저자: JeremyGrantham · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 그랜섬은 '슈퍼 버블'이 붕괴 초입이며 긴 하락과 침체가 이어질 것으로 보고, 침체 이후 녹색 기술·벤처투자에 장기 기회가 있다고 본다. [버블 단계와 진행 구조] 과거 대형 버블(일본 등 6건 내외)의 공통점은 정점에서의 과도한 낙관과 기록적 부채, 연준·정부의 협조다. 정점 이후 신뢰가 무너지면 낙관에서 공포까지 긴 하락이 이어진다. 현재 위치: 2020년 말~2021년 초 신흥 기술주 하락에서 시작된 1단계(신뢰 붕괴)는 진행됐으나 전체 하락은 아직 중간 단계라고 본다. 연준의 금리 인상이 임계점을 앞당기고 있으며 어떤 고리가 먼저 깨질지는 예측 불가라고 주장한다. [은행 위기와 과거 사례 비교] 베어스턴스 파산(2007)처럼 실리콘밸리은행(SVB) 사태도 대다수에게 놀라운 사건이었다. 이런 충격은 연쇄 파급을 예측하기 어렵다. [경기침체 시나리오] 2000년 닷컴 버블 후 침체는 약했지만 나스닥은 82%, S&P는 50% 하락했다. 1929년은 훨씬 나빴다. 이번에는 기록적 부채와 인플레이션 후 이익률 하락이 겹쳐 장기 침체가 예상된다. [시장 바닥 판단] 하락장 랠리(베어 마켓 랠리)가 있을 수 있으나 실망스럽게 끝날 가능성이 높다고 본다. 역사상 하락의 대부분은 첫 금리 인하 이후 발생했다는 점을 강조한다. 다음 실적 시즌에서 펀더멘털 타격이 확인되면 추가 하락이 나타날 수 있다. [기후·자원 요인] 기후 피해로 세계 GDP가 약 0.5%p 감소하고 인플레이션 압력이 생긴다. 리튬·코발트·니켈 등 배터리 금속 공급은 부족하며, 최근 20년간 대형 광산 투자가 부족했다. [투자 전략] 그는 자산의 절반을 녹색 기술 초기 벤처투자에 넣었다. 향후 2년은 취약하지만 장기적으로는 최적의 투자처이며 정부 지원(미국 IRA 등)이 순풍이 된다고 본다. 인공지능은 주목받는 분야지만 본인은 녹색 기술에 무게를 둔다. [출연자 전망] 결론적으로 장기 낙관과 단기 비관이 공존한다. 침체 이후 녹색 벤처투자가 다음 성장 국면을 이끈다고 본다.
다듬은 글
Hi, JJ again with an external meaning. Welcome. Well, today I'm going to talk about Jeremy Grantham's recent interview with TIP. You're going to have a long interview, and I'm going to summarize it here today and comment on what he said. He's talking about the super bubble again. I've done a few previous videos about Jeremy Grantham's take on the bubble that's emerging and now collapsing.
He calls it a super bubble and explains why. And now he's talking about what stage we're at in this super bubble, how it's coming down. And we'll end on a slightly positive note about where he thinks it's best to be, who he thinks he'll be in the next decade, even if there are bad things ahead, some nasty surprises, and a huge bubble coming down.
So, let's get down to business. I, um, remembered the old aphorism about the Fed continuing to tighten monetary policy until something breaks. And in this situation, and it reminded me of a conclusion I came to when I studied the big bubbles, a handful, five or six, including Japan, over the last 100 years, because it seems to be the same thing.
As you come down from the peak, the final sugar peak of the super bubble, there is almost endless optimism, the belief that good things will last forever, record rates of return, etc., etc. And these are always bubbles, always formed at the end of a long, heroic economy, and everything in the garden is perfect, and it always required cooperation from the Fed and the administration.
So, everything is perfect. And then, when something undermines that confidence and it starts to seep through, there's a long way down to go from the peak of optimism to at least mild panic, if not severe panic. This is a long fall. He says that the market was euphoric and it's a long way to go for a fall.
He goes on to say that it will take a long time to blow up, but we are already somewhere in the middle. He describes it in detail further on, what stage we're at, but he talks about the sugar rush that happened with euphoria, and we started to see that in December 2020, early 2021, when the stocks of emerging technology companies started to fall.
Arc, and it seemed to have been on the decline since then. I went all the way to the bottom. So, according to him, it starts right there. But overall, it's about this euphoric peak, and it's going to take a long time to get out of it. So he says it's not over yet. The fall is still long. And at the top, people were always sure that they were always increasing the level of debt.
So they are always at or near the historical peak in 1929 or 2000, the housing bubble, etc. And in Japan in 1989. And how were they this time? This time you had record levels of debt to GDP around the world, but certainly including the US. And so as things unfold, of course, the pressure of the combination of declining confidence and peak debt levels is very serious.
