저자: BillGross · 외국인
요약 보기
빌 그로스는 2016년 8월 기준 펀드 수익률 연초 대비 약 4%라고 밝히며, 글로벌 중앙은행의 초저금리·마이너스금리 정책이 가장 큰 도전이라고 진단한다. 초저금리 정책: 일본은행(BOJ)과 영국(MPC)이 8월 중 추가 부양책을 낼 가능성이 거의 확실하다고 보며, 금리가 더 낮아지다 극단적 수준까지 갈 수 있다고 본다. 핵심은 정책이 멈출 때를 알고 음악이 멈추기 전에 빠져나오는 것이다. 정상화 조건: 중앙은행 목표는 실질성장뿐 아니라 명목성장이며, 그로스는 부채를 갚기 위해 명목 GDP 성장률 약 3~5%가 필요하다고 본다. 이 수준에 도달하기 전에는 금리가 오르지 않을 것이며, 현재 미국 실질성장률 전망(1~2%)을 보면 그 수준에 못 갈 수도 있다고 한다. 헬리콥터 머니: 그로스는 이를 재정정책의 대리 수단으로 보며, 케인스식 재정부양이 된다면 긍정적이라고 평가한다. 다만 0% 금리 상황에서 저축 기능이 훼손되어 자본주의 작동에 해롭다고 비판한다. 정상화 경로: 금리 하락은 점진적이었으나 정상화 과정은 위험자산에서 투자자가 이탈하는 계단식 충격(step function)일 가능성이 높다고 본다. 옐런 연준에 대한 조언: 저금리가 자산가격을 올리고 그것이 실물경제에 도움이 된다는 모델은 잘못이며, 금리 인하 집착을 버리라고 권고한다. 기업 실적이 양호해도 명목 GDP 성장은 연 3.3%에 그친다고 지적한다. 배당: 고배당 투자 관련 질문에 배당 성장률이 고수익의 대리 지표가 될 수 있다고 답한다.
다듬은 글
William gross is with Janice Capital we welcome all of you on Bloomberg Radio and Bloomberg television William gross has been unconstrained which has been a tough battle given the back and forth and the crosscurrents of what's going on Bill I want to congratulate you on even surviving to the end of the work given what's going on what's the biggest challenge of managing money given Global Central Bank Theory well the the fact Tom and thank you uh for the compliment uh we're up 4% for the year and so I'll I'll I'll take that for um 2third of a year um but the the biggest challenge is obviously uh you know what the central banks are doing in in terms of producing uh near 0% interest rates and in many cases negative interest rates and the the the judging going forward of what they may continue to do um we we know that the boj on Thursday night uh we'll probably have a special surprise for us and we know uh with um near 100% certainty that uh you know the MPC and the UK will uh will initiate some program in August and so uh you know yields move lower and lower and lower to to near uh unfathomable types of levels the the trick is to know when they stop and to to get out before the Music Stops I want to get to helicopter money in a minute but this is important all of our viewers and listeners whatever their Walk of Life are certain that we see a great Distortion in Bill gross's world you have said this will this will go on for years rogoff Reinhardt gross have all said the duration of this Distortion is remarkable do you see any indication it ends anytime soon well no uh not yet because the objective of of central banks is to produce uh not only real growth but nominal growth and that's why we he about inflation all of the time certainly from Japan and and from the uh the ECB um you know countries and Global economies need nominal growth um of uh in my opinion three to four to 5% in order to pay bills um that were incurred over the prior 5 10 15 years um so the objective is um you know a four to 5% nominal rate of growth and and we won't see higher interest rates until we get to that level um we may never get to that level based upon you know some of the current conditions in terms of productivity and uh economic growth forecast going forward uh in real terms that are one to 2% at best in the United States but uh we'll have to see if they don't succeed at generating nominal GDP growth Tom uh they're going to stay where they are right when you look at this bill one of the basic rules is you have to Clear markets back to Fredick Hayak in the 1940s you've got to Clear markets we see Deutsche Bank struggling with clearing out their challenges we can look at the entire economy of Japan as another example if we are reticent to take the tough medicine what institution is going to drive that debate forward or is it just the market Vigilantes the Bond vigilantes like Bill gross that's going to tell the authorities when to Clear markets well markets to my way of thinking are a function yes of monetary policy and that's what we talked about for the last few minutes but also of fiscal policy and together they come together to generate nominal GDP I I think monetary policy has gone about as far as it can go and and Bond vigilantes are certainly not a factor in in driving uh the um the forward-looking behavior of Mario dragi or um or Janet Yellen so going forward and I think we're beginning to see this Tom we see this with uh with in Japan Jaan and