저자: PeterSchiff·GregoryMannarino·JeffSnider · 외국인
요약 보기
영상 결론: 실질임금 하락과 과도한 인플레이션은 중앙은행의 부채 기반 통화 확대의 결과이며, 현 체제는 구조적으로 부채를 늘려야만 유지된다. 실질임금·가계 상황: 공식 통계상 실질임금은 15개월 연속 하락, 전년비 -3.6%이나, 실제 인플레이션을 18%로 보면 약 -12.6%로 봐야 한다는 주장. 두세 개 일자리를 갖는 사람 증가, 평균 근로시간 감소 반영 시 실질 가계소득 약 -4.4%, 가짜 CPI 보정 시 실제 약 -13.4%라고 주장. 고정소득층은 인플레이션으로 잠식된다고 언급. 식품 물가: 공식 식품 인플레이션 전년비 10.4%는 과소 집계이며 실제로는 50%, 경우에 따라 100% 이상 올랐다고 주장. 중앙은행 목적·QE 메커니즘: 중앙은행의 목표는 신체제 전환을 위해 인플레이션으로 사람들을 옥죄는 것이며, 부의 상위 1%로 이전하고 한 계층을 파괴하도록 설계되었다고 주장. QE의 이론적 채널(금리 효과, 포트폴리오 효과 등)은 실제로 작동하지 않으며 본질은 자산 교환이라고 설명. 금 가격은 일시 반등 후 되돌림, 달러 하락도 미미해 시장이 연준의 인플레이션 승리를 여전히 믿고 있다고 평가. 향후 전망: 인플레이션이 목표를 크게 웃도는 상황에서는 채권·환율·금 시장의 자경단(vigilantes)이 되살아나 연준이 과거처럼 완화 정책을 쓰지 못할 것이라 주장. 체제는 부채 기반이라 멈출 수 없으며, 부채 발행을 중단하면 시스템이 붕괴한다고 설명. 정부 직접 지원: 2020~2021년 헬리콥터 머니 방식의 현금 지원은 재무부 채권시장 차입에 의존했으며, 연준의 직접 화폐화라기보다 상업은행 대차대조표 간 재분배였고, 실물경제에 일시적 영향만 남겼다는 분석. 세계은행 빈곤 관련 발언도 언급. 리스크: 부채 확대 중단 시 체제 붕괴 가능성, 인플레이션 장기화, 실질소득 하락 지속.
다듬은 글
that so many americans in fact record numbers of americans are now working two and three jobs to make ends meet you know according to the official statistics this is the 15th consecutive month in a row where real wages are down and they're down 3.6 percent now year over year but that's if you adjust wages by the make believe inflation number but if you figure that inflation is 18 not nine percent then real wages aren't down 3.6 but 12.6 you're seeing a collapse in real wages that's why so many americans need that second or third job to make ends meet because these are unprecedented pay cuts and they're gonna continue the high inflation is not just here for one year it's here for multiple years compounding so this is going to be a dramatic reduction in real wages but for a lot of american families it's not just that wages are down but they're working fewer hours if you adjust for a decline in the average work week average real household income is down by 4.4 which of course means if you throw in another 9 to adjust for the phony cpi we're looking at an actual decline of 13.4 percent but what about the people that don't even have wages what about the people who are living on fixed income their fixed incomes are being eviscerated by inflation we've had central banks here for now well over a decade doing nothing but inflate creating cash out of thin air buying assets with it it was only a matter of time here before all of this money creation was going to present the current issues that we have uh it's economics one-on-one it's all these extra bills existing in either digital or physical form here finally chasing the same amount of goods you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out and their own numbers are just all nonsense anyway i think everyone realizes that you know the data was all fake there was you know it's interesting we just recently found out this is laughable they're saying oh who is this last week i think it was reported that food inflation year over year is just up 10.4 how many people are paying just 10.4 percent more for their food i think it's more like it's over 50 maybe in some cases 100 percent more it's just more the deception more the distraction but this just is so simple to understand the goal here uh of central banks is is to foster in a new system period the end and how they're doing this is by strangling people to death via um surging inflation that's where they're going they continue to go out of their way to create more of it the system is designed seriously to destroy an entire class of people create more inflation push wealth up to the one percenters and uh and then a new system is going to be instituted even if you ask central bankers how is qe supposed to work what is the theory behind this they won't say money print because they know i mean you or i or no we can't get our hands on bankers we are not banks we're not part of the banking system so it's not like i can go into the grocery store and hand over a bunch of bank reserves and walk out with groceries so they aren't even money on a technical level on a real economy level they're only for use in the banking channel so if you actually ask a central banker and if they're actually honest with you and say well how does this qe stuff supposed to work they will never say it's money printing because they know it's not in fact the very first quantitative easing in march of 2001 bank of japan there was one sole dissenter her name was aiko shinitsuka she said why are we doing this quantitative easing because we don't know how to do quantity money we can't define it what we do is these bank reserves and therefore we can't tease any we can't predict any correlation between the level of bank reserves and what happens in the real economy because it's all sort of mushy it's all psychology so if you ask a central banker and they're honest with you well how is this qe soft stuff supposed to work there's three theoretical channels the first one is uh interest rate effect and that's supposedly you know the supply and demand the fed buys bonds the bank of japan buys bonds and if the bank of japan or the fed is buying government bonds the interest rate supposed to fall because there's more buyers for those bonds and what you'll find out there is no it doesn't work that way either even the most charitable studies find a very negligible impact on interest rates because the market is already buying