雷·达里奥 | 全情投入访谈

当时政府是最大的买家。然后所有人都开始加杠杆，问题就出现了。

It was the government that was the big buyer. Then you get everybody leveraging up, then you've got a problem.

你持有比特币吗，雷？

Do you own Bitcoin, Ray?

是的，我有一些。但远不及黄金的持有量。AI战争是一场任何国家都输不起的战争。如果中国或美国真的输了这场战争，其重要性远超利润。

Yeah. I have some. Not nearly as much as as gold. The AI war, it's a war that no country can lose. If China or The US really lose this war, it's more important than profits.

我们同时处于内部内战和国际战争中。只希望人们能理性行事。也许这要求太高了。我们期待如此。我正在为你们所有人努力。

We're at a civil war internally and we're at an international war simultaneously. Just have people behave logically. Maybe that's too much to ask. We hope. I'm doing all of you.

好了，各位挚友。我认为这又是一场史诗级的讨论。人们喜欢这些访谈。我可以听他们聊上几个小时。绝对如此。

Alright, besties. I think that was another epic discussion. People love the interviews. I could hear them talk for hours. Absolutely.

我们在一分钟内解决了你们的问题。我们正在提供真实数据供大家参考，以支撑自己的观点。你们觉得怎么样？很有趣。太棒了。

We crushed your questions in a minute. We are giving people brow truth data to underwrite your own opinion. What'd you guys think? That was fun. That was great.

雷，早上好。

Ray, good morning.

早上好。

Good morning.

我先分享几个数据。如今，美国联邦政府债务高达36.4万亿美元，GDP为29.1万亿美元，债务与GDP比率达到125%。这一比率自2020年疫情爆发以来持续攀升，当时联邦政府债务为20万亿美元，GDP仅为21万亿美元。也就是说，疫情以来联邦债务增长了80%，而GDP仅增长38%。由于央行和美国政府大规模刺激计划引发的持续通胀，美联储（即美国央行）不得不提高利率，导致借贷成本上升。

I'm gonna start off by sharing a couple stats. Today, The US has $36,400,000,000,000 of federal government debt and GDP of 29,100,000,000,000.0, giving a debt to GDP ratio of a 125%. And this ratio has climbed steadily since the pandemic began in 2020 when the federal government debt was 20,000,000,000,000 and GDP was just 21,000,000,000,000. So since the pandemic, federal government debt has risen by 80% while GDP's climbed 38%. And steady inflation from the large stimulus of money from both central banks and the US government caused the Federal Reserve, which is the US Central Bank, to raise interest rates, driving up the cost of borrowing.

尽管近期试图再次降息，但市场抛售国债导致美国长期债务利率飙升至2008年全球金融危机前夕的水平。为维持经济增长，美国政府现在每年财政赤字近2万亿美元（约占GDP的7%），仅现有债务的年利息支付就超过1万亿美元。国会预算办公室（CBO）上周预测，到2035年年度财政赤字将维持在GDP的6.1%——远高于过去五十年3.8%的平均水平。未来十年国债预计增长近24万亿美元，这还不包括现任政府可能实施的数万亿美元额外减税政策。美国是否正走向破产？

And despite recent efforts to cut interest rates again, markets have traded treasuries down causing the long term interest rates of US debt to spike up to levels that we have not felt since just before the two thousand and eight global financial crisis. To keep the economy growing, the US government's now running a nearly $2,000,000,000,000 annual deficit, nearly 7% of GDP, while paying over a trillion dollars per year in interest alone on just the existing outstanding debt. The congressional budget office, the CBO, projected last week annual budget deficits are expected to be equal to 6.1% of GDP through 2035, which the CBO noted is significantly more than the 3.8% that deficits have averaged over the past fifty years. The national debt slated to rise by nearly $24,000,000,000,000 over the next decade, a sum that does not even include the trillions of dollars in additional tax cuts that the current administration may put into place. Is The US headed for bankruptcy?

即将到来的危机机制是什么？我们能否避免？为此我邀请到雷·达里奥——我认为当前全球最重要的议题专家，也是该领域最杰出的思想领袖。众所周知，雷在2021年出版了《变化中的世界秩序：国家兴衰之道》，我将其评为年度之书，认为这是最具预见性且人人都该阅读的重要著作。遗憾的是，政界和政府许多人似乎忽视了书中那些先见之明的警示。

What are the mechanics of the looming crisis ahead, and can we avoid it? To talk about this, what I consider to be the most important topic in the world at the moment is Ray Dalio, who I consider to be the preeminent thought leader on this matter. In 2021, as everyone knows, Ray published the changing world order, why nations succeed and fail. I declared it the book of the year, and I thought it was the most prescient and important thing that everyone should read. And, unfortunately, I feel like many in politics, many in government have largely ignored some of the prescient warnings shared in that book.

