저자: 에세이삼촌 · 한국인
요약 보기
짐 로저스의 신간 『세계에서 가장 자극적인 나라』를 바탕으로 미중 패권 경쟁과 미국 보호무역의 문제를 다룬 해설 영상이다. 결론: 저자는 트럼프식 보호무역·무역전쟁이 역사적으로 성공한 적이 없으며 미국 경제에 불리하다고 비판하고, 미국 증시가 2020년경 큰 하락을 맞을 수 있다고 본다. 무역전쟁 비판: 역사상 보호무역으로 무역전쟁에서 이긴 나라는 없다는 주장이 소개된다. 대두·옥수수 사례: 중국이 미국산 대두에 25% 관세를 물리고 수입처를 브라질·멕시코로 돌려 미국 농가가 타격을 입었다. 옥수수 수출도 막혔고 일본이 그 물량을 가져갔다는 내용이다. 소비자 물가: 트럼프가 소수 노동자를 보호하려다 전체 물가를 올려 더 많은 사람을 고통에 빠뜨린다고 비판했다. 중국산 애플 제품 가격 상승도 언급된다. 증시 전망: 미국 증시는 이미 고점권이라 2020년경 하락 위험이 있고, 무역전쟁이 확산되면 악화될 수 있다. 레이 달리오 등도 미국 증시 과열과 하락 가능성을 언급했다는 내용이다. 중국 주식: 2018년 말 미국 증시는 사상 최고치였고 중국 증시는 2015년 고점 대비 60% 하락 상태다. 저자는 떨어진 주식이 더 매력적이라고 보며, 따라서 중국 시장이 상대적으로 유리하다고 주장한다. 진행자는 한국 증시도 급락해 바겐세일 같다고 언급하며, 다음 방송에서 한국·중국 주식을 다루겠다고 예고했다. 달러와 위안화: 달러를 대체할 통화는 위안화뿐이며 유로·파운드·엔은 대안이 못 된다는 주장이다. 다만 달러가 단기간에 약해진다는 뜻은 아니고 먼 미래의 얘기라고 설명한다. 패권 전망: 미국을 대체할 나라는 아직 없고 중국이 가장 가깝지만 역부족이다. 미국은 변할지언정 사라지지 않는다는 견해다. 진행자도 중국의 단기간 패권 교체 가능성에는 동의하지 않는다. 중국 내부 과제: 성장률 둔화는 불가피하며, 기업 부채가 GDP 대비 약 160%에 달해 구조조정이 진행 중이다. 진행자 결론: 미중 패권 경쟁 자체보다 우리나라가 어떤 입장을 취하고 이 위기 속에서 어떤 기회를 찾을지가 중요하다고 말하며 다음 방송 예고로 마무리했다.
다듬은 글
This time, continuing from last time, we will continue Jim Rogers' discussion on the US-China hegemonic rivalry. If last time was Part 1, you can consider this time as Part 2. On page 174 of Jim Rogers' new book, *The World's Most Sensitive Country*, there is a passage that reads: " Historically, not a single country has won a trade war while advocating protectionist policies." True to Jim Rogers' background—having majored in history at university and economics at Oxford University—he presents economic examples from history and specifically criticizes President Trump.
Trump believes that a trade war is the right measure and that the US will definitely win. Is no one explaining to him that a trade war like this will not yield good results, or does Trump think he is smarter than history? There are also those who evaluate Trump's policies as a show to boost his approval ratings.
In any case, looking at the content of this framework, Jim Rogers takes a highly critical stance regarding President Trump's current protectionist trade policies and, in particular, the US-China trade conflict. We can see this fact. On page 175, he continues with these expressions: " Currently, Trump supporters are all being angered due to his mismanagement.
The United States is the world's largest soybean producer, and 57% of its production is exported to China. China is an important customer for U.S. soybean producers. However, when Trump shouted 'It is a trade war,' China raised tariffs on U.S. soybeans by 25% and simultaneously shifted its import source to Mexico.
China is effectively the world's largest importer of soybeans. Actually, while China used to import a huge amount of soybeans from the U.S., with the start of this tariff war, it is expanding imports not only from Mexico but also from Brazil. Well, it's not just these soybeans. China also used to import a huge amount of corn from the U.S., but now that imports have stopped, U.S.
corn export farmers are suffering. So, when Trump told Abe of Japan, 'Let me live,' Japan understood and a huge incident occurred where Japan ended up profiting from massive amounts of U.S. corn." Someone wrote that Abe of Japan faced tremendous criticism from the Japanese media. Jim Rogers continues to explain the decisive reason why President Trump can never succeed in the trade war.
He criticizes him for committing the foolish act of raising the prices of all goods sold in the U.S. in an attempt to create domestic jobs—that is, to protect a small number of workers. He argues that in an attempt to protect a few workers, he is plunging far more people into suffering. He states that even if prices rise, people will not realize that this is the result of Trump protecting small workers.
However, he predicts that eventually, when the prices of Apple products manufactured in China start to rise, people will finally catch on. Not long ago, when Apple CEO Tim Cook met with President Trump, he made a very earnest plea: to refrain from imposing tariffs on Apple products, specifically iPhones produced in China.