those bonds and though the central banks come in and buy after the market already has so the market sets the interest rate and the fed tries to take credit for it so the interest rate channel not doesn't really work the second channel is portfolio effects portfolio effects is as i said qe is nothing more than an asset swap so the central bank comes in and says i'm going to pay you a little bit extra for that government bond you have in your portfolio i'm going to give you bank reserves same thing happened in the gold market gold which was down about fifteen dollars ended up rallying to up close to twenty dollars on the high before settling up about ten bucks at seventeen dollars and thirty six cents now is that a sign that we've seen it top in the dollar and a bottom in gold probably not it wasn't significant enough in my mind as a reversal i think if the markets were really figuring this out it would have been a much bigger rise in gold it would have been a much bigger drop in the dollar so the markets are still operating under the delusion that the fed is going to win its fight against inflation they still don't realize that inflation is going to win and that the fed is going to surrender and instead try to fight to stimulate the economy but this time it's not going to work remember the only reason that monetary stimulus was able to work in the past is because the fed was doing it when the official inflation rate was below 2 and so they could get away with quantitative easing and 0 rates because inflation was still below target they will not be able to get away with it when inflation is well above target because the bond market vigilantes will be back the currency market vigilantes will be back the gold market vigilantes will be back the federal reserve will not get away with that type of monetary stimulus when we already have high inflation what people need to understand i really at his core the system number one as i said is debt-based it's a debt-based economic model it must be fueled with more debt it can't ever stop once we stop the moment see we could end the system we could we could see my hat back here and the fed we could end the federal reserve and every central bank in a nanosecond if if we just prevented them from issuing one single dollar of more more debt just one dollar the entire system would implode um that's why they got to come up with reasons to continue to pull cash from the future and sell it to the public i mean we just heard from the world bank world bank is saying that developed nations around the world must support impoverished nations all the global poverty issue is going to get worse well i have a little clue for everyone is listening to the global global poverty issue is designed to get worse much much worse and no amount of cash conjured up out of thin air being created by a central bank is going to fix the problem the underlying issue is the debt based economic model and they will never let it go and unfortunately people are being lulled into this and um i think willingly in a lot of ways people can't make it anymore uh they can survive so they become slaves to the systems which is the end game which is the goal on the final solution to create slaves to create a world of i don't think people realize how much of the debt the federal reserve has owned basically throughout i mean you go back to something like 2003 2004 people might be surprised to learn that the fed owned 10 of the national debt before quantitative easing they have always earned or they've always owned what they call earning assets because the fed by by mandate is supposed to fund its own activities the only way it can do that is by exchanging these bank reserves for actual assets in its portfolio so the fed has owned a lot of treasuries and mbs and other things for a long period for quite a long time it only became an issue when we got to quantitative easing and the proportion changed a little bit i think it went from 10 to about 15 16 17 by around 2014 or so but you're right something was different in 2020 and 2021 when the federal reserve not you know the federal reserve quantitative but the federal government started to get involved directly in the economy through its helicopter drops giving people directly cash that it was borrowing from the treasury market and some people say was monetized by the fed that's an argument that people can be can make but i think by and large what really happened was that the federal government borrowed from the treasury market which was only too willing to buy safe and liquid assets and so it didn't need the fed to monetize that debt the treasury market was going to buy whatever the federal government was going to sell and so what you have isn't it isn't necessarily the creation of money or the monetization from the fed as much as it is a redistribution on corporate commercial balance sheets uh commercial bank balance sheets so it wasn't it wasn't necessarily money creation but you're right it was a way to circumvent in one sense the lack of willingness of the banking system to lend into the real economy so it was a redistribution borrowed from the treasury market that the federal government then injected into the real economy which had a temporary impact it absolutely had a major impact on the global economy but it was temporary it wasn't a permanent shift in economic activity
Comments 0