저자: Mario Nawfal · 외국인
요약 보기
이 방송은 중간선거 직후 미국 증시가 급락한 상황에서 전직 금융인 로버트 울프와 진행자 마리오가 나눈 대담을 담고 있다. 대담은 먼저 선거 결과를 짚는다. 로버트는 트럼프가 10년에 걸쳐 쌓은 연합이 하루 만에 흔들렸고, 오바마 연합이 히스패닉, 흑인, 젊은 남성, 노동자 표에서 다시 살아났다고 평가했다. 진행자는 S&P 500이 중간선거 이후 랠리를 지웠고 55분 만에 2조 2천억 달러가 증발했으며, 나스닥은 약세장 문턱까지 6% 하락했다고 전했다. 로버트는 정치와 금융이 분리되지 않으며, 데이터센터와 AI 규제를 초당적으로 논의해야 한다고 주장했다. 그는 리먼 사태 이후 도드프랭크법 같은 규제가 필요했던 경험을 근거로 들었다. 정치 양극화 부분에서 대담자들은 생활비 부담이 핵심 쟁점이라는 데 공감했다. 로버트는 포퓰리즘이 좌우 어디서나 나타나며, 건강보험은 국민의 권리로 봐야 한다고 말했다. 대법관 사임 가능성, 국방장관 교체 가능성, 이민 개혁 등 취임 전 60일의 변수도 언급됐다. 이란 전쟁에 대해 로버트는 트럼프가 전쟁을 원하지 않았을 것이며, 출구 전략 없이 공화당의 참패로 기억될 수 있다고 평가했다. 그는 외교적 해법을 찾아야 한다고 강조했다. 후반부에는 호르무즈 해협 같은 공급망 취약성, 관세 정책의 부작용, 농가 타격, 수출입 흐름에 따른 글로벌 체제 변화가 다뤄졌다. 로버트는 일괄 관세에 반대하고 특정 제품 관세는 조건부로 수용한다고 밝혔다. 방송 말미에는 향후 정기 대담과 후속 방송이 예고됐다. 요약은 방송 내용에 근거하며, 개별 주장은 발언자의 견해다.
다듬은 글
Uh, hold on. We are live. Yeah, we're live. Can you say exactly what he said, Robert? That was an incredible hook. Yep. The Obama Coalition is back, you said. Yep. I'm ready to go. We're live already. Tell me that the hook. I loved it. We are. Yeah. So, Mario, great to be on. It's great to see you. It's been a minute.
Uh, congratulations on all the success. I mean, this is Thank you. I know we're going to have a good deep dive discussion and I'm sure I'm going to have a lot of fun questions, but this is, you know, this election showed really one thing that the Trump coalition that he built for 10 years ended in a day and the Obama coalition that took a 10-year hiatus, you know, came back to life.
and we'll go through the Hispanic vote and the black vote and the young men vote and the working vote and um and you'll see that there's just a lot of similarities but you know I look forward to going through it with you. Um, I want to ask you before we get into that, uh, I was going to focus on that, but then as we're going live, the stock market just started plummeting.
The S&P 500 not only erased more than so the entire rally we saw after the midterms has been completely erased. $2.2 trillion was erased in 55 minutes. It was it's double the size of yesterday's post election rally. The NASDAQ is 6% away from bare market territory. Um, it's one of the fastest wipe outs in stock market history.
What happened today? What is the market reacting to? I would say first, what happened yesterday? This idea that, you know, people love gridlock, I think it's BS. Okay. And that's why a lot of people thought the market rallied like they'll just be an impass for the next two years in Washington. But I think what people fail to realize is since 2008, you know, the Lehman crisis, the intersection of Washington and Wall Street has been joined at the hips.
Or the way you and I have talked about it, K Street, Main Street, and Wall Street has really directed a lot of the traffic because public policy impacts Wall Street, impacts mortgage rates. And I I think we're just kidding ourselves that they don't think that the maybe the one bipartisan thing we can really work on is figuring out guidelines for data centers and rules and regulations, you know, and have the debate on AI whether it should be regulated or self-p policed.
