. You know, they're desperate.
And therefore, they already chickened out in 2025 cuz the market forced them. They'll do more of it this year because there are, of course, midterm election, and they need to try to boost the economy and reduce inflation. So, tariffs are going down, not up. Has the whole tariff discussion, Nouriel, uh maybe permanently or at least in the intermediate term negatively impact just trade the US between various partners, or is this something that everybody can just get past, do you think?
Uh you know, there's been some short-term volatility. There's been some shrinkages of our imports from the rest of the world. My view is actually the US trade and current account deficit, regardless of tariffs, is going to widen because from a macro point of view, uh the trade balance is not exports minus imports, it's savings minus investment.
And US is in the middle of an investment boom driven by AI and technologies of the future. It's like an emerging market if I oil or something where you have an investment boom and your domestic private and public savings are lower, then you have a current account deficit. So, our current account deficit is going to become larger, not smaller, even if you have 30% tariffs.
That's a macro view. And it doesn't matter because the inflow of capital, equity investment to finance it, FDI, VC, startups, you name it. Portfolio investment is going to finance that. So, not only American exception is not over, the exorbitant privilege of the US dollar is not over, and even the weakness of the dollar is only short-term.
Over the medium term with 4% growth, the dollar is going to be much stronger and the euro is going to be much weaker. Are you predicting an advancing dollar from here, or does it have to weaken down and then we get a bid in the dollar? Listen, in the next few months it could weaken more depending on relative monetary policy, but I'm asking myself, suppose you are 2030, at the end of this decade, and US growth is four, and Eurozone is stuck at 1%.
Uh real interest rates and real exchange rate depends on real growth rate. No, just just cuz of time. I got to ask the euro has to be well below parity in that world. was brilliant and I got this in. Are we stealing investment from other parts of American enterprise with all this money going into AI technology and data centers?
Um no, I don't think so. Uh I don't think so because first of all, to build all these AI data centers, there's a supply chains of construction, of equipment, of everything, cooling, heating system, you name it, the chips uh supply chains and so on. And you know, and this booming capex is maintaining economic growth strong and that's going to be good for the economy and for many other sectors.
And secondly, it's not just the hyperscale Mark 7 are doing investment in AI. If you are any S&P 500 firm today and you don't have a AI strategy, you're dead because you could be disrupted by a competitor or by tech firm or by whatever. So, everybody is trying to play with AI. Now, we're not yet seeing the significant increases in productivity growth.
We see them at the macro level, by the way, but we don't see them for every firm. But, the profit margins for every S&P 500 firm has increased. The real revenues for all S&P 500 firms have gone up since ChatGPT has been launched by 15%. So, 5% per year. So, there are already signs that there is this increase in productivity growth across across the economy.
So, everybody has to have a AI strategy. So, everybody is doing capex. It's not just a hyper scalar story. Nouriel, can this economy grow at 4% as you suggest with no immigration? Do we need a an immigration policy that allows population growth? Well, we need it because we have a bottleneck of skilled labor.
Um you know, uh TSMC is building a factory in Arizona. I spoke with people in Taiwan. I said, "We don't have the skilled workers in Arizona." So, they have hundreds or thousands of engineers of TSMC going there initially for a few months. Now, they'll have to be there for a few years. So, you need a more intelligent immigration policy with more H-1B visas so that skilled workers can work in United States.
But, even if we had net migration that was close to zero, I think the increases in productivity growth driven by the technologies of the future, and AI is one of the 15 of them. Everybody's obsessed with AI. AI is just one piece of the story. There are 15 other sectors where there is a productivity growth because of technologies of the future.
So, that's going to lead to an increase in productivity growth regardless of job creation. That's why there is a gap between GDP and jobs cuz there is a booming productivity growth. So, that's what's already happening. We don't have the workers. We're cutting [clears throat] back on net migration. We're deporting people, and growth is actually accelerating rather than decelerating.
Roubini, out with his pulse. We welcome all of you across the nation. We welcome you worldwide as well from Istanbul to Tehran to Tel Aviv and then on to Italy, which is Nouriel Roubini out of a suitcase in his childhood. You have a perspective, old world, new world, like no one I know because of your tumultuous childhood and your superior, brilliant academics at Bocconi and and and and and others.