本周雷将发布新书《国家如何破产》，专门分析这一课题的研究成果。今天非常荣幸邀请到雷参与对话。雷，感谢你的到来。

This week, Ray is releasing a new book called how countries go broke in which he analyzes and shares his studies on this particular topic, and I'm really excited for Ray to join me here today. Ray, thanks for being here.

感谢邀请我讨论这个重要议题。

Thanks for having me here to talk about this important issue.

那么首先请问，你为何选择现在出版这本书？能否从你的视角谈谈当前时局的紧迫性？

Well, so so let me just start by asking why you wrote the book, why are you putting it out now, and maybe we can just talk about the timeliness of all this from your point of view.

在我大约五十年的全球宏观投资生涯中，我一直保持低调。如今75岁的我想传递那些曾帮助过我的经验，以及我在全球债券市场和全球市场长期参与中积累的见解。关于债务何时足够、何时产生影响及其运作机制的问题，存在一个未被充分理解的机械过程。我现在感到有必要阐明这种机制——国家、美国及其他储备货币国是如何运作的？

Through my roughly fifty years of being a global macro investor, I would keep to myself. And then now I'm 75 and I want to pass along the things that have helped me and the bond markets, global marb markets I've been involved with all over the world for a long time. And there's a mechanical process which is not understood about the question when is enough debt, when does it matter, how does it work mechanistically. And I feel compelled to get that understanding out now. How do the mechanics work for countries, for The United States, for other reserve countries?

我希望确保这一点被理解透彻。

I wanna make sure that's understood.

感谢您的分享。这些分析的基础是您在桥水基金及之外的研究成果，对吗？您为这本书汇集了大量资料，并提供了丰富的历史背景，能否简要谈谈数据来源以及您进行这些研究的时间跨度与方法？

Thanks for doing it. And the basis of the analyses is your work at Bridgewater and outside of Bridgewater, is that right? You've kind of gathered quite a bit of material together for this book and you've shown a lot of historical context, maybe just share a little bit about where the data came from and how you've kind of conducted these studies over what period of time.

要知道，桥水基金与我本人直到大约一年前我逐渐淡出之前，几乎是密不可分的同一体。在那段时期，我们深度参与市场，我也持续关注着这些议题。数据主要来自公开渠道，任何人都能获取。我们只是从各处收集资料，并像在《变化中的世界秩序》中那样追溯历史。

You know Bridgewater and I, up until my passing along Bridgewater maybe a little over a year ago, has been indistinguishable, know, one in the same. And over through that period of time, we've been involved in the markets. I've been involved in the markets and thinking about such things. So the data is largely public data that's available for anybody. We just, you know, collect it from all different spots and go back through history like I did in changing world order.

在《变化中的世界秩序》中，由于涉及数百年前的数据，我们曾查阅档案提取资料。这些数据对所有人都是开放的。

We we were in some cases in the changing world order because we were dealing with data that was hundreds of years ago, we would go through archives and pull data out. The data's all available to everyone.

我认为这非常重要，因为您撰写的并非仅是观点文章。作为分析师，您分享了大量公开的实证数据，任何人都能查证。您通过分析指出：这是历史反复出现的模式与趋势。您在书开篇就强调了一个关键点——

And so I think that's really important because this isn't just an opinion piece you're writing. As an analyst, you're sharing quite a lot of empirical data that's publicly available that anyone can go access and you're taking a look at that data and saying this is the pattern. This is the trend that we've seen historically. It has repeated over and over again. I think you make a really important point at the front of the book.

自1700年以来存在的750个货币债务市场中，仅约20%留存至今，而所有现存货币都通过您在书中描述的机制过程贬值了。这值得特别注意。我们常以为美国享有特权地位，认为这次会不同，但您揭示了人们总自认处境优越却难逃周期循环。您提出的核心概念是'大债务周期'，指出这类周期通常持续约80年，相比平均6年（±3年）的短期债务周期更易被遗忘。

Only about 20% of the 750 currency debt markets that have existed since 1700 still remain, and all of them that still remain have devalued through the mechanistic process you described in the book. That's really important to note. You know, we all think that we have this kind of privileged position in The United States and The US is different and this time around is different, but you highlight how so often everyone thinks they're in a good place and then the cycle repeats. You speak about and and the primary premise of this is what you call the big debt cycle and you highlight that these big debt cycles typically last about eighty years. They're more easily forgotten than the short term debt cycles which last about six years on average plus or minus three years, you say.