And I've been challenged on that. And all I will say is, you know, when I was for regulation after being, you know, one of the eight 10 executives that Lehman weekend, that infamous weekend, when we walked in, we realized, Mario, we didn't have the tools. And then they brought in DoddFrank and Wall Street regulation.
And what I can tell you is 20 years later, it has not been like JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs have lost their way of innovation. So we can we can also do well and do good at the same time. And I think that there'll be a lot of debates. And I think, you know, the unwind that's happening maybe is because, you know, there's going to have to be some some things happening.
And I did a piece with a Trump advisor um recently on data centers. And it was the wild west doesn't work, but either does moratoriums. And I think that what I would say, and we were going to talk about it, one of the things I think really people are pissed off with Trump is this whole data center thing.
I think there were like 40 plus votes on it um on Tuesday night and I think I think um there was a desire to change data center regulation in 40 out of 41 votes or you know um and I think when you think about that you know President Trump said we have to be the best there is in the world in data centers and then he gives the nimi phrase but not in my backyard and I I think that that hits home to a lot of people, electricity costs and water consumption and pollution.
So, listen, I think we're going to see, you know, have a discussion about a lot of things that, you know, that kind of unwound the Trump coalition. I have so many questions. Yeah, I have so many questions for you. Um, I know where to start. Um, one thing that worries me is the whole, and I will fix the video in a second.
This has been happening for the last few days, so you could still hear me. One thing we've been worried about is the They see me well. Yeah, they can see you, which is what matters. Is the uni party is that nothing would change. Nothing changed when Trump took office. Nothing would change now or things will change at the margins.
But the things that are fundamentally important to people around the world, it comes to foreign policy, domestically, comes down to inflation, the debt, etc., those won't change. Even the Democrats taking office, the House and the Senate. Yeah. There there's no question, Mario, that we have structural issues in the US that, you know, we need wholesale change and it's not around the corner.
And then there's structural issues around the globe that you know equally are not going to be fixed around the corner. But I will just tell you elections have consequences and we should not underestimate the voice of the people. And the Republicans lost because they were a do nothing Congress for a few years enabling this president.
And before that the Democrats lost because they didn't do much. And so, you know, this is a point in time where things are front and center. And the one thing I think everyone agrees is that affordability is really the driving issue. And you can say it was either caused on by the war or caused on by spending too much money.
But whatever it is, when people go home and they struggle to afford food and education and a home and insurance, and then they start thinking about healthcare, you know, we have an aging population, you know, I mean, populism's back in. Trump ran as a national populist. He changed dramatically. And you can say that the most popular politicians in the US, you know, Mandani and AOC, they're running as progressive populists.
And it reminds me of, you know, when we were called banksters on Wall Street during the Lehman crisis and Occupy Wall Street grew. And you could in some ways say that's that was the beginning of Bernie Sanders and that led to Donald Trump. And I think populism isn't such a bad thing because I think it gives the voice to those who are hurting.
And that is not a left or right thing. Okay? Right now, you saw what happened. We have 30 Democratic governorships, 75% of the nation. That's not because people are loving Democrats. That's because they hate what's going on and they want a change. and the pendulum sometimes swings too far. But what I would just say health care is a right and there's going to be a whole debate of Medicare for all.
I am not supportive of Medicare for all. But I do support letting people keep their private insurance. There's about 150 million people on private employee based insurance. But also we should have a public option. Healthcare should be a right in the United States. People should not go broke over healthare.
So, there's ways we have to fix some things here. And if we don't work together to fix some things here, you know, I I think it's going to get much uglier. I don't want to look like France, but it's going to get much uglier. what happens in the next um because we're talking long term and if the Democrats are able to fix some of the issues that Americans are voting about, but what about the next six is it what 60 days um before the uh
the candidates are sworn in. Yeah. Listen, what happens then? What is Trump going to do then? Yeah, I mean, you know, there may be some things he looks to do, but you know, the first thing that comes to mind would have been if Alto resigned. Okay. Could he put someone in in the Supreme Court with getting 50 plus one Republican senator votes?
I don't I've heard today Alto's not resigning. You know, maybe that's a curveball, but that's what we're hearing. You know, certainly if there's something going on with the Secretary of Defense, or as they call it, the Secretary of War, I'd rather call it the Secretary of Defense. Um, so my view, if something happens with that, you know, Massie wants to put that to the floor.
