저자: RayDalio · 외국인
요약 보기
한 줄 결론: 2019~2020년은 경기 후기 사이클, 중앙은행 금리 여력 축소, 부의 격차와 정치 갈등이 맞물려 경기둔화 위험이 크다. 경기 및 투자자 인식: 실행 가능한 사업 흐름에 따라 주식 수익은 당분간 지속될 수 있으나 사회 갈등이 시장 충격으로 번질 수 있다. 법인세 인하나 저금리에 따른 자사주 매입이 주가를 떠받치는 요인이다. 경기 둔화 전망: 2020년 경기둔화 가능성이 높고 미국, 유럽, 중국, 일본 모두 해당된다. 스콧 마이너드는 2020년 경기침체를 예상했다고 언급됐다. 미국 금리는 거의 0%에 가까워 완화 여력이 제한적이다. 정치·부의 격차: 상위 0.1%의 순자산이 하위 90%와 같다는 수치를 제시했다. 부의 격차와 포퓰리즘이 정치 갈등을 키우고 있으며 70% 세율 같은 정책이 자본이득 과세 등 시장에 영향을 줄 수 있다. 1930년대와 유사하다고 봤다. 미중 관계: 신흥 강국의 기존 강국 도전 구조로 1930년대 후반과 비슷하다. 무역 문제는 해결 가능하나 공급망과 충돌 위험이 남아 있다. 부채와 통화정책: 모두가 레버리지 롱 포지션을 가진 상황이라 중앙은행 여력이 줄었다. 자사주 매입과 기업부채 구조도 점검 대상이다. 대응 방향: 정책 수단은 단순 재정이 아닌 생산성 개선, 교육, 마이크로파이낸스로 제시했다. 실제로는 정치 대응이 느릴 것이라는 회의적 시각도 밝혔다. 출연자 전망: 2019년 금리 하락으로 경기 둔화와 금리 이슈가 현실화될 것이며 완만한 성장 유지 가능성에 기대했다.
다듬은 글
founder , co-chief investment officer and co-chairman of Bridgewater, is with us now . We are very happy to see you this morning . Even though it's sunny in Davos , there seems to be a lot of anxiety here. It seems like you're also a little concerned about what might happen in the coming years. I saw some of your comments in your panel discussion this morning, and it seems to me that you both have similar ideas .
A letter written by Seth Klarman in Davos this morning has been the talk of the town . Reading it makes you feel like you're talking to yourself. " Business as usual cannot continue amid continued protests, riots, shutdowns, and rising social tensions, " he said. You have spoken many times about social tensions.
In the letter, he asked, " Social conflicts are a challenge to democracies around the world . We wonder when investors will take notice ." Why do you think investors think all this is just a nuisance so far ? Investors look at the returns on things like stocks. So, it has not become a disruptive factor so far.
This may take some time, perhaps a few months . It might take nine months. If corporate tax cuts are implemented, the value of stocks will increase. Or if interest rates are very low, it is profitable for those who buy equities , meaning that companies' owners do buybacks, which supports stock prices .
So, even if right-wing populist policies are popular, capitalism and profit- making drive the stock market . This is not something that stimulates the entire economy. So, you need to realize that you are buying an income stream . Therefore, those are the most important things. Are we in that revenue stream?
I have to tell you, Scott Minerd was sitting right where you were sitting in the last segment. He expects a recession in 2020 . So there is a risk of a recession, meaning it will be growth minus one? Would that be a plus one? Okay, let's not get too technical about it. There is a high chance of an economic slowdown in 2020.
Now let's look at it in the right perspective, okay? We are in the final stage of the cycle. There are some reasons for the increase in growth , but a slowdown is coming worldwide. This is not just limited to America, but is also the case in Europe, China, and Japan . And let's see where we are in terms of interest rates.
So we are almost at zero. We have 300 basis points here . We have zero there. Those factors, combined with income disparity and popularity, now drive political elections. We are about to enter election season . We've been hearing about new candidates on the list for weeks. So with that we're going to ask the question about rethinking how we're working now.
That wealth gap has brought popularity and with it we are going to have political conflict . The consequences of political conflict on markets are profound. So we're going to start talking about it . For example, will a tax rate of 70% come in? Does that change how we deal with capital gains? Will it have an effect ?
So I think these three big factors are the combination of these factors, the combination of wealth disparity and politics . The late stage of the cycle we are in and the inability of central banks to ease too much are, in my opinion, the key factors that will define 2019 and 2020 . Where... tell me.
Tell me. No. I wanted to ask where the relationship between America and China fits into that matrix ? Because I know you've talked a lot about a long-term war between these two countries . Yes, I think that's another example of how this period is very similar to the late 1930s . So, what are those things?
One aspect is that we have the phenomenon of an emerging power challenging the existing power in various ways . There is a commercial aspect to it, but that is not the most important part. I think we can resolve the trade issue well . There is a method there. China operates from the top down for its various reasons .
It dates back to the time of Confucius, to the time of dynasties, that's the way things are done. There is a bottom-up approach. That problem has implications for supply chains . In other words , you have many opportunities . No one knows where it will end. None of the leaders are aware of the possible consequences.
If you take the worst-case scenario, which is conflict , it leads to the question of whether I am self-sufficient . Are you self- sufficient ? How are you going to deal with it ? Those problems will remain with us at that time . So, this is what I would say if you take equal time in terms of forces.
These are those forces. The forces of wealth disparity. The net worth of the top 1/10th (0.1%) of the population is equal to the net worth of the bottom 90%. You have to go back to the 1930s. If we take populist policies in a political sense, you have to look at the situation in the 1930s for comparison .
