저자: JimRickards,MarcFaber—소속미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
중앙은행의 금 매입과 미국채 동결 리스크로 인해 금의 구조적 수요가 늘고 있으며, 정부 부채 확대와 통화 증발로 귀금속 가격이 추가 상승할 것이라는 주장. 금의 연내~내년 초 중간 목표가를 온스당 1만 달러로 제시. 유동성은 충분하고 달러는 약세라는 판단.
다듬은 글
What is this? Have we reached a peak, or was it a " bubble" or a hyper-bounce, and now prices will continue to fall, and we should get out while we can, etc.? Does it just happen like that? Is this a normal—I will say “normal,” meaning not unexpected —drop in commodity prices and a successful preparation for the next stage of growth to a much higher level?
I'm sure that the second one is a pullback, and my intermediate goal— meaning the end of this year or the beginning of next year—of $10,000 per ounce is still relevant. I think many people believe that interest rates have increased and liquidity is limited. No, the system is full of liquidity. If there was no liquidity, if money were " expensive", Bitcoin would not have reached its maximum.
Gold would not renew highs. The dollar would be strong. No, he is weak now. Recent fluctuations in global commodity markets are making investors wonder whether real assets have peaked or are preparing for a powerful rally. Beneath the surface volatility lies a fundamental shift in how the world's central banks manage public reserves.
Jim Rickards, a renowned economist and financial author, along with Mark Faber, a veteran global investment and market strategist, argue that physical commodities are entering a powerful new monetary cycle. Rickards notes that central banks are rapidly accumulating physical bullion to protect reserves from foreign asset confiscations and storage risks.
Meanwhile, Faber emphasizes that rampant government budget deficits and continuous money printing will inevitably push the valuation of precious metals significantly higher. Thanks to excess systemic liquidity and changes in geopolitical alliances, gold is forecast to reach an interim target of $10,000 per ounce by the end of this year or early next year amid rising global demand.
. Gold has surpassed US Treasury bonds, excuse me, US dollar assets, as a share of global reserves. It's just a fact. But it's important to understand why. It wasn't...again, central banks are net buyers. I want to make this clear . This has been true since 2010. But it wasn't like they just dumped Treasury bonds, bought gold, and so gold went up.
What happened was that they had a certain amount of gold. They had a certain amount of Treasury bonds. Treasury bonds can be volatile, but they don't change in price very much. And gold doubled. It has almost tripled in a fairly short period of time. So they added gold, but even for the same amount of gold, if you triple the price , in dollar terms it would be a larger percentage of total assets.
So yes, gold has outperformed Treasury bonds as a percentage of total reserve assets, but not because they were buying huge amounts of gold. They bought a certain amount. This happened because the price tripled. And here's what happened. It's like in any portfolio, when you have a winning asset like that , it's nice, but you might have to reallocate your portfolio a little bit.
So yes, gold outperformed Treasuries, but the reason is because the price tripled, not because they bought so much gold. However, this begs the question: why are they buying this gold? And that's exactly what you pointed out. Do they see something coming? I think it's already here. And the thing is, this goes back to 2022 and the Russian special military operation in Ukraine.
Here we are in 2026. This war has been going on for over four years. It won't be over yet, maybe within a year, but it was a pretty brutal fight. Russia is winning. They are going to win . But they are in the process of winning. This is quite understandable. I know that the Ukrainians are sending drones to Moscow, but yes.
OK. Minor damage, but not really that big. But what's happening there is that Russia had $30 billion in U.S. Treasury bonds in its reserves before the war started. And this is the work of Nabiullina, who heads the central bank of Russia. I always say that she is the only central banker in the world who understands her job.
She's actually doing pretty well with it . But if we go back to January 2022, before the war, Russian reserves were approximately $600 billion. Of that, $150 billion , or 25%, was in gold—physical gold bars in Moscow. We are not talking about tokens, futures or anything else. They had gold in Russia.
But they also had about $300 billion in Treasury bonds, and the rest was euros and other assets. So what to do with $300 billion in Treasury bonds? Well, the last paper Treasury bond was issued in 1979. You know, people talk about digital cryptocurrency, all that. The Treasury bond market has been digitalized using encrypted message traffic since 1979.
So, this could be the original cryptocurrency. But when you have that, you're talking about a digital ledger. Okay, but who controls this book? Well, now you need a custodian. Ultimate control is exercised by the US Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve System, and Fedwire. The Federal Reserve System acts as the financial agent of the Treasury Department.
So they control it, but in between there are custodians like Euroclear, Clearstream, DTC and others. The Russians held about 200 billion of their 300 billion in custody at Euroclear in Belgium. And why? They trusted the Belgians and they trusted the Americans. Big mistake. So what happened was that the US and Europe together froze these assets.
So they are still there. In fact, I'm saying they're still there. Their validity period has expired. Because many of them were short-term. So when the term expires, the Treasury simply gives you the cash. I do n't know if they were reinvested in US Treasury securities. Whether it's cash or bonds, these are assets in US dollars that are held in accounts at Euroclear, but they are frozen.
The US is constantly freezing something. We are really good at this . Syria, Iran, North Korea, anyone we don't like that day—we can freeze your assets. But theft... Seizing assets, not just freezing them, is a completely different thing. There are a lot of legal issues and so on. Europe and the United States tried to seize assets, essentially stealing them from the Russians.