My guess is, you know, could could he replace the Secretary of Defense, you know, during the lame duck session if he just doesn't want to deal with it. Yes. But I do think there's places that President Obama and Democrats can work together. Like I think they can work together on some healthcare. I think that there is I think that President Trump I mean President Trump, sorry.
I think President Trump wants to make sure reminiscent of the the good old days. I know. I'm I'm sorry to say that. I actually was speaking with him tomorrow. You know, I'm on the executive committee of the Obama Foundation, so it was it was on my mind. But, um, you know, President Trump wants his legacy to be great part.
You know, he's been talking about healthc care for a decade. There are some quick fixes I think they could do. The big beautiful bill. I don't call it beautiful, but I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. I call sometimes the big ugly bill. But, you know, 10 plus million people, okay, either got off of um Medicaid or or the subsidies left.
And there's tweaks we can make to make sure those people can get back on. There's tweaks we can make on Obamacare so we don't have, you know, the rises of 13%, we could get the subsidies back. So, there's some things we could do. Immigration reform. I mean, this is, you know, if you woke up Wednesday morning, Trump had a great win in 24 with the Hispanic and Latino community.
That reversed by 50%. I think we should recall, you know, Obama, Obama, and I mean Obama, he was once called the deorter and chief, okay? But he was for tough on immigration when it came to criminals. But he wanted dreamers. He wanted a pathway to citizenship. There was a group of eight, four Democrats, four Republicans.
We thought we were going to get it passed. There's immigration reform that could be passed. The Hispanic community, okay, is not against tough border. But what they are against is crazy ass ICE, okay? Going in and taking, you know, kitchen workers and someone's uncle and someone's son when literally we should be thinking about them.
how we possibly give, you know, legal immigration differently if they pay their taxes, if they get in line as opposed are not the criminals we're going after. So, you know, I I think the pendulum swung too far. Maybe, you know, President um Trump and the Democrats can look at immigration reform. So, I'm hopeful that there's some things to that can be done.
Do you think that um Trump would be willing to work with the Democrats? There was a report he doesn't really care about domestic policies anymore. All he cares about is by the Wall Street Journal reported today. All he cares about is his legacy which is achieved through foreign policy and less so about domestic issues.
So what would Trump look like? Uh moving on from this, more importantly when it comes to the war in Iran, which I know you're probably not going to be a fan of it. Listen, let's let's be clear here. I don't think when President Trump woke up on Wednesday morning that he was le loving what his legacy stood for.
It was the biggest shellacking of the Republican party, okay, that I've seen in my lifetime. So, you know, the map changed dramatically. Are you kidding me? Texas. Okay, Kansas. That's crazy. Iowa. I mean, when we go through what happened to his coalition, it ended on Tuesday night. 10 years to build, one day to end.
So when the pendulum goes too fast and you kind of do more than what you know you've been elected to do, you know, Trump was not for war ever. The idea that we're in this war with Iran, you know, I think I don't think he has an exit strategy. And so I don't think that he wants that his legacy. Okay.
So I do think he's going to rethink foreign policy. I do think that there's going to be some, you know, legislation and he'll probably veto to do with war powers to do with Ukraine and Russia. I mean, let let me be clear, things are not going to stay status quo. Now, whether things get passed, I don't know.
But I will tell you, you know, I've met President Trump before years ago when I was running UBS. He was a big client. I played golf with him. you know, I believe he wants to have a strong legacy and I I think he's going to have to work with Democrats other than otherwise, you know, his last two years, you know, he's going to be remembered for the Iran war, you know, for losing the Senate, for losing the House, for losing, you know, we, you know, governorships and and and changing the Republican party to be smaller and more narrow.
So, my hope is he wants to be a dealmaker. Do you think that would make him more likely because you said he'll be remembered for the Iran war. So, do you think that would make him more likely to double down and try to fix that problem to fix that part of the of the legacy or do you think he's more likely to just walk away and accept the L?
I don't know how walking away would look like cuz that would be embarrassing as well. That would be an even bigger stain. So, my worry is that the the size of that stain, the Iran war stain on his legacy is going to force him back to try to fix it because there's no other way of dealing with it if he cares about his legacy.