Nouriel, how do you see America after this second term of President Trump? Do we go back to the processes, for example, you had serving us with Bill Clinton? Do we go on to a new populism? How do you see us after Trump? You know, I I I think that Trump is going to be more a temporary exception rather than radical change of the US.
Yes, there is a little bit more populism because there are plenty of people left behind. Some of them vote for the progressive, some of them vote MAGA. But there'll be the strong increasing growth. I think that after midterm election, if the GOP loses the house, uh Trump is going to be a lame duck. Anybody from J.D.
Vance to Marco Rubio to a bunch of other going to say, "I want to run. Great job, President, for two terms." Even the Supreme Court is not going to allow him to run for a third term. And therefore, you know, he's going to be lame duck and we're going to Whoever is going to be elected, maybe with the exception of J.D.
Vance, but even a Marco Rubio is going to be somehow in between the traditional, you know, George Bush Republican Party and more populist one. So, and with stronger economic growth, I think some of these backlash against liberal democracy and free market is going to shrink. There'll be some of the backlash, but I think with higher growth, some of these concerns about inequality and other things are going to be lessened over time.
Nouriel, with all your travels and all your contacts around the world, is the US leadership position which it's held generally un- interrupted since the end of World War II? Is that changed? Is that done? Is that Is that framework no longer in place, do you think? Well, you know, even our friends and allies in Europe, in the Middle East, in Asia are happy because US is behaving like a like a bully.
But you know, NATO is still there. We're going to find deals on trade and other things. And think about the Europeans. Do they really want to use the fence stack of China and AI of China and be in the Chinese orbit? Of course not. So, they have an option and they'll have to essentially spend more on defense, be part of NATO, buy even more American weapons.
And there are going to be two technological stacks are going to be completely the risk because there's a [clears throat] US stack and a Chinese stack. And if you are a friend of the US, you don't want to be subject to the spying and being within the firewall of China. So, you have Europe and friends and allies have no choice.
They have to go with our technology, with our defense, with our own system, with our economic channels. They'll do some trade with China, but once it's stuff that is really sensitive, they have no option but going with the US. Nouriel Roubini and Richard Clarida have sat in this chair and I'm posing sat in the chair and others to discuss the next chairman of the Fed.
Are you comfortable with Mr. Warsh? Are you particularly comfortable with him that he doesn't have the academic say of Richard Clarida? He wouldn't know DSGE theory if it hit him over the head. Um, that doesn't bother me as much. You know, he was at the Fed before and and even Powell has done well well being a lawyer.
I'm more concerned about his views. Uh, the view that you can because of AI reduce the Fed funds rate is wrong because even if AI will eventually reduce inflation, it's going to increase potential growth. So, the equilibrium real R star is higher while the nominal because of inflation could be lower and it's going to be a wash between the two.
So, on one side, the real growth implies high real rates. On the other side, lower inflation implies lower nominal, and it's a wash between the two. So, that doesn't justify a lower Fed funds rate. you included in dynamics here. Waller, I asked him, "Do we need two R stars?" Cuz we got an American nor you'll flat on their back that is not part of this AI productivity experiment.
Are we living two R stars right now? Well, we live in what everybody refers to as a K-shaped economy. The top 10% is doing very well. The bottom 50% struggles from paycheck to paycheck. Even if we are at full employment, these people have jobs, but even if you were to cut policy rates in an economy is near full employment, you're going to fully fuel only inflation, and inflation is going to hurt more the working class than otherwise.
So, the solution is not going to be reducing the policy rate. If you're worried about inequality, you have to do stuff like providing education, skills, retraining, and all the things we're not doing to make sure that those were left behind are not left behind. It's not the job of monetary policy. Your PhD advisor, Jeff Sachs, did the book 15 years ago, folks, predicting all of this educational failure in America.
I got 20 seconds. When's the next Roubini book? Uh I usually write one every decade. Crisis Economics was 2010. Megathreat was 2022. So, maybe something on AI and how the world is going to change, but it's going to be by the end of the decade. Not not anytime soon.
Comments 0