we see it in China and we see a little bit of it in the political atmosphere here in the United States during the conventions um you know fiscal stimulus lies ahead and the the combination of monetary as it is now um and perhaps more fiscal stimulus going forward you know it is a something that we should look forward to I think Bill I think when you were licking when you were clipping coupons rather not licking postage stamps you did that later but when you were clipping coup coupons in the Pimco mail room a few years ago you dreamed about owning a helicopter we all may get it with helicopter money Olivier Blanchard says it's a scam other people are more calm about it where do you fit in here do you think helicopter money is a is a fiscal proxy can work I think it is a fiscal proxy and that's that's a good phrasing of of of what helicopter money is you know people view it as uh dropping actual cash to Citizens you know from uh helicopters and that's really not the way it works it works through fiscal policy um so to the extent that helicopter money um you know generates some type of fiscal stimulus Keynesian fiscal stimulus I think it's a positive I I would uh would not claim that where we are now in terms of monetary policy and the combination of 0% interest rates and uh the uh thrust of helicopters going forward is really a positive for capitalism because it's not we have to get off of this addiction you know at at some point because capitalism to my way of thinking cannot Thrive it may survive but it can't Thrive at 0% interest rates because the savings function which ultimately leads to the investment function you know is is destroyed when we do this and when we get back to the beginning of normal do you assume smooth Glide pass me measured vectors where you and Janice can work in real time to adapt and adjust or do you just assume it's some brutal jump conditions I I I would favor the latter although I don't know and I I would hope for the former but you know I think while the adjustment on going down in terms of yields has been rather gradual over the past five or six or seven years you know I would think some type of Step function uh on the other side would probably be the norm a step function not necessarily in terms of interest rates because they're still going to be controlled by central banks but a step function in terms of risk assets and the the desertion of uh the investment Market from them what would be your advice to chair Yellen what we've certainly seen in the last number of days is good corporate earnings I think of United Technologies Dupont even McDonald's with their struggles doing okay Apple doing okay according to the surveillance interviews we did today it's a pretty good America and yet she's Central Banker to this troubled world what would be your counsel to her for September and then into next year well I I would suggest and perhaps we're going to see some of this in in August Tom you'll probably be out there at uh at Jackson hle and we'll hear something more but you know I think Janet Yellen not to be critical but you're asking me and so I will be um you know as as well as all Central Bank are fixated on the fact that the lower and lower interest rates go the higher and higher asset prices go and ultimately that redounds to the benefit of the real economy I don't think it does and so i' I'd say Janet get off of it you know get off of this fixation of lower interest rates providing a push for economic growth because the evidence is despite what you talked about in terms of apple and corporate profits the evidence is is that nominal GDP has only grown by 3.3% over the past several years and real growth is down below two and so you know that is not normal something must be wrong and and so get off of your old model and get into the the real world of uh common sense right here's my real world Bill gross I need some Financial advice and you're the only one that's going to give it to me is dividend growth a proxy for yield um for high yield uh it it can be uh because you know dividends although we don't believe it are subject to reduction as well as increase but a dividend yield uh relative to a risk asset with a 30-year duration is a is a decent proxy yes
댓글 0