I hope fixing it is working with our allies in the Middle East and and pan Europe. Hopefully we work, you know, with Southeast Asia who's more impacted, okay, with a straighter Hermus than we are. And what we're going to have to do is get people at the table to figure how we work with Iran. You know, I was supportive of President Obama's Iran nuclear deal, not because it was perfect, but because if you can get China and Russia at the table to work against anti-nuclear proliferation, then you sign the dotted line.
And by the way, that was a that was supposed to be like a five-year program that continues to be iterated and and become dynamic to where the world's going. But like all these things, whether it's NAFTA or whether it's, you know, the Iran nuclear deal, you can't just or whether it's Obamacare, these things have to continue to be worked on and fixed.
And so, yeah, I I think we're going to have to figure out how to do it with our our frenemies. We're going to have to work with China. We're going to have to work, you know, he's kind of broken up NATO in some ways, but we're going to have to work with the NATO countries. We're going to have to work with the Middle East.
and we're going to have to come to a a different diplomatic solution. Now, listen, I'm not saying there is a diplomatic great solution with Iran there. You know, in my opinion, you know, there they they have been a terrorist regime. I'm not going back on that. I'm not crying spilled milk over the Ayatollah.
But that being said, okay, we don't need a huge war. I think where this administration flawed dramatically. I think they thought Iran was going to be like Venezuela two days and out. I don't know, maybe the secretary of war, I'll call him war this time. Like he didn't realize how big Iran was and it's bigger than the state of Texas and it's like 90 million people.
I think I mean maybe he didn't realize where it was on a map. Probably. What do you think will happen to Hex? There's also report by the Independent that Rubio could be resigning. We saw that post by JD Vance. It it feels like people are just running jumping off the ship in any way they can. Yeah. I I you know I you know I can't always say I believe what I read in the media.
I think I've read a million pieces about me that were wrong. Um you know what I would say is first of all I think Marco Rubio is the best person in the Trump administration. I think that if if he stops being a complete enabler, I know he's someone that can work with Senator Warner and Senator Reid on the Democratic side and Senator Thun on the Republican side.
There's people he can work with. He's been part of that, you know, gang of group of eight or gang of eight, whatever they call it. And so, I hope he doesn't leave because I actually think he's one of the best minds they have there. Vance to me, we saw his tweet yesterday or on X and um you know, I guess it sounded like a Democrat, you know, you know, so so that was a quick shift.
I saw Ted Cru I saw Ted Cruz's tweet. I guess the Trump economy isn't the greatest in the history of the world overnight. Finally, you know, someone realized that affordability is not a hoax. So, listen, these are people who want to run in 28, okay? Um, but I don't think they're all going to get such a free pass.
[snorts] Um, just back to that market crash. Yeah. Um, it is, I know you're explaining it earlier. You said that, you know, kind of the the the spike we saw the day after the midterms that's been erased, but we've gone way past that, and I'm starting to worry something more to it than that. I know there's a lot of uh
well, a couple things, right? There there's a couple things going on. One, we've had a great run in treasuries, right, from 520 to, you know, below 490. So that's so obviously people are putting things back into safe assets. Um I would say number two that a lot of the stock market gain was based on productivity gains.
Some people think that was driven by AI. Others think it was just people working harder because they were scared they'd lose their job because of AI. Whatever it is, we saw productivity gains. I think people are nervous, you know, whether those productivity gains in AI will continue. I think partly because using AI has been, you know, incredibly expensive and so people have to repric it.
Are they getting what they want out of it? you know, th this this whole idea of AI, it's the fastest thing I've seen in my lifetime move, you know, and I think we're in unknown territory. I remember when I was running UBS uh in in the Americas and was president in 27 countries. It was kind of the beginning of cyber security, you know, it was, you know, 20-ish years ago.
And um we were there and we had this kind of thing where we called it fixed bayonets. Like we had to protect our castle. Don't let anyone into our fortress. So all we cared about is making sure no one could enter. Then all of a sudden Snowden came and all of a sudden this big thing became zero trust.