And the rest of the world watched. By the way, they came up with the most ridiculous schemes . One idea was that Europe would issue bonds, give the money to Ukraine as a loan, and then Ukraine would repay the loan through reparations after Russia lost the war. But if not, the loan would be secured by Russian assets .
That was the idea. Everything I just said is true, but none of it is happening. For example, Russia will not lose the war. They will not pay reparations. The loan will be declared in default, and one way or another, they will try to steal these assets. And now the main point. Let's say you're Saudi Arabia, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or any number of other countries around the world, and you have $300 billion, $500 billion, or a trillion dollars in U.S.
Treasury bonds in custody, like the Russians, and you're watching what we do to the Russians. What do you tell yourself? You say, "Hey, what if America wakes up one day and doesn't like what I'm doing, or doesn't like my foreign policy, etc.? Are they going to steal my Treasury assets?" Well, the answer is probably yes.
I mean, if they do it to the Russians, but you get blacklisted, maybe they'll do it to you too. And so you start getting insurance, you start buying gold. And that's part of what's driving—not the only reason, but part of what's driving central banks to move to gold. This is inflation. Yes. But it has more to do with an asset that the United States cannot steal.
Because if you buy physical bullion and put it in your own vaults, don't leave it at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Bank of England for safekeeping. Put them in their own storage. And this is a physical asset. It is not digital. It cannot be broken. You need to invade the country if you want to go that far.
But the point is, it's geopolitically safe. It's not just about inflation and diversification. Yes, these things matter. But physical bullion is protected from the US stealing your treasury assets. So I would say that the US, which had a reputation as a jurisdiction with the rule of law, has tarnished or tarnished its reputation and given other countries a reason to own gold.
So I always say: if it's good for central bankers , then it's good for...what is it? Have we reached a peak , was it a bubble or a hyperbole, and now it will continue to fall, and we should get out while we can, etc., or is that how it should be? Is this normal, I would say normal, that is, a fully expected drop in commodity prices and a good preparation for the next stage of growth to a much higher level?
I'm sure this is the last one, that this is just a decline, and my interim goal— end of this year or early next, $10,000 per ounce— still remains relevant. Systemic market liquidity remains extremely high, despite rising interest rates, which is driving new record highs for alternative financial assets.
Higher interest rates generated new capital flows into the system, rather than restricting the total money supply. At the same time, government agencies are making a strategic shift , converting digital debt obligations into physical bullion, securely stored in local vaults. As global public debt rises and the purchasing power of fiat money declines, physical precious metals remain poised for sustained capital appreciation.
Given the global growth in sovereign debt and the priority of central banks on building physical reserves, hard assets will maintain an upward trajectory as demand exceeds supply . Now let's get back to the interview. I believe that today's circumstances are much more favorable for gold, silver, and platinum than they were in the 70s .
And I would vote for Mr. Trump. There is no doubt about it. I would never advise anyone to vote for Ms. Kamala Harris and the Democrats in the current situation. But I must say that Mr. Trump is a gift from God to the world and to those who own gold, silver, and platinum. Because you can be sure: there will be massive budget deficits and huge money printing under him.
Surely he has no other choice. I have a company in the financial sector, I have personal assets, etc., and in my case, liquidity has improved over the last 5 years, because previously I was getting zero or half a percent per annum on my deposit and bank account . Right now, I get 4% on all the money I hold in the form of liquidity.
Now you might say, “Well, 4% is not a lot of money .” I agree, because I believe that inflation and the growth in the cost of living in the world right now is probably higher than 4%. But that 4% has now given me cash flow that I didn't have before. And compared to zero interest rates, 4% is a lot. So I think a lot of people think, "Oh, interest rates are high, liquidity is low." No, the system is full of liquidity.
If there was no liquidity, if there was a shortage of money, Bitcoin would not be making new highs. Gold would not reach new highs. The dollar would be strong. No, he is weak now. Do you understand? It has become very difficult, firstly, in times of monetary inflation it is difficult to calculate the correct price.
We don't know—the Dow Jones is at its peak in nominal terms, but in euros, gold, or silver it is well below its high. We are looking at the year 2000 or 1973 . The technology sector was very overheated in 2000. We had the so-called dot-com bubble. In '73 we had a bubble in quality growth stocks. We called them the "Nifty Fifty." It was 50 stocks like Kodak, Xerox, Polaroid, Sears.
Most of them went bankrupt, but at the time they were the most popular stocks . In any case, when they fell, they dragged the entire market with them , with the exception of the " bear" market of 73–74 . The price of gold was adjusted upwards in 1971 when Nixon closed the "gold window " in August 1971.
So, the price of gold was in an upward trend, and during the "bear" market of 1973-74, everything fell except for shares of gold mining companies. The current macroeconomic environment offers an unprecedented catalyst for precious metals , far surpassing the historical inflationary backdrop of the 1970s .
Structural budget deficits in major economies when measured in real hard money, not in depreciating fiat. Traditional stock indexes remain well below previous historical peaks. Historical market cycles show that during periods of serious financial rebalancing, physical commodities serve as the primary vehicle for preserving capital.
Looking ahead, geopolitical realignments will continue to expand the global money supply. As government debt grows rapidly, central banks will have no choice but to print money, creating ideal conditions for gold, silver, and platinum. Tangible assets remain the main protection against systemic currency depreciation.
Investors who prefer physical bullion benefit as the purchasing power of paper money steadily declines, ensuring that physical metals outperform debt instruments in volatile markets. .
Comments 0