自1945年以来，我们现在正处于第12.5个短期债务周期中。因此，美国大约已经历了八十年的这种大债务周期。但或许我们可以先谈谈构成长期债务周期的短期债务周期是什么。是的，我想我

And we're now 12 and a half cycles of the short term debt cycle since 1945. So we've kind of been in this big debt cycle in The US for about eighty years at this point. But maybe we could start by talking about what the short term debt cycles are that that you highlight make up the long term debt cycle. Yeah. And I wanna I

想强调一点，根据你所说的，它们是机械性的。你可以观察它，可以进行计算。所以如果你读了这本书，你会看到这些要么对你来说合乎常理，要么你能看到计算结果。对我来说，这几乎就像循环系统。

wanna emphasize just based on what you said that they're mechanical. They can watch you can watch it. You can do the calculations. So if you read the book, you can see these either make common sense to you and you see the calculations. To me it's almost like the circulatory system, you know.

我认为信贷就像血液，将养分输送到身体的各个部分。它通过一个类似动脉的系统流动。然后信贷创造了债务。关键问题是，如果它是健康的，债务是否产生了足以偿还债务的收入？这就像是，我不知道，吃蔬菜之类的。

I think that credit is like blood that brings nutrients to all of the parts of the body. And it passes through a system that is like arteries. And then credit creates debt. And the key question, if it's healthy, is does the debt create an income that is more than enough to service the debt? And that's like, I don't know, eating vegetables or something.

这是一个健康的过程。如果不是这样，信贷就会开始积累这种债务。它开始变得像动脉中的斑块。你可以测量它，就像你可以测量动脉中的斑块一样。你可以看到它是如何限制循环系统的，因为随着信贷和债务服务的增加，你会发现它消耗了越来越多的消费，因为你必须花费那部分。

It's a healthy process. And if not, credit begins to build up this debt. It begins to become like plaque in the arteries. And you can measure it just like you could measure it in the arteries. And you can see how it constricts that circulatory system because as credit and debt service rise, you see that it eats up more and more consumption because you have to spend that.

所以你可以看到政府这样做。你可以看到利息和债务服务是如何消耗的，这意味着钱变少了。然后你还可以看到心脏病发作是如何发生的。你知道，经济债务心脏病发作。它们发生的方式是通过观察供需关系。如果你有很多债务，然后又有大量需要购买的债务供应。

So you could watch the government do that. You could see that how interest is eating up and debt service is eating up and that means there's less money. And then you also can see how heart attacks take place And they're very, you know, economic debt heart attacks. And the way they take place is by looking at the supply and the demand. If you have a lot of debt and then you have a large supply of debt, that has to be bought.

必须有人购买它。所以当你到达存在债务风险的阶段时，不仅需要提供新的供应，还有那些债务资产的持有者可能会出售这些债务资产。因此，供应相对于需求变得压倒性。这意味着对于政府、个人或公司来说，动态是相同的，只是政府可以印钞。所以当债务服务负担增加或供需严重失衡时，如果政府，尤其是中央银行，不印钞购买债务，那么债务价格必须上涨以限制借贷，而借贷受限，信贷无法到位，将削弱经济并导致糟糕的经济状况。

Somebody's gotta buy it. And so that when you get to the point where there's debt risks, there's not only the new supply that has to be offered, but there is the possibility of holders of those debt assets selling those debt assets. And so the supply becomes overwhelming relative to the demand. And then what that means is it's it's the same dynamic as it for the government as it is for an individual or a company, except the government can print money. So when that debt service burden rise or there's a big supply demand imbalance, if the government, most importantly the central bank, doesn't print money and buy it, then there has to be a rise in the price of the debt to constrict borrowing and that borrowing constricted, that credit that is not gonna come, will weaken the economy and and cause bad economic conditions.