If we look at where we are in terms of monetary policy , the ability to stimulate is reduced, because everyone is in a long position . Everyone is in debt, everyone is in debt and in debt, right? Since everyone wants the market to rise, you too will want to borrow and go long . This means that the work done by central banks provides credit.
That's purchasing power. Since everyone is long on debt , everyone wants the market to grow, but there is a limit to that, because interest rates cannot be easily lowered, or money can be easily printed to increase the market. These are the turning points. These are the problems of our time. Very good.
If wages are rising due to the tight job market, they are rising compared to the past , you know . There is some evidence that some people of working age who were excluded from the system are returning . There is evidence that people are making bold decisions to leave their current job and join another job that pays better .
Does it reduce the wealth gap in a natural way? Not in any effective way. So, how does a 70% tax rate work? We look at the average too much . If there is a 70% tax rate, I can understand how it would discourage those who accumulate wealth, but can we assume that that money will reach the poor people who need it ?
Or will it only go to the government at first? No, you are touching on a very important point . The fact is, there are a lot of unresolved issues . Okay, how does this affect incentives ? What is that money used for? How do you get it? Will this have a negative impact on the employment growth we talked about earlier ?
Even if they're not big, at least they're happening . But in matters like education. Okay. If you think about it, education is in a very poor state for the majority of the population. So, what is that money being used for ? Or will it go to schemes like universal minimum income (UBI)? The question then is, how will it perform?
If you have a 70% tax rate, looking at it, I know its performance should be at least above 10 million. But then the question of arbitrage arises. Does that mean I will become a company? Now I have a corporate tax rate , and I avoid 70% of the tax because I am a corporation . That affects the arbitrage between corporate behavior and individual behavior.
Will that affect how tax rates change ? Will that affect corporate tax rates ? If it affects corporate tax rates , it will have indirect effects . So there's nothing there, nothing there , but no details. I don't know, you don't have any details on what that money is used for , what other tax scope is there, what the arbitrage will be like .
What I'm saying is , I'm not making any comments on this. What I 'm saying is, think about this. But this is a reflection of the problem of our time , isn't it ? And we need to solve that problem of our time . For example, if I were the President of the United States , I would set up a commission to address this matter thoughtfully and methodically , because what we are seeing is one faction fighting another, and this could lead to chaotic situations that could affect the markets.
But more importantly than markets, it affects our society . Am I saying? You understand my point, right? If the 70 % of the tax you are collecting is not effectively reaching those you are trying to help. There is no reason for everyone to be equally poor. It's a good thing that millionaires are being created .
We should not create an egalitarian society where everyone is poor . What we are saying here is that we need to redesign capitalism in a way that increases productivity, and there are ways to do this . There are things like microfinance or paying for education . In other words , I think you have to calculate all the costs .
For example, if you can't educate one person and balance the budget , you're not taking into account the total cost. I do n't believe that our government, which is currently shut down, will do what you are saying. Well, neither do I , but I'm talking about that problem. So, now let's step back and be practical.
Okay? And let's say what is likely to happen . As we move forward in the markets and the economy , we will have to address other issues besides monetary policy . But that is changing . We are going to see an economic slowdown not just in America but also in Europe , and the economic slowdown will have an impact elsewhere as well .
That slows down growth to a certain level. Along with the notion of how monetary policy becomes part of that, at the same time politics and these issues of inequality come together. In other words , it becomes a political issue , and with it, we see indications of policy actions. As those policy measures and surveys start to change, I ask myself, " What does this mean for my return on my investment?" Investors start calculating .
I think the future will be like this . Greg, can I ask you about something you said here last year ? I think you said this time last year that we were in a Goldilocks period and that anyone who invested in cash would feel very foolish about it . I don't mean to offend you, because that's what we heard from many people last year, and it's clear that you've moved faster than anyone else, as one of your funds has grown by 14.6% .
Yes, what I said is that there will be that stimulus in the first half of the year, and then the Federal Reserve will respond to that stimulus , maybe they will tighten things up a lot, and if interest rates rise faster than expected, I believe they cannot tighten at the rate they said and without a negative impact, including on the balance sheet .
And then I thought it would happen anyway in the second half of the year . What I said last year was true, I may be wrong many times, but when it comes down to it , I think the Federal Reserve made a mistake . They perceived things differently when it came to influencing markets and monetary policy .
So you saw interest rates fall by 70 basis points, that determined the bond yield and that represents the term structure of interest rates. If you multiply 70 basis points by the duration of the stocks , you see that increase and that reaction. So now we've changed, so I think we're in a situation now , where if you take the timeline of interest rates, it basically means rates aren't going to go up.
That's what's inherent in that curve . If it grows faster than that, I think we'll have another problem . So it should not grow. And as we move forward , we will see how much the economy slows down and what happens to the debt that supported the stock buybacks , as well as the corporate debt that drove the big growth .
It was financed because the cost of funds was low compared to the return on equity. We'll see how that affects it. So we are at that stage. Anyway, I'm answering .. We have to go, but I have a small question , do you think this recession is inevitable ? I know you talk about the financial machine . Is there any chance that things will take an unexpected turn and surprise you too ?
Yes, I tend to be surprised, so I think you have a chance to maintain balance with easy monetary policy . Because we have 300 basis points and you grow somewhat slowly . And you won't have a normal depression for a while. There is such a possibility . And I think that's the best chance for us , but we also have to address the other issues that we're talking about . Long term . Ray Dalio, thank you very much for coming this morning. Mmm.
Comments 0