저자: 레이달리오 · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 달리오는 현재 상황을 1930년대 대공황과 유사한 '대불황 2.0'으로 보며, 회복에 단기가 아닌 수년이 걸린다고 봄. 거시 진단: 정부의 막대한 차입과 제로금리, 중앙은행의 국채 매입으로 돈과 신용이 대량 생산되는 상황이며, 1933년 당시와 같은 정책 흐름이라고 설명. 회복 전망: 주식시장이 고점을 회복하기까지 오랜 시간이 걸릴 것이며, 달라지는 신질서 속에서 결국 회복될 것이라는 장기 낙관. 금융 리스크: 2008년보다 더 큰 위기로 보며, 은행 외 비은행 금융권까지 확산될 수 있음. 금리 인하 여력이 소진돼 통화정책 효과가 제한적이고, 정부 채무 매입 등 재정 역할이 중요. 산업 전망: 레버리지가 낮은 필수소비재 성격의 안정 기업과, 혁신·적응력이 높고 재무구조가 탄탄한 혁신 기업이 유리. 자산 가격 방향에 대한 구체적 목표가나 종목 언급은 없음. 글로벌화·지정학: 글로벌화 후퇴는 상황을 더 어렵게 만들며, 중국과의 협력 필요성과 적대 프레임의 위험을 언급. 개혁 방향: 자본주의 체제를 지지하되, 교육 등 생산성을 높이는 투자와 부의 공정한 분배를 위한 개혁이 필요. 사회적 합의가 이뤄질지 낙관은 60%, 비관은 40%로 신중한 입장. 결론적 시사점: 단기 반등 베팅보다는 구조 변화에 따른 장기적 재편을 전제로 한 접근이 적절하다는 취지.
다듬은 글
thank you so much for being here we really appreciate it how bad is it how worried do we be you're seeing a situation that is the same as existed really in the 1932 45 period in that now we're seeing the production of a lot of debt a lot of borrowing by the government we're seeing zero interest rates and not the traditional kind of money monetary policy but the producing of a lot of money and credit so the Federal Reserve is buying the Treasury's debt and the Treasury is getting that money to my mostly Americans in some imperfect but remarkably large way and the Europeans are doing the same in their way that Bank is a smaller Bank because the world lives with about 70 percent dollars and only a small percent euro and they will produce there's for theirs and there aren't many banks around the world and so the rest of the world is going to have gaps holes that won't be filled so there'll be a big differentiation as to which entities benefit and which entities don't do you think that we're headed into a global depression so what do you mean by a depression okay something like happened in the 1930 so just to repeat 1929 to 1932 there was a fall in the economy and a very double-digit unemployment rates and a magnitude a fall in the economy like about 10 percent do I think we're in that yes how was that dealt with 1933 what they did is they printed a lot of money then and the government came out with a same type of programs that we're having now yes okay same thing zero interest rates hit zero same thing okay same dynamics and then there is the that money causes an expansion from that point how long does it take for the stock market to exceed its highs or how long does it take for the economy to exceed its former highs a long time okay do I think that's what we're in yes that's what we're in it'll pass it the world would be very different there'll be a new world order but it will pass and we'll be inventive because what we're dealing with now is just money and credit money and credit is just digital I mean there's no there was real good services you know that those are real but everything else is just accounting and so when you change the digits and you work those things out and you work yourself through that takes you know a couple of years at most kind of and then you come back into a restructured environment how much people seem to think that within I don't know a year we'll be kind of be back where you are you're saying no it's going to take longer does that imply that there is basically a sort of some systemic shots that the market hasn't yet fully seen perhaps to do with the abit of inability of some players to handle the extreme levels of debt that are piling up right now as people can't work you know some people mistake this as there is a virus and the virus may come and go okay maybe we never see it again I don't think that's likely but I mean the people who tell me say not who knows but if it never came back again there will be those who are broke and and and who will have lost some income we're going to change how we operate and in a way the the supply lines are going to change in other words with self-sufficiency what is self-sufficiency now going to mean do we have enough of this and that we're going to restructure our economy and restructure the financial system in ways that we mean we are not going to go back to the way it was so do you see systemic threats to the financial industry as graceful greater than Hoffman did in 2008 this is bigger than what happened in 2008 I'll distinguish it in 2008 we had banks it's the same thing meaning you have a certain amount of leverage things go down too much leverage means you're broke in the counting terms so then you look around and you say who are the systemically important entities that you don't want to go broke because do you want to lose those banks at this time and then you can make up money and make up credit and you can keep them alive in some way and you did it with banks and through the banks there were the mortgages and that's what it looked like this is more complex than that because there are the banks and then there are those all of those that are beyond banks although the little businesses all of those in all the different places that are beyond it and it's a bigger crisis and we have a less effective monetary policy because interest rates declines have reached their limit and just buying financial assets by the central bank and buying the normal financial assets won't work they have to buy the debt of the government and the government or the many governments have to be