所以他们可以让这种情况发生，或者他们可以印钞购买债务并将其货币化。当他们这样做时，这是通货膨胀的，并且会降低债务的价值。无论哪种情况，你都不想持有那种债务，因为要么存在债务服务问题，要么存在贬值，你会用更多的供应和更便宜的货币得到偿还。这就是动态和机制。因为它可以被测量，所以可以在所有国家看到，你可以观察它的发生。

And so they can let that happen or they can print money and buy the debt and monetize it. When they do that, that's inflationary and it lowers the value of the debt. In either case, you don't wanna hold that debt because either there's a debt service problem or there's a depreciation, you get paid back with a greater supply and cheaper money. And that is the dynamics and that's the mechanism. And because it can be measured, it can be seen in all countries, you can watch it happen.

就像你去见医生时那样，你可以测量这些指标，观察它们，并明确需要采取的措施。

And so like you're going to your doctor, you can measure these things, you can see them, and you can know what needs to be done.

所以我想快速讨论两点。首先是给观众或听众做个类比，说明利息水平相对于收入过高意味着什么。比如美国今年预计要支付超过一万亿美元的利息来偿还未偿国债，而政府收入将略低于五万亿美元。这意味着联邦政府每征收一美元，就有近四分之一要用于支付现有债务的利息。因此要资助新项目，政府必须举借新债，而提供资金的机构就会质疑——

So, yeah, I I wanna just talk about two things real quick. One is just to provide an analogy for folks watching or listening on what it means to have interest levels be so high relative to one's income. So, you know, The United States this year is expected to service debt with over a trillion dollars of interest payments on the outstanding US treasury bonds and the government's only gonna bring in just under 5,000,000,000,000 of revenue. So nearly a quarter of every dollar that's being collected by the federal government is going out the door just to pay interest on the existing debt. So in order to fund new programs, the government needs to take on new debt and the folks that are having to issue that cash to the government end up saying, wait.

现在风险太高了，我需要更高的利率。随着时间的推移，利率不断攀升。这时有个叫中央银行的独立机构介入，表示愿意最终购买这些债务，让政府能继续运作或维持经济运转。当你说'货币化'这个词时，就是指央行在市场上购买这些新发行的债券和债务。

That's pretty risky now. I need a higher interest rate. And over time, that interest rate climbs. And then there's this separate entity called the central bank that comes in and says, well, I'll buy the the debt ultimately to give the government the ability to continue to operate or give the economy the ability to continue to move. And the central bank when you say the word monetize, you mean the central bank ends up when when you say monetize the debt, that means they're buying the bonds, they're buying the debt that's being issued in the market.

这是正确的纠正方式吗

Is is that the right way to correct

没错。他们本质上是在凭空创造货币

That's right. They're they're essentially making the money up

对。

Right.

然后购买这些债务。

And buying it.

美国有一个核心机构，即我们的美联储，它与美国政府是这场游戏的两大参与者。在这个模型和历史实践中，特别是在疫情期间和2008年2月，美联储会介入市场。他们通过凭空创造现金来购买债券。

There's a central in in The US, it's our Federal Reserve and the US government are the two players here. And the Federal Reserve ultimately would, in this model and historically, obviously, during the pandemic and during 02/2008, they would go into the market. They would buy bonds by issuing cash that they're making up effectively.

描述得非常到位。举个例子，在新冠疫情期间就发生过两轮放水。第一轮是疫情初期，政府希望也确实向民众和企业投放了大量资金，以弥补收入损失。所以他们首先豁免了很多债务。

Very well described. And, you know, a good example was in COVID. Money there were two waves. The first wave was the COVID wave in which they put out the government wanted to and actually did deliver a lot more money to people, companies, then there was a loss of income. So they first waive a lot of that money.

这些钱从哪来？他们不得不借钱。随后央行进场提供贷款，这是主要渠道。接着在拜登当选总统后，疫情后期出现了第二轮放水，更像是全民基本收入计划，直接发钱并期待经济好转。

Where did they get the money from? They had to borrow it. The central bank then came in and lent them, that was the primary. Then the second, when President Biden was elected, there was a second wave of that after COVID. It was mostly like a universal basic income thing, in other words hand people money and we're gonna be better off.

于是他们再次重复这个操作发放现金，自然人们获得大量资金后存入银行或进行消费。因此随之而来的通胀浪潮毫不意外，许多银行购买政府债券也蒙受巨额亏损，这就是危机的由来。这就是运作机制。

And so they handed people money doing that same exercise again, and so naturally all these people got a lot of money and so they put them they deposited them in banks, they went out and spent and so on. And it therefore shouldn't be surprising that we had a big wave of inflation, and we also had a lot of banks buy government bonds which they lost a lot of money on, and that was that crisis. So that's how the mechanics work.

