저자: PeterSchiff · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: Schiff은 2016년 초 미국 증시 급락의 원인이 중국이 아니라 연준의 2015년 12월 금리인상과 거대한 버블이며, 하락과 경기침체가 더 진행될 것이라고 주장한다. 연준 금리인상과 버블 붕괴: 연준이 2015년 12월 금리를 올린 것이 증시 하락의 원인이며, 연준이 부풀린 버블이 꺼지는 중이라고 설명한다. 과거 연준의 통화정책 때문에 조정이 미뤄졌을 뿐이라는 논리다. 증시 전망: 2016년 초 주식시장은 역대 최악의 첫 주를 보였고 하락 여지가 훨씬 더 남아 있다고 본다. 이 하락은 시장과 경제 모두에 해당한다고 언급한다. 고용지표 해석: 12월 고용 29만명 증가는 서비스업(웨이터·바텐더), 보건보조(3만·5만명) 중심이며 제조업은 8천명에 그쳤다고 지적한다. 계절조정 오류와 출생-사망 모형의 가정 때문에 수치가 부풀려졌을 가능성이 있어 고용지표를 신뢰하지 않는다고 말한다. 경기침체 경고: 선행지표들이 모두 침체를 가리키고 있으며 고용은 후행지표라고 주장한다. 침체가 오면 기업들이 해고에 나서 실업률이 급등할 것이고, 이후 양적완화 4차가 나올 수 있어 최악의 시나리오가 될 것이라고 전망한다. 정치적 동기: 옐런 연준이 선거 시기 공화당(특히 트럼프) 승리를 막고 힐러리 클린턴에게 유리하게 하려고 금리 등을 움직일 수 있다고 주장한다. 오바마 임기 말 경기 호조를 연출하려 할 것이며, 연준의 정치적 중립성을 믿지 않는다고 말한다. 대상 자산 관련: 미국 주식 전반(나스닥·S&P500 등)의 추가 하락을 전망하고, 금리 인상은 실패였다고 본다. 개별 종목 및 금리·환율 목표는 언급하지 않았다.
다듬은 글
now politically 2016 is going to be a wild ride but it is already rather rocky in the smock stock markets both domestically and internationally so what is going on is it back to the future for Wall Street back to recession joining me now from Westport Connecticut CEO and chief global strategist for euro pacific capital Peter Schiff Peter it seems to me rather disingenuous to blame what's going on in the US markets right now the big drop the terrible start to 2016 on China's problems in their markets and kim jung-eun testing a hydrogen bomb we've got plenty of problems here at home of our own well absolutely in fact if anything the problems in the overseas markets are emanating from the United States I mean we're the source of the global instability it's the Fed that I sit on your program many times that if the Fed made the mistake of pricking its own bubble and actually raised interest rates in 2015 which is what they did in the waning reeks of December that the stock market was going to drop like a stone and that's exactly what's happening because the air is coming out of this bubble and there's a lot of air in there this is the biggest bubble the Fed has ever inflated and at the same time the great recession which the Fed interrupted with its monetary stimulus is going to resume in earnest because now all the problems that the market would have corrected but for the Fed are going to come back an even greater with greater pain now because they've all been made worse thanks to the last 70 years of Fed policy so why did the Fed raised rates because they had to save face they were painted into a corner or what I think that's it look they were they were pretending they were going to raise rates all year they were talking about how the economy was strong enough for a rate hike and I think they felt that if they didn't deliver by December that people would know that they were wrong or that they didn't they didn't understand the economy or they would doubt the legitimacy of the recovery so I think the Fed felt that they had no choice and maybe they were lulled into a false sense of confidence when they hinted at rate hikes finally in December and the stock market didn't roll over like it did in August you know which was why they of course they couldn't raise in September so if they believe that the markets were blessing the rate hike I said from the beginning that was the wrong conclusion to make because I thought it would be a head-fake you know here we are you know we had the worst opening week in the history of the stock market and I think there's a lot more downside to come you know both for the market and the economy and it's amazing that so many people are trying to pretend that nothing or they're trying to say you know it's contained to China or the problems in the economy are contained to manufacturing you know it's everything else is okay this is just what they said when the mortgage bubble burst I said it was contained to subprime or when the Nasdaq bubble burst I said always contain detect it's never contained but they never run out of excuses and if you look at the fundamentals which you do every day the Fed reads the same fundamentals you look at the jobs report that came out two hundred ninety thousand jobs everybody was very happy about that didn't help the market all that much but when you start peeling back the onion on those jobs a 30,000 jobs in the service sector those are waiters and bartenders 50,000 jobs in the health care assistant those are cleaning out bedpans only 8,000 jobs in manufacturing Peter that's trouble for manufacturing is it not I don't even believe that we created a tie think we lost manufacturing jobs look I think a lot of these jobs were there because the seasonal adjustments which probably didn't even work is in case they didn't notice it was a pretty warm December but they probably assumed it was cold and they probably made up some gains that didn't exist and of course a lot of the jobs come from the birth-death assumption where the government just assumes that new businesses were started and they hired people reality is businesses aren't starting up they're closing down and they're laying people off so I don't necessarily believe these numbers and in fact if you look at all the other numbers that we got last week including two reports that came out on the same Friday as a job report all these numbers are awful so to me if you get you know a preponderance of data points that say we're going to a recession or already there and then we get this loan outlier the job report you know why would the job report be right and everything else be wrong it's more likely that everything else is right and there's something wrong with the jobs numbers especially when you consider the fact that jobs are a lagging indicator they don't tell you where the economy is going they tell you where I've been all the leading indicators that are forward-looking are flashing recession and once this recession hits and all the employers realize that they were wrong in anticipating and non-existent recovery that they bought into the fence propaganda they're going to be laying off a lot of workers they never should have hired in the first place and then the unemployment rate is going to skyrocket then all the non-farm payrolls are going to disappear but by then we're knee-deep in a recession and then comes quantitative easing part 4 I assume which would probably be the worst case scenario for our economy and right in the middle of an election year ma yes or they may not wait that long they may not wait until they see the whites of the eyes you know of the recession in it they may act to try to you know prevent it from from you know from coming because it is an election year I mean the last thing that Janet Yellen wants to do is hand the election to a Republican or maybe even Donald Trump and so she's gonna do whatever she can to deliver it to Hillary Clinton she remembers what happened when the Alan Greenspan bubble burst well a bush was still in office that guaranteed that Obama would win and McCain had no chance with that kind of baggage well she doesn't want to saddle Hillary with the same kind of baggage she wants Barack Obama Obama to be able to leave claiming that he saved us that he inherited a disaster and now he's the economy has a clean bill of health and he's just handing the baton to Hillary to continue the good work if this thing blows up before he gets out of Dodge and we're right back in his big a mess if not bigger than when he took the oath of office you know eight years earlier then you know then Hillary will have no chance yep anybody who says the Federal Reserve is a political is not paying attention Peter
Comments 0