Okay. Not only can you not let anyone enter, you got to watch out who's inside. AI has and and and we worked on that too. Now we're at a situation because of the rapidness of AI and and what these agents can do. We're at a point we've never seen before and it's moving fast. We can protect oursel when there's one bad actor coming in or one bad actor inside.
But when you have a number of bad actors inside and a number of bad actors in the out from the outside, you cannot protect yourself. So listen, I want us to be, you know, the the greatest in the world when it comes to AI and that's going to no question, you know, change the world. But we have to really, okay, figure out what's the right regulation, you know, how how can we make them good corporate citizens when there's a hack.
I was reading about something. There was a hack in the in the health care system in Australia and the Australians didn't know about it for maybe three months. I may be paraphrasing and my timing not may not be perfect but I'm not that far off. There were hacks on the freezers in Europe and the US or the freezers the temperature.
But the idea that the Australian health care system was hacked and the government didn't know about it. It just tells you that um you know this wild west we may have to figure out how to slow down and you know I'm not necessarily for self-p policing. Um you know I think there's got to be strict guidelines and and principles and and maybe to the point of regulation but I don't think we it would stop innovation.
Do you think but do you think the markets are worried of over regulation by the Democrats? No, because you know, first of all, you know, one, AI regulation, my gut tells me is going to be bipartisan. Number two, I think the president will veto it, okay, unless it's common sense. Um, I do think that the president getting in bed with, you know, the technocrats, okay, you know, turned off a ton of voters.
Okay, I remember, you know, when I was called the fat cat with the president's [clears throat] here, okay, and and Obama, you know, called Wall Street, you know, guys a bunch of banksters, you know, that that led to Occupy Wall Street. So, I would say that, you know, I don't support the the wealth tax and the billionaires tax, but I do think we have to make sure that, you know, society is working for all and just not, you know, the top 1%.
And it surprised me with his populist approach that he went so into bed with this group. Yeah, it's bizarre. I What happened? Cuz I understand many people were critical of Trump from the get-go obviously, but even those people, he exceeded their expectations and how bad he was. The Iran war being the best example, Epstein being another um the tariff war kind of ICE taking it way too far.
So many things went wrong. Yeah. I also think, you know, he was going to do something. He did something in his first term on criminal justice and then all of a sudden we have the Cali decision that brought that turned back voting rights decades. There's no question, okay, that the black vote, okay, went hard hard in this midterm.
the black vote, the Hispanic vote, the the the the the young man vote, the young white white men vote. All of those went reversed big time because they're not liking the promises that were broken. And and so, you know, I I'm surprised, you know, you know, years ago, I had lunch with Steve Bannon, and he always said, you know, he was a he's a national po nationalist populist, right?
He's totally America first. And he always said, you know, you have to look at one thing in elections. Are we on the right or wrong direction? It's kind of an, you know, I I'm not one that, you know, feels like polls are always right, but I did feel pretty damn bullish and made some, you know, forecast that we were going to win both the Senate and the House.
And I said that on the House, we're going to be way north of 230 seats. and the Senate. I think my bid offer was 5153 and it's because of you know what what Bannon said predictions. Yeah, I I was light. Um and what Bannon said rung true, right? The country thinks we're in the wrong direction on the economy, the wrong direction on war, the wrong direction on corruption, the wrong direction on what ICE has been doing.
And we can go down the list. I think that this president to I actually you know listen many of your viewers may not realize listen I'm a moderate and I'm a capitalist but I advised Mayor Mandani and we disagree on a lot of things and I did the prep for him for his first Trump meeting and it was not a surprise to me that they would get along because they both kind of come from that populist perspective.
and they also both beat the establishment. So, it didn't surprise me and it doesn't surprise me that they're finding common ground. What's surprising me about the president is how he went so effing far off script that what he ran on no wars, you know, inflation coming down. Okay. I mean, the ones who got impacted the most, and I'm on TV and I said this.
I said that we were going to do incredibly well in rural America. Farmers are pissed. Look at Iowa. Look at, you know, Kansas. I think actually in Nebraska, if Osborne had a D instead of an independent, he would have won Nebraska over Rickettts. But it was clear that what happened with the war, with fertilizer and diesel, what happened with tariffs, with beef and soybeans just smoked farmers.