没错。当这些货币被印出来，就会流入经济体系导致货币供应量增加。我常这样理解——你的书里有张很棒的示意图令我印象深刻——你提到的大债务周期概览：随着债务进入市场会出现小规模的扩张与收缩波动。债务本应推动生产力，但当积累到无法继续刺激生产力时，就不得不将债务货币化，导致所有资产贬值。不过说到货币注入经济体系，我总是告诉人们：看啊市场在上涨！

Right. And when that money gets printed, it finds its way into the economy and the money supply goes up. And the way I kinda think about it, and you've got a nice image in your book that I really appreciate, here's a kind of overview of the big debt cycle that you talk about, which is there's small expansion and contraction waves as as debt comes into the market. Debt should drive productivity, but at some point, you accumulate so much debt that you can't drive productivity anymore and then you effectively have to monetize the debt and everything gets devalued. But as I kinda think about the introduction of money into the economy, the increase in the money supply, I always tell peep and everyone screams, oh, the markets are going up.

市场确实在上涨。但我要强调的是：这是以美元计价的市场上涨，而美元本身变多了。纳斯达克指数、道琼斯指数可能都在攀升，但如果流通中的美元大幅增加，单个美元的价值实际在下降。真正的问题是：你的购买力提升了吗？

The markets are going up. But I say, the markets are going up in dollar denominated value, and there's more dollars. So, you know, the nominal, meaning that the actual, you know, index might go up, the the Nasdaq might go up, the the Dow might go up. But if you've got a lot more dollars, a dollar is worth less. The real question is, has your purchasing power gone up?

当市场上涨时，你的净资产真的增加了吗？研究显示，向系统注入资金会导致通胀——所有商品价格上涨。所以市场看似上涨，资产价值看似攀升，但若所有东西都在涨价，你的实际购买力反而下降了。

Have you actually increased your net worth as the markets go up? And when you do the studies, it turns out that inflation goes up, meaning the cost of everything goes up when you pump money into the system. So, of course, it looks like the markets go up. Of course, it looks like asset values go up. But, ultimately, if everything's going up, your purchasing power goes down.

这就像我告诉人们你有100个蛤蜊，然后用贝壳买东西。而市场上只有五样东西可买。如果你有500个贝壳来购物，你想买的东西价格就会上涨，因为大家都有更多贝壳了。这不正是货币供应量增加时发生的情况吗？通货膨胀导致所有东西的购买力下降，每个人的财富都在无形中被稀释。

It's almost like I tell people you have a 100 clams and you use seashells and you're using seashells to buy stuff. And then, you know, there's only five things to buy. Now if you have 500 seashells to buy stuff, the price of the things you're trying to buy goes up because everyone's got more seashells. Doesn't that ultimately kind of describe what happens as the money supply goes up, the inflation drives the the purchasing power down of everything and everyone kinda gets inflated away.

说得太好了，戴夫。靠印钱是没法变富的，明白吗？而且货币的目...

Very well said, Dave. You can't get richer by making money. You know? And the the purpose of

归根结底重要的是购买力，你的钱值多少，能实际买到什么。

money Purchasing power is what matters at the end of the day, what your money's worth, what you can actually buy with it.

没错。货币有两个功能：交易媒介和财富储存。储蓄非常重要。如果没有储户将其作为有效的财富储存手段，就不会有可持续的长期信贷市场。是的。

That's right. And there are two purposes of money, which is as a medium of exchange and a storehold of wealth. Saving is very important. And if you don't have savers who has it as an effective storehold of wealth, then you don't have a viable long term credit market. Yeah.

人们不明白债券会变成糟糕的投资。就像任何市场一样，你需要买卖双方能有效协商达成平衡，而不是政府插手印一大堆钱把市场搅得一团糟。他们制造了严重的实际负利率，对吧。我们都知道严重实际负利率的后果。

People don't understand that the bonds become a bad deal. You need that like any marketplace, you need purchasers and sellers to be able to have an efficient negotiation to achieve a balance without the government coming in and printing a lot of money and messing up make a big mess. It's like they made very severe negative real rates. Right. And we know what happened with the negative, severe negative real rates.

在制造严重实际负利率的过程中，政府才是最大买家。于是政府接手并制造负利率，结果就是所有人都开始加杠杆。

And the government, while they were making the significant real rates, it was the government that was the big buyer. Okay. So the government takes it on and they make negative rates. So what happens is then you get everybody leveraging up.

确实。

Yes.