effective in getting buying power and production to those who need it around the world what kinds of industries organizations companies have the best prospects of thriving going forward there are two types basically there are those that are state stable meat-and-potatoes not leveraged kind of companies you know the Campbell Soup equivalent you know like everybody's going to use them all time kind of thing and then there are the innovators those who can adapt well and innovate well and don't have balance sheet problems in other words they have strong balance sheets so they're going to be able to play the game without having that they will be great winners and so there's always new inventions new creativity that is the new adaptation that that becomes a company and an entrepreneur and they're going to do great plus the stuff that we're always going to need those are the things that are going to do great in terms of our recovery this seems like something that is going to require a coordinated effort you know financially spiritually in so many different ways if we retreat from globalization right now does that make everything harder going forward if we retreat from globalization which we certainly will do it will certainly make things very hard and when you have congresses and presidents and they start to say who will we help and how will that be and what will that mean it gets down to real practical questions and the reality is a lot of those people won't be helped and then will you'll deal with how will they behave for each other or one country's vulnerabilities on other countries opportunities this isolation of the United States relative to the rest of the world this.d globalization began before we had this that force there's more of it right and it happened for reasons okay so don't overlook those reasons and don't overlook the reading of history just because we wish it can happen if you want to wish it happens it's all everything is all dependent on the behavior of those who have their love on their hands on the levers of power I would tell you like for example right now I've been going to China for a long time and the the Chinese in many ways are helping in many ways things that are needed in this crisis and and all that to even say that is a politically challenging thing okay because we're in a world that is so fragmented that even to publicly say thank you and thank you to many people and many companies it's almost dangerous to say thank you to those who are helping because the world we're now in an environment in which there are its enemies and and who is evil and do you fall into that category and so the history of these is there's demonization of different people okay now you must see it around you it exists and so how we come out of this will be how we depend behave with each other so what's our opportunity here what changes can we make throughout all history you go back hundreds of years you see that any system works for those who tend to control the system I'm a capitalist I believe in the system I believe you can increase the size of the pie and you could divide it well and if we talk about how to do that effectively we need to do it but there it becomes a time that there needs reforms and those reforms have to create productivity it doesn't mean just give money away it means how do you make those people productive so that they are also psychologically productive as well as physically productive and producing output now we are restructuring it okay in it it's the UH neva table consequence of what we're doing here we will come out of that there's been a tremendous transfer of wealth whether people realize it or not through the production of all of that borrowed money and all of that producing of money that is a big force we will come out of here and the thing we will talk about over the next couple of years and probably sooner rather than later is how we do that restructuring am I worried now is the same as my worry then whether that will be done in a civil bipartisan way that will both increase the size of the pie and divide it well rather than damage the economy because you lose productivity there are certain things that are great investments education is a great investment the more people you have that are well educated and you have equal education the more people you're going to have who have a chance to compete with each other and raise that over a period of time it's a hell of invent investment it will produce more productivity than ever will cost if it's done well but what happens is states and localities think of it as a budget item so they look at expenses and they penny pinch on the education because if you're in a rich town you make your we'll get a good education and if you're not and a large percentage of the population is losing that so that has to be engineered well so that they're productive as well as divide the pie well and everybody believes that the system is fair if we we can get there my optimistic that we will get there you know I don't know I would say I'm 6040 pessimistic that will be good enough with each other to do that but there's that possibility this is our test this is our stress test right thank you so much for this this was this was really really really interesting thank you so much thanks all
댓글 0