He appealed to the Vice President, stating that if tariffs were imposed on Apple products, only Samsung Electronics would reap significant benefits. This is precisely what can be described as the purchasing power currently being generated by the U.S.-China trade war. Instead, American companies... It means that situations where a blow is inevitable are also occurring.
Now, on page 177 of this book by Jim Ross, he continues with a very interesting statement. He says that while U.S. stock prices are currently on the ice, if they start to deteriorate from 2020, Trump will blame this on the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese. Those who have heard this tend to blame others for everything.
If a trade war begins, the global stock market will turn into an air market, and the economic situation will become even more difficult. If the economic situation worsens, the President might try to wage more trade wars to resolve it. However, this is completely the fifth edition. There was a very intriguing point in what I just read to you, wasn't there?
It was the expression that the U.S. stock market might experience a major downturn in 2020. It is not just Jim Ross; Reid Alio, a very famous investor known as the "Godfather" of a famous hedge fund, is also talking about the possibility that the U.S. stock market will experience a significant downturn sometime next year or within two or three years.
Well, it is not just these people; a great many people believe that the current U.S. stock market is extremely overheated. Perhaps because of the current situation, there are many enemies. So, in this book, Jim Rogers makes another interesting statement. I will read it to you; it is on page 165. "The U.S.
stock market recorded an all-time high at the end of 2018. In contrast, Chinese stocks have fallen 60% from their peak in 2015. For me, stocks that have fallen 60% are more attractive than those at their peak. This is because they are likely to rise in the future only when they are in this fallen state." Now, you all understand what this means, right?
Yes, so he is saying that because U.S. stocks have already risen as much as they can, and Chinese stocks have fallen significantly from their past highs, if asked which market to invest in between the two, investing in the Chinese market seems more advantageous. Of course, there may be some who do not 100% agree with Jim Rogers' argument.
This is because stock investing is broadly divided into two styles. Some people argue that you should buy stocks that are rising and invest that way, while others... have fallen a lot There are those who argue that you must buy stocks to see significant gains, and there are also those who invest in that manner.
Honestly, since this is a technical aspect of investing, opinions among investors may differ. However, generally speaking, investment masters like Warren Buffett often talk about whether one should buy cheap stocks. We are well aware that they primarily argue that if a company is good and its stock price has risen significantly, then that company's stock is worth investing in.
From this perspective, we can view what Jim Rogers is saying as being that Chinese stocks are currently significantly undervalued and cheap. If we consider this strictly, honestly, aren't Korean stocks also currently in a state of sharp decline? They have fallen so much that it feels like a bargain sale is underway.
Now, since I plan to continue the discussion regarding Korea and China in the next broadcast, please look forward to the conversation about Korean and Chinese stocks. Finally, since there is a passage in this book where Jim Rogers discusses the US dollar and China, I would like to briefly introduce that content.
I will wrap things up here. In my opinion, the only currency capable of replacing the US dollar is the Chinese yuan. The Euro might collapse—no, it will undoubtedly collapse—and the British pound now has no hope either. The French franc is too small in scale and is n't even worth considering. Oh, and the Japanese yen isn't even worth thinking about.
Therefore, as long as it can serve as a rival to the US dollar, the Chinese yuan is essentially the only one. Of course, Jim Rogers isn't saying that the dollar will rise immediately. He is n't saying that the dollar will continue to be strong for the time being; you should view his discussion as looking at what currency could replace it in the distant future.
On page 166, there is this expression: "Looking at the world right now, there doesn't seem to be a country that can replace the United States. China is the closest, but it is still not enough to hold the 100-won mark to replace the US." Honestly, I completely agree with Jim Rogers's statement. As I mentioned last time, I said that China's economy is not in the worst situation as we outsiders describe it.
I mentioned this before, but nevertheless, I also believe that it will not be easy for China to rise as a hegemonic power capable of replacing the United States in such a short period of time. Let me read you a very impressive sentence: "The United States will undergo a change in the times, but it will not disappear." I got that feeling strongly while reading Sim Roth's arguments.
From a historical perspective—you see, there is a historical flow, isn't there? The flow of the status of hegemonic powers that extended from the Netherlands to Britain to the United States in the past— historians and those who deal with historical economics often talk about how that flow is gradually tilting toward China.
It appears that Roth is also making this argument based on such historical insight, claiming that the "rat" is shifting toward the hegemonic power. However, honestly, I am not claiming that the United States will easily be overtaken and China can completely replace it as the hegemonic power in a short time.
I feel the same way. China has a considerable number of internal challenges that need to be resolved. As for the recent phenomenon of stagnating growth rates, we have to view this as inevitable. Given the rapid pace of high growth achieved so far, I believe a decline in the growth rate is inevitable.
Also, regarding the issue of excessive corporate debt—corporate debt as a percentage of GDP is currently approaching 160%—I understand that structural adjustments are currently underway. However, what is truly important to us is not the US-China hegemonic rivalry itself. What is truly important is determining what stance our country should take amidst this situation, how to navigate these economic difficulties as we are currently facing a crisis, and what opportunities exist within it.
Examining and responding to these matters is what truly matters. I intend to address these critical issues in the next broadcast.
Comments 0