And if you think farmers are happy to get a bailout, that's complete No one wants a bailout. They want to just earn a good living and they want to make sure that they're working hard and being paid. and and and this idea that he says, "Oh, well, we gave him $12 billion and we bailed them out." It's I don't know anyone who wants that.
Okay. And so it was not surprising to me that we won Kansas, that we won Iowa, that we won South Carolina, that we won Texas. I met with James Tarico. I think he's an incredible candidate. But it does not surprise me that in Georgia we have both senators and the and the governorship. I think what he did in rural areas in the southwest and the southeast, I think he just went way too far.
And on and and you can go back, everyone can go back on liberation day, I went on TV and I said that in my entire four decades on Wall Street, it was the biggest unforced error I've ever seen out of Washington. I called it the Game of Thrones red wedding day. It was the dumbest effing thing that a president could do.
And by the way, I'm okay with blunt tariffs. You want to go put a tariff on solar panels or on tires where we think China or someone else is dumping, go for it. But across the board tariffs is nothing short of insanity. It's a tax on the consumer. And the idea that this administration was gaslighting hardworking Americans saying it wasn't a tax is complete I got you thinking now.
I'm not hearing you. I'm muted. You're talking about the fertilizer shortages. Um how bad is not only the US economy, just the global system itself? It seems like you know I remember um um Muhammad Alan was was making the argument in the whole discussion his biggest concern is that globalization itself he didn't say is dead he said it's broking or it's breaking or it's ending I would say it's almost it's almost completely dead um after what happened now with the straight of the be mandib strait and the vulnerability of other choke points as well um what did the Iran war do to the global system
yeah so So, I know I'm going against the grain and people will say that's You tend to do it. You tend to do this a lot. I do. I do. And and I wish I'm not what I'm going to say. I kind of in some ways wish it wasn't true. But I think similar to the Suez Canal where there is a toll for ships. I think during this time while we're negotiating we should put on a toll for ships to pass the straight of her moose.
Let's just say a buck a barrel. So it's probably going to be 1 to2 million per ship. But by the way, okay, oil will go from 95 down to 60. Okay, so everyone will will benefit. And I think if we could cut a deal where that money is going to the rebuilding of Iran, the infrastructure would got absolutely decimated and we could figure it out how it goes to the people.
Okay, instead of you know the IRGC, I think that's a deal people would sign on to. We have to figure out how to lead with diplomacy even with someone that, you know, is our worst enemy. You know, when I was advising the Pentagon, I'm not going to say anything that I learned there, but there's always this acronym that came out that a lot of people when you walk the halls used called Crinket.
China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and extreme terrorism. Listen, we have to deal with all of them. Okay, they're they're all enemies. Maybe some of them are friendnemies. I'm trying to figure that out. But we'll call China a friendnemy. We'll call the rest maybe enemies. But it doesn't mean you you have to figure out how to deal with them even in the worst of situations.
And I think war is always the last choice. It's never the first choice. And um I think that in in my opinion, Iran, you know, is, you know, is driving the straight of her moves and they're not saying, "Yeah, we're giving it back." And, you know, so I think we have to find that common ground. And listen, if I was your viewers, I'd probably hate what I say, but I do think it's a starter of diplomacy, and then we can see where it goes.
Now, I think most viewers would agree with you, to be honest, depending which viewers. YouTube, they'll probably agree with you. X, they'll probably lose their mind. Well, Robert, um, pleasure to speak with you again. I'd love to do this more often. We could do it maybe on a on a weekly basis, get a catch up, um, see how the, um, responses to the loss yesterday, the economic ramifications of it, also when the Democrats take office.
I'd love to keep having those conversations. Mario, you've been a good friend and the idea of a public square works and I know what you're going through back home because you're in the middle of a war and so, you know, I would just say be safe. No, I appreciate it. Well, I'm I'm out of the country at the moment.
Okay. I'm safe. I took precautions, but we'll see you next week what happens. Thank you, Robert. Thank you. Bye-bye. See you, man. Um, all right, guys. We'll be live again in 15 minutes. I think it'll be we got a debate in 15 minutes or it's going to be my daily news recap with Brandon. Oh, an hour and 15 minutes with Brandon. I'll see you then. Bye.
댓글 0