저자: PeterSchiff · 외국인
요약 보기
연준과 월가·정치권의 유착을 지적하며, 연준이 자산효과 유지를 위해 인플레이션을 방치하고 있다고 주장. 달러 붕괴 시 금 가격 급등을 예상하며 금에 투자 중이라고 밝힘. 주식 상승은 펀더멘털이 아닌 모멘텀에 의한 투기로 보고 암호화폐도 비판. 디플레이션 우려에 대해서는 소비자 가격 하락 시 구매 지연은 비합리적이라는 취지로 반박.
다듬은 글
you really have a very cozy unhealthy relationship between the Fed, the government, and Wall Street. It's just one big club revolving door of personnel. Yeah. Uh and the Fed through its policy has really engendered to build an assetbased economic model where the wealth effect is very important to driving consumption confidence.
And so the Fed feels that they need to keep the stock market up because if the stock market crashes, everybody's poorer who owns stocks, so they spend less. Now we're in a recession. People lose their jobs. So the Fed kind of thinks, well, what's good for Wall Street is good for the economy. And of course, that works great for Wall Street, you know, and so and again, it's the same the same economists that work at the government work work for Wall Street.
They go they go back and forth, right? They're all they're the same people. They're all buddies. And of course, some of the biggest donors are, you know, Wall Street bankers. You look at the people who write the big checks, not only just directly to the campaigns because those are not the big checks.
It's the packs, right? So the people that are writing the, you know, $50, $100,000 plus checks to the packs that are working to reelect particular, you know, people there are disproportionately on Wall Street. That's not a coincidence. You know, it's not that these guys are just so patriotic that they really feel that it's important to donate to the candidate who's going to do good for the country.
No, they're making an investment in those candidates just like anything else. And they're evaluating it based on a cost benefit. Like, how much is it going to cost me to buy this senator or this congressman? And what's my return on my investment going to be? Because I'm not doing it out of the goodness of my heart because I'm a patriotic American.
No, it's because I want the politician in office that's going to do things that make me money. So, how do you feel comfortable betting against that? Cuz don't they say don't fight the Fed? I'm not fighting the Fed. The Fed's going to keep creating inflation. So, I want to own assets that will benefit from what the Fed is doing.
You know, I'm betting that the Fed is going to continue to behave as recklessly in the future as it has in the past. that it's never going to learn from its mistakes and it's going to keep repeating them and it's going to repeat them until it basically destroys the dollar, sends the price of gold to the moon.
And so that's what I'm investing for. I'm investing for the endgame because I know how the game is going to end. Most people who are playing it don't even realize the game that they're playing. Don't they don't get the rules. They've just been winning for so long. You know, they think they know how the game ends or how the game is played.
They don't, right? It's like a game of musical chairs, but they don't know the music's going to stop one day. They just think it's going to keep on playing and and but it's going to surprise them when it stops and you know, they're not in a share. So, how are they playing the game? Is that mostly with tech stocks?
Because it seems like to me the NASDAQ and the S&P are the clear winners over the last 20 years or so. And that's where a lot of people seem to be investing the bulk of their money. Yeah. I mean they are playing the game by buying the momentum, buying whatever the crowd is buying, buying whatever is going up.
And it doesn't matter what the fundamental value of the underlying business is. I mean in some cases it doesn't matter if the underlying businesses have any fundamental value at all or do they even care. All that matters is what's the price and where is it going and how many people are buying. Look, the price of anything can go up if people keep buying it.
It's just that when they stop buying it that you have a problem. You look at cryptocurrencies, right? They have zero fundamental value. Uh so they're probably the most speculative investment and probably are the most speculative investment. Yet people have more profit in Bitcoin if they have been in it from the early days than in anything else.
But all these things are going to ultimately collapse when inflation rears its head in a way that people realize it's it's here to stay and recognize that the Fed is all talk and no bite, you know, bark or no bite when it comes to being able to contain inflation, being able to bring it anywhere near 2%, let alone back down to 2%.
Although, we'd be better off with inflation below 2%. economy 2% is not some holy grail that we need to shoot for and that inflation is at 1% that that's somehow a problem that the Fed needs to solve. I mean the only problem with 1% is that it's not zero. I'd rather have no inflation than 1% and in fact I'd rather have minus 1% than prices staying the same.
You know everybody wants lower prices. The lower the better. The less stuff costs the more stuff I could buy. Even the businesses want to be able to lower prices because if they can lower their prices, they'll sell more stuff. And so, how do businesses try to lower prices? They try to lower their costs.
And what what a businessman cares about is the margin. As long as I can sell above my cost, I'm making money. And then I can make even more money if I can ramp up the volume. But what about Japan's argument where they've had a series of deflationary times where people are afraid to spend their money because it just becomes more valuable the next year.
That's very bad logic. I mean, people aren't afraid to spend money. Maybe incentivized. If I wait a year to buy this couch, I could buy it way cheaper and if I don't need it now, I'm going to wait. But what are you going to sit on for the next year on the floor? You know, assuming it's an upgrade. I mean, yeah, but the question is how long do you want to sit on a shitty couch while you're waiting for the price of the couch you really want to go down?
I mean, what what real experience will tell you is when it comes to consumer goods, an investment is a different situation. If you're thinking about buying an asset as an investment and you think the price is too high, well, you're going to wait for it to come down, right? But when you're talking about consumer goods, which is, you know, what all this is about, people don't wait.
If you're hungry, you buy food. You don't say, "Well, if I starve myself, I can get the food cheaper next week." You know, if you need clothing, you go out and buy it. If you need a new cell phone, you buy it. I mean, you know that if you just wait another year, you'll be able to get that phone for less.
But you don't want to wait. You want to use the phone right now. Maybe you need the phone or you're just tired of the phone you have. You want to get a new phone. You may not even be alive next year, right? I mean, so who knows? you get hit by a bus, right? Waiting for the price of a phone. And we know that doesn't happen, right?
Computers, TVs, they get cheaper almost every year, even now, but people still buy them. I mean, the first cell phone, you guys don't even remember the 1980s with the Gordon Gecko cell phone, which was like a huge brick. Hardly anybody bought those phones when they came out. And it's not because people didn't want them.
Everybody wanted one. and they were just so expensive, few people could afford them. The reason that everybody has cell phones now is because they're a lot cheaper. The first television sets that came out in the 1940s, you know, they were huge. They were a big piece of furniture with a tiny like a 2-in screen and you could only watch them for maybe 2 or 3 hours a day and it was in black and white and, you know, it was a horrible picture.
They cost as much as a car. Who bought them? Really rich people that wanted to show off that they had a TV. Now, the middle class, sure, they they they were they would like one, but they just they couldn't afford it. Um, and so when prices go down, then people buy. So, people don't wait indefinitely for prices to go down because there is a present value to having something today versus having it a year from now, two years from now.
And you and so the economists that that believe this nonsense are forgetting about attributing a value to having something now. So even if I know the price is going to go down, I can buy it today for $100. I can buy it a year from now for $95. Am I going to pay $5 to have it today and get to use it for the next year rather than waiting a year?
Comments 0