那么你就遇到问题了，这就是它的运作方式。而且这是一个全球性问题，不仅仅是美国的问题。

Then you've got a problem, and so that's how that's how it works. And it's a global issue. It's not just an American issue.

好的，我稍后想讨论这一点，因为我想谈谈美国的相对实力及其全球影响。首先，在你的书中，你描述了大债务周期的五个阶段。你称之为健全货币阶段，此时净债务水平低、货币稳健且国家具有竞争力。然后你谈到债务泡沫阶段，债务和投资增长超过了收入所能支撑的范围。接着是顶部阶段，泡沫破裂，信贷、债务和市场收缩。

Well, what I I wanna get to that in a minute because I wanna talk about relative strength of The United States and how this plays out globally. Firstly, in your book, you describe the big debt cycle following five stages. You call it the sound money stage when net debt levels are low and money is sound and the country is competitive. And then you talk about the debt bubble stage where debt and investment growth are greater than can be serviced from the incomes being produced. And then you call it the top stage, the bubble pops, and the credit and debt and markets contract.

然后是去杠杆化阶段，央行介入开始购买所有债务并发行更多现金，通胀上升而货币贬值。最后，大债务危机消退，我们重新开始。但你在顶部阶段提到债务危机，能否描述一下债务危机？比如，我们该如何理解债务危机的运作机制？

And then this deleveraging stage where the central bank comes in and they start buying all the debt and issuing more cash and the inflation goes up and the value goes down. And then finally, the debt the the big debt crisis recedes and we start over again. But you speak about in the top stage, a debt crisis. Can you describe the debt crisis? You know, like, how do we talk think about the mechanics of what is a debt crisis?

就面临债务危机而言，美国目前处于什么阶段？你关注哪些危险信号？

Where are we in The United States today with respect to facing a debt crisis, and what are the the red flags that you look for?

首先，当需要大量借款来偿还债务时，就会出现所谓的死亡螺旋——我们通常这样形容企业的情况，政府也可能如此。这是一种恶性循环：债务过多导致必须借新债还旧债，投资者意识到偿债困难后信用评级下降，利率随之上升——这对高负债实体最为不利。利率上升又迫使借更多债，如此循环。

First, when there's a lot of borrowing to service debt, there's what's called, you know, the death spiral is what we typically refer to that when a company has it, the government can have it too. And that is that dynamic where there's too much debt and you have to borrow to service the debt. And then people, investors know that that's a problem to service the debt so the credit is worse. And that means that interest rates go up, which is the worst thing that can happen to a heavily indebted entity. And then as they rise you get that spiral, you need to borrow more, and so on.

关键转折点是偿债支出变得庞大时。最危险的红旗信号是债务持有者开始抛售存量债务（而非仅新发债务）。这会在市场动态中显现——长期利率上升而短期利率持平或下降，表明自由市场出现供需失衡。随后货币会贬值，尤其是相对于黄金、比特币或其他资产（有时是其他货币）。通常这些现象会同时发生，所有货币相对黄金、比特币或实物资产贬值。

So that is also noticed when then there is the the key spot is when the debt service becomes large and then like the real red flag, the biggest red flag is when there's then the selling of the debt beyond the new supply, but the holders of it sell it. And then you can see it in the market action because you can see that long term interest rates rise while short term interest rates aren't rising or go down. So it's the free market losing its desires that you have a balance problem in the free market out there. And then you start to see that when the currency then depreciates particularly relative to gold or Bitcoin or other assets and sometimes other currencies. But typically these things happen broadly speaking together in which all currencies go down relative to other things like gold, bitcoin, or or tangible values.

这就是危机前兆的表现。接下来你会看到两种可能：要么央行迅速介入购债（此时货币贬值）。以日本为例，如果你持有日本国债，相对于黄金你损失了约80%的价值，相对于美国国债损失约60%——因为日本利率比美国低3%，你实质上损失了利差。

And so that's what it looks like. That's that edge. Then you start to see, you know, the dynamic. So you either see the central bank comes in very quickly and does the buying and and when that happens you see then the currency. To take a Japan, for example, if you were a holder of Japanese bonds, you lost about 80% of your money relative to gold and about 60% relative to US bonds because you received an interest rate that was 3% less than the corresponding interest rate in The United States, so you lost the interest rate.

