저자: MohamedEl-Erian · 외국인
요약 보기
2020년 3월 코로나 충격 시기 시장 진단: 신용시장 경색에서 시작된 시장 기능 장애가 인플레이션·국채시장으로 확산됐고, 연준의 대응은 늦었지만 필요하다고 평가함. 정책 방향: 금리 인하·현금 투입만으로는 부족하며, 취약 계층 보호, 중소기업 대출, 의료 분야 자금 지원처럼 표적화된 대응이 필요하다고 주장. 영국의 중앙은행·재무부 공조를 모범 사례로 제시. 경제 충격: 수요와 공급이 동시에 붕괴하는 'sudden stop' 상황이며, 항공사 예약 70% 감소·감편·해고가 연쇄 타격을 준다고 설명. 1930년대 대공황 이후 처음 보는 상황이라고 진단. 리스크: 사회적 거리두기와 세계화 축소로 인해 경기침체가 심화되고 회복이 어려울 것이라고 경고. 보건 정책과 경제 현실의 내적 모순이 단기적으로는 보건이 이긴다고 봄. 전망: 시장이 단기간에 회복하기 어렵고 경기 침체는 불가피하다는 취지의 비관적 견해. 다만 구체적 자산별 가격 목표는 제시하지 않음.
다듬은 글
this latest news from the Federal Reserve about the purchases they're planning—they have n't called it quantitative easing yet, but we heard from Sheila Baer that there's concern about the refinancing of some of the corporate debt and that this debt bubble may be threatening the markets. Is this a concern of yours?
This is all him. Um, and it's nice to see the Fed finally focusing on market dysfunction. You know, it started at the beginning of the week. It started in the credit market. Then it spilled over into the inflation market on Tuesday night and Wednesday. This began to affect the Treasury bond market. So it's a good thing that the Fed is finally responding, because we can't let market dysfunction start to backfire on what's happening in the real economy.
And what about the reaction not only from the Fed, but also this statement that we are reportedly due to get from the President today? I have to admit, I thought this would calm the markets to some extent, as there was criticism that the administration was not being proactive enough, but that did not happen.
We saw markets actually fall to their lows after that. So, two things: the markets were losing momentum on the eve of this statement, and they were losing it for a very simple reason. To sustain the rebound, buyers with large capital are needed to offset what will be a string of forced sales and a history of "stuck" promotion players looking to get out.
So it is very important to obtain further purchases in significant volumes. We didn't get that. So we started to weaken quite significantly from the opening, and then from the announcement, because it was uncertain. No one fully knows what a state of emergency means. But we look at Europe today. Belgium has closed restaurants.
Spain has declared a state of emergency , and all of this is what is called a sudden economic shutdown . This stops everything suddenly. So the markets are trying to figure out what this announcement means. Hi, Muhammad, this is Brian Chang. So, you've talked a lot about the balance between monetary and fiscal policy here.
There seems to be a consensus that fiscal policy should take the lead in this situation. But I'm curious when you look at other parts of the world, like the UK, where the Bank of England released its statement at the same time as the budget was presented to parliament, and the Bank of Japan met with the Ministry of Finance yesterday in addition to the financial regulator there.
I'm wondering if you think the United States has fallen behind in trying to bring everyone around the same table? Will this inspire more trust? Could this be a kind of fuse in the sell-off we've seen so far? So, we are moving to a nationwide approach, and this is critically important. Although the Fed is not a government, it is an extremely important institution.
So when I say " national," I also mean the Fed. We must act like one big orchestra, playing one melody with the same notes. Thanks for mentioning Britain. Britain set a great example on Wednesday, not only because of the coordination between the Treasury and the Bank of England, which is important, but also because of how they are approaching this issue.
So, it's not just about lowering interest rates or injecting money. It is important to focus on where market failures occur, ensuring lending to small and medium-sized businesses. Things that require a detailed approach. But the first stage is primarily about protecting the most vulnerable segments of the population, the most vulnerable segments of the economy, and directing funds to the medical sector.
If you just lower interest rates or taxes, people won't start going to the movies or going back to flying. So be careful not to use up all your ammunition too soon when it comes to general policy. What the Bank of England and the Treasury did was very right, because it was targeted, and in the long term they paved the way for improved infrastructure.
What does this give? This stimulates future demand and productivity. Muhammad, I think you just mentioned Belgium, which is closing restaurants. I'm curious. A week ago, this seemed like a ridiculous question. But you can close the country, but you can't stop the economy. But what would it look like if we started taking measures like in Italy, and like we're starting to see in Europe, which the WHO says is now the epicenter of the outbreak?