My question really is, will the Fed survive this, or will it still find a weak spot, sooner or later? And perhaps the Fed's rate hikes are accelerating the tipping point. And I think of it like water behind a dam, you can never predict which brick will fall first. In fact, you should expect the unexpected.
By its very nature, it's a complex financial system, a complex economic system, and you build up the pressure, and you build up the pressure when your confidence drops and the debt starts to hurt, especially if the Fed raises rates and then something gets eroded. And each time it seemed unexpected. So here he starts talking about some of the nasty surprises that could happen with this combination of falling confidence from such a high peak optimism and these record levels of debt, and the Fed raising rates very quickly now.
So , he says it's like a dam breaking, and something will collapse, something else will collapse. You could say that everything has collapsed. He says he talks about how Silicon Valley Bank is going and similar surprises. He said there could be more. If you get value from this episode, please don't forget to like it on YouTube or Rumble to help spread it to more people and give me that little dopamine hit.
Thank you. Who would have imagined that Stearns would say, "Hey, the Bears, as we used to call them, were the guys who were always giving other people these nasty troubles." And when the music stopped, they always had one of the planes. So when Bear Stearns went under in 2007, it was a big surprise in Silicon Valley until you think about it and look at the balance sheet.
It seemed to hit the world as a complete surprise. And maybe that's what I mean from 60,000 feet: such is the nature of the beast. You should expect that the first thing to go will be, generally speaking, a surprise. And how this cascades is practically unknown. So here he compares the surprise of the Bear Stearns bankruptcy at the beginning of the financial crisis, the global financial crisis, to Silicon Valley Bank, how it was a surprise, people didn't pay attention to it , and it was in the heart of Silicon Valley.
So he says there were unpleasant surprises, and this was one of the surprises that happened. People thought maybe this was the bottom of the market, and then bam, it happened and turned into a small banking panic. So, from euphoria, particularly in the technology sector, to panic, mild or severe panic, which was actually a bank panic.
It seemed to come on suddenly if you weren't paying attention to what was going on in the bank and how many people were there. But, let's say, after a few big bubbles, there was always a recession. If people behave well, if leaders are prudent, it's a mild recession. The year 2000 was as easy as it gets.
If they behave very badly and are unlucky , like in 1929, you will have a depression. Just focus on these few. They always have a recession. And when they want to take their time, they really take their time . Most of the declines in these major bear markets only occur after the first interest rate cut.
So tell me when the first interest rate cut will happen and I'll tell you when the second half of the pain will begin. And if from a historical perspective it is unlikely that it would not have been held, this financial and stock event would not have dragged on deep into the following year. And that's exactly what it looks like.
This is not a rush. He seems to be saying that he sees a fairly severe recession coming, a severe recession that will last quite a while, unlike the period after 2000 , when the tech bubble burst, the dot-com bubble, it was a fairly mild recession. And of course, this led to the fact that, years later, people started investing in the housing market, and policies were aimed at helping this.
So everything changed and that ended up in a bubble too. But he sees this recession three times. We had a very obvious first phase of the bubble bursting. We have undermined confidence. It's easy . All you have to do is shake off that complete and utter euphoria. We did it. She burst out laughing. Then you have the classic bear market growth.
And we knew from the beginning, didn't we, that this time we would have more bearish buyers than almost ever before, thanks to the trillion- plus dollars that are sitting in the coffers from stimulus. And from the behavior of meme shares, we knew it would n't melt away too quickly. And so we've had impressive growth, and we could very well have more.
And then you move on to the third phase, and these are fundamental indicators. And this is a difficult phase. How long and how painful will the real reality, the adjustment phase, be? How much will the economy slow down? How much will the rate of profit decline? Let me point out that the most noble was the recession of 2000.
We had a very mild recession. We've never had anything like a soft landing, but this was the closest we got. It was the least hard landing. And what happened? Uh, the Nasdaq fell 82%. The S&P fell 50%. The real estate was cheap, but it wasn't being used. The bond market was cheap, but it wasn't engaged.
Anything that was favorable could have been favorable, and still it hummed along for 3 years and the Nasdaq fell 82%. That's what interests me. The rate of profit fell and the growth rate slowed moderately. During the housing boom, GDP slowed even further . Profits have virtually disappeared completely.
1929, of course, was even worse. So we will have unacceptably bad times. It will depend on how effective the administration is, etc. But the truth is, we're going into this with a very high rate of return. We are entering this with a form of capitalism that for the first time raised prices ahead of workers.
So, unexpected inflation occurred. Very quickly, profit margins rose and real wages fell. This is not what happened in the 70s, I assure you. The rate of profit has fallen and real wages have risen. So we are facing a long period of recession, which is getting closer by the minute. So here he's talking about the phases of the super bubble bursting through it, starting with the euphoria in emerging tech stocks that was easy to break through after the COVID stimulus, the massive amount of stimulus, but that was just the first phase, and that hit stocks.