如你所知，美国的利率在那段时期大部分时间里相对于通胀水平都非常低。再加上货币贬值，所以你看，通过这种方式你在债务上损失了一大笔钱，因为央行介入并印钞。这对债务持有人非常不利。这是基本道理，甚至不需要太专业的解释，就是个供求关系问题。

And interest rates in The United States as you know were very low relative to inflation for most of that time. Plus you had a depreciation in the currency, so you lose, you know, you lost a ton of money in the debt that way because the central bank came in and printed the money. It's very bad for holders of the debt. And it's a basic thing. You don't have to even get too technical, it's just a supply demand thing, you know.

那么，我们现在在美国看到这种情况了吗？几个月前美联储降息了。随着他们降息，市场反而抛售美债而非买入——这很正常，你知道利率下降时债券价格本应上涨。但现在我们看到市场利率实际上相对于美联储降息时的水平在攀升。这种动态对你来说是否是个危险信号？

Well, so are are we seeing that in The US today? So the Federal Reserve cut interest rates as of a few months ago. As they've cut interest rates, the market has sold off US bonds rather than buying them, which is normal when, you know, rates go down, the price of bonds is supposed to go up. And we are now seeing rates actually climb in the market relative to where they were while the Fed has been cutting rates. Is is that a dynamic that's a red flag for you?

黄金和比特币都在上涨，这就是我说的那种市场动态。是的。你在其他国家也看到过这种情况。英国就是个典型例子。美元相对算是强势货币——但若以黄金或比特币衡量则不然。

While gold has gone up and the Bitcoin has gone up, so that is that kind of market action I'm talking about. Yeah. And you've seen it in other countries too. The UK, very classic. The dollar has been a relatively strong currency but not measured in gold or Bitcoin.

明白吗？所有货币都在贬值，然后就会出现你说的那种动态。英镑就是个好例子，英镑贬值的同时英国债券利率上升，而央行保持利率稳定。这些都能从市场动态中观察到。

Alright? So all currencies have gone down and then you've had that dynamic you're talking about. And you see it also in like sterling is a good example. Sterling has gone down while UK bond rates have gone up and central banks have held it steady. And so you see it in the market action.

你还可以从买家结构看出端倪——比如看到央行和主权财富基金在减少债务、债券等持有量的同时，增持黄金或硬资产。对了，顺便说黄金是第三大储备货币，排序是美元、欧元、黄金，然后是日元。所以你看到这种供求关系的变化，部分是因为我们讨论的所有原因，部分则源于地缘政治等问题。有些国家担心制裁，比如中国就担心持有美债。

You also see it in terms of who the buyers are and who you've seen central banks, for example, and sovereign wealth funds shift to have lesser amounts of debt, bonds and so on, at the same time as they've accumulated gold or hard values. Yeah, gold is the third largest reserve currency by the way, dollars, euros, gold and then yen. So yeah, you're seeing that supply demand shift And it's it's partially for all the reasons we're talking about and also partially because of issues like geopolitical issues. Countries sometimes worry about sanctions. Countries China is worried about holding bonds, you would, US bonds.

日本购买了大量债券。但即使从投资组合比例来看，美债和美国债务在组合中的占比已经过高，单从投资组合再平衡的角度你也不希望如此集中。所有这些因素都在影响债券的供求关系。所以我强调必须关注债券的供求动态。

Japanese bought a lot of bonds. Yeah. Even as a percentage of portfolios, the bonds themselves have become such a large, US Treasury bonds and US debt has become such a large part of the portfolio that it's even from a portfolio rebalancing point of view you don't want so much concentration. All of those factors are in play for the supply demand in bonds. That's why I emphasize you have to look at the supply and demand of bonds.

你在书中有个表格对比了主要市场的中央政府债务水平与赤字水平，包括美国、日本、中国、法国、德国和英国。美国赤字率达GDP的7%，意味着联邦政府支出超过收入的部分约占美国经济总量的7%，在所有工业化市场中最高。法国第二，赤字率6%。

You've got a table in the book where you look at central government debt level to deficit level across these these major markets. So you've got The US, Japan, China, France, Germany, and The UK. And The US is running a deficit, 7% of GDP. So the federal government is spending more than it makes at a level that's about 7% of the total size of the economy in The United States, which is the highest of all of these these industrialized markets. Second is France at 6%.

第三是英国同样占6%，然后中国占5%。接着这些国家的债务与GDP比率都接近100%。日本显然高达215%。因此从相对角度来看，我常听到的一个观点是：大家都有这个问题。各国都存在支出失控的现象。

Third is The UK at 6% as well, and then China at 5%. And then these these these countries are all approaching a 100% debt to GDP. Japan, obviously, is at 215%. So from a from a relative perspective, one of the points that I've heard a lot of people make is everyone's got this problem. Everyone's got rampant spending.