What would it look like for us to take such steps, and how long would it take ? So, this would mean a recession. This will make the global recession even more severe and the recovery even more difficult. Listen, there is an inherent contradiction that people haven't yet noticed between the current phase of health care policy and the realities of our economy.
What is the health policy ? What keywords guide us? Social distancing, isolation, separation — that's right, that's how you try to contain the virus until you develop the necessary medical tools. So, on the one hand, we have deglobalization. You are effectively stopping economic activity. On the other hand, we have an economy that is not adapted to this.
We are tuned to interconnectedness. We are committed to globalization. So there is an internal contradiction, and in the short term, health will win this contradiction. So yeah , you know, I'm worried that people are still underestimating how quickly we're slowing down and how hard it is to restart the economy.
Muhammad, let's get you back to the conversation. I know, uh, you don't seem to be in Los Angeles, but it's a little closer to home. Uh, when we hear about Jess and how they're in Congress debating the best way to deal with all these issues, what do you think? And even if they do pass some of the things that have been discussed , paid sick leave, etc., how much does that really help cushion the economic blow of shutting everything down?
So the reality is that there is little that can be done to soften the blow. What needs to be done is to protect the most vulnerable segments of society and safeguard critical sectors, and importantly, lay the foundation for when policies become effective again. So I think it's important to have realistic expectations.
As I said before, do you think we would change our behavior if we got a tax credit? We will not change. If we get a check in the mail, we'll just put it away. Will this help the balance sheets? Yes. Do everything you can to help balance sheets, but you can't get people back into economic activity until you restore confidence in the health situation .
I was actually encouraged by the signals that were emerging because this is an important first step, and it's important that the two parties are coming together. I just hope that this will be followed very quickly by a clear plan of what the second phase will look like, what the third phase will look like.
Muhammad, Dan Howie is here. You know, you were talking about the uh closures, the potential uh complete shutdown of uh restaurants and that aspect of the economy. But what happens to those restaurant owners, movie theater owners, uh, the people who run these businesses if they have no income because people just don't go out when everything is closed.
Does the government step in and provide them with the means to be self-sufficient until the economy starts working again? So we have a leading indicator of all this in the aviation industry, and we get a simultaneous destruction of supply and demand, which is really scary. This usually happens in failed or fragile states, which we are not, or in communities affected by a large-scale natural disaster.
So what's going on? Step one: people consume less. For example, we go to restaurants less often. In the case of airlines—we don't fly anymore. United announced a 70% drop in bookings. The second stage, which comes very quickly after the first, if not simultaneously with it, is that airlines reduce flights, capacity, and lay off people.
British Airways just announced massive capacity cuts today. What does this lead to? That reduces someone else's income and demand , right? That's why it's so scary, and why it's important to prepare for the concept of a sudden stop. We've seen financial shocks before, and paradoxically, they hit harder right away .
But the central bank can step in and say, "If you don't trust each other, trust me, I have a balance sheet, I have a printing press in my basement." You can't do that in an economic sudden stop because of fear. When you talk about a sudden stop, I should note that Louisiana has postponed the Democratic primary that was scheduled for that state.
By the way, we have Florida on Tuesday . Nothing is heard, which means they haven't postponed it yet. Is this the same case? Are we creating a vicious circle of fear? Does this play into the hands of conspiracy theorists, who have all sorts of ideas about what's really going on here? We have never before found ourselves in a situation where both supply and demand are being destroyed at the same time, at least not since the Great Depression.
When you hear that Louisiana is postponing its primaries, at least the Democratic ones, what do you think? I think as a society we are overreacting. But I've been talking to doctors non-stop for the last six weeks, and they're saying, "You know what? If you look at type 1 and type 2 errors -- overreacting or underreacting -- it's better to overreact, because the consequence of underreacting is that our hospitals will be overwhelmed." We don't have enough beds.
We don't have enough doctors. We don't have enough tests. Good. So, we need this social distancing now. So if you ask me from an economic perspective, yes, we are completely overreacting. If you look at the probabilities, they are small. But the medical community has, I think, a very compelling argument: can we really take the risk of underreacting ?
So it's really complicated, and that's why I immediately brought up this contradiction, which people still don't realize, between the right phase of the medical response and how it affects the economy. Hello investors, this is Zach Guzman. most up-to-date market analysis, great interviews from .
Comments 0