Some tech stocks have fallen 50, 60, 70, 80, 90% in some cases, and they haven't come back. After that, there was a lot of heavy talk about the growth of the bear market. We have had several bear market rallies that actually led to disappointment and further declines. So, he says that these long bubbles that take a long time to unwind are bear market growth, and there is historical evidence for this.
A bear market can surge 50% or more and then fall below the lows, and he obviously sees that happening. Will he be right? We don't know. He says that next time it will hit the fundamentals, and that's why in the next reporting season , in the next report, whether they will have success or the fundamentals start to take a hit, we will see a further decline in the stock market.
He said it takes time. This , uh, is paving the way, as he said, for a recession that's coming, a longer recession, and obviously the stock market is going down. Will he be right, or have we already seen the bottom of the stock market? It is not yet known. And in this period we have significantly accelerated climate damage, probably reduced by half a percent of global GDP, probably in the first year it was a noticeably large amount.
Floods, fires, agricultural disruptions, flooding during planting and harvesting, etc. Too hot for certain crops. Chronic droughts harm other crops. This simply slows growth, especially in developing countries, but also raises prices. This is inflationary. Then we have a shortage of resources. Part of the problem with the lack of capital investment over the last 20 years is that we don't have great mines looking to enter the market like we did in 2011-2012 when the last peak occurred.
Most of the big mining companies had their last desperate giant new mines to launch, which they did, all together, like the good old days. And this time there are no capital investments . There are no big mines waiting. We are just on the flight path if we want to make the global economy green. We don't have anything like the amount of copper, lithium , cobalt, and nickel that we would need to do the job.
So, continuing the pessimism, but moving to optimism eventually, he talks about the climate damage that's happening, which is leading to this recession that will continue, and it will be a drag on global growth. And he talks about mining in an environmental sense, saying that there is a shortage of resources, let's say, battery metals like lithium, cobalt (in terms of how cobalt is mined), and other battery metals that are needed for a green economy, growth.
He considers this the best field. This is his particular area of interest, and he says he invests half of his money in such investments. So he talks about venture capital, about how it's the way forward. As we emerge from a recession, that's the only positive thing. This is the only way forward he sees.
He talks about this further. So, one of the venture capitalist's tasks now should be to find bottlenecks and problems that will come to the fore and try to do something about them . So lithium- ion batteries can be replaced with sodium-ion batteries, they can be improved by using half the lithium or half the resources, and they will be.
But there simply isn't enough lithium to do the job the old-fashioned way typical of yesteryear. We have to constantly change everything. And this is a pretty relentless pressure on prices. So early- stage research companies and venture capital investments are at the point of maximum vulnerability to carbon loss.
This is a short-term story. And it could be a year or two of significant difficulties. But in the long run, it's the only place to be. You are doing something worth noting. You generate new ideas. You generate productivity gains. You are encouraging the economy in a world where economic growth has been slowing down quite steadily.
And you do everything you can to counteract this. And I think that will be in green venture capital, of course, you have the support of governments around the world that are supporting this now . The IRA is a huge example , many billions. But it happens everywhere. And so it's like an unfair tailwind that carries you along.
I'm very happy that half of my money is there. Despite the next two tough years, this is a great place to be for the long term. I like to say that this is the only potentially all-in-one case that I've ever encountered where this is exactly what we need to do for the long-term well-being of the climate .
And it's a candidate for making the most money from any share of investment in the entire capital system, which is pretty cool. And I, of course, hope I 'm right. So he ends on a very positive note, talking about the early-stage venture capital investments he has invested in. He says he invests half of his money in greening the economy.
So, as he says, for two years, these businesses are very vulnerable in the short term. And we saw this with the example of Silicon Valley Bank. This is where these companies, these entrepreneurs and venture capitalists had their money in the bank. So, there will be volatile times ahead for the next few years, he said, and he sees a recession, but coming out of it, he sees green technology, green space, clean technology, if you will, clean technology.
That's where he's putting his money for the next period of growth, saying it's the only way to grow. And of course, we can also talk about artificial intelligence. This is another area that I think is already getting the most attention, but he is looking 2 years ahead. He has a lot of money in green technology, and he says that there are tailwinds behind it, all the governments, which is right.
Will this be the next candidate for a period of growth as we emerge from the recessionary period he sees ahead? So, what do you think of Jeremy Grantham's words? Share in the comments. Is he right that this super bubble is bursting and will take a few more years ? And then with some bright spots , from venture capital to green technology and greening the global economy with a big tailwind.
Do you think he will be right about this ? What alternative do you see? Have we already seen the bottom and is there already a bull market? I already made a previous video that I will link to where Michael Berry said that earlier this year he advised selling and then said that I was wrong to sell. Has the market bottomed out and are we in a new bull market?
Jeremy Grantham doesn't think so. What do you think? Let me know. If you've made it this far in the episode, please consider subscribing on YouTube, Rumble, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. And thank you for watching or listening, and see you next time.
Comments 0