各国的债务水平都在上升。它们通过提高债务水平来支付现有债务的利息并刺激经济。在我们刚才展示的群体中，美元是最优秀、最强势的货币。人们有什么理由抛售我们的货币？雷，从市场角度来说，人们还能把财富、净资产投向哪里呢？

Everyone's got rising debt levels. They're increasing their debt levels to pay the interest on their existing debt and to stimulate their economy. The US is the best, strongest currency amongst the group that we just showed. Why would anyone trade out of our currency? I guess from a market perspective, Ray, where else do people go with their worth, their net worth?

如果不选择美元，他们该将价值转移到何处？难道不还是需要某种法定货币吗？而美国难道不是最终的最佳选择吗？或许你可以谈谈这些替代方案——黄金、比特币等其他选择。但大规模实施这些现实吗？

Where do they transfer their value into if it's not dollars? And doesn't it have to be some denominated currency? And isn't The US ultimately the best? Maybe you can talk about what these alternatives are, gold, Bitcoin, elsewhere. But is that realistic at scale?

比如，是否有足够的黄金和比特币让所有人都能将净资产转换成这些资产，而不是持有某种货币计价的资产？或许我们可以讨论这个决策机制：我该如何决定价值存储的方式，该把净资产存放在哪里？

Like, is there enough of gold, enough Bitcoin for everyone to transfer all their net worth into those assets versus hold some currency denominated asset? Maybe we can just talk about that dynamic of how do I make the decision about where to store my value, where do I store my net worth?

首先，美国和中国这样的国家，你看到这种特殊动态。中国、日本，它们都具有教育意义。这意味着债券、债务都是不良资产。因此你应该将财富存储在那些能从货币贬值与购买力下降中获益而非受损的资产里。显然你要审视货币及国际货币的本质。

First of all, The United States and countries like China, you you see that particular dynamic. China, Japan, they're all educational. And that means that the bonds, the debt are bad assets. So then what where you store it is in those assets that benefit rather than suffer from the reduced value of money and the buying of it. So and obviously you look at money and what is an international money.

这就是黄金存在的原因。至于比特币或其他选择，我们可以另作讨论。理想情况下，它应该是国际化的、可流动的，最好还具备相对私密性以确保安全性。

That is why gold is in it. And then there's a question of, you know, Bitcoin or others are a conversation. We can digress into that. But it can be ideally, it's international, it's mobile. Ideally, it's relatively private, so it's relatively secure.

因为在历史上，价值存储总伴随着某种形式的没收风险。这种没收很容易以持有税的形式出现。

Because in history, there's the value part of it and then there's the confiscation part of it too in some fashion or another. That confiscation can easily take the form of taxing on holding it.

没错。

Right.

举个例子，房地产的问题之一，除了它无法移动、不具备国际流动性——你知道，你无法在国际上使用它——还在于它是一个极易被征税的资产。它就摆在那里。

For example, one of the problems with real estate besides the fact that it doesn't move, so it's not internationally, you know, you can't use it internationally, is it is a readily taxable asset. It's there.

它就摆在那里。

It's there.

因此他们总能找到你，他们不会放过它，而你也能得到它。所以我们必须明白，税收和没收本质上是一回事。

And therefore they're gonna get you they won't take it and you can you can get it. So we have to understand that taxes and confiscations are one and the same.

因为在债务危机期间——我稍后会详细讨论——你提到可以采取的四种措施：征税或税收、政府削减开支的紧缩政策、债务重组，以及央行购买债务。显然，在这些时刻，征税的概念始终扮演着关键角色，资产会以不同方式被没收或征税并转移。那么大宗商品呢？大宗商品市场表现如何？非黄金类大宗商品在硬性、软性等类别上是否存在差异？

Because during a time of of of a debt crisis, and and I wanna get to this in a minute, you talk about the four actions that can be taken, tax or taxation, austerity where governments cut spending, restructuring where the debt gets restructured, and then the central bank buying the debt. Obviously, this notion of taxation has always played a critical role during these moments, and assets are seized or taxed in different ways and transferred away. What about commodities and how did commodity markets do? Non gold is there a difference in commodity markets, hard soft, etcetera?

这非常有趣。我研究过历史，当然也亲身经历过几次，比如七十年代。理想情况下，大宗商品——尤其是那些在经济不景气时可能表现良好的品种，因为你还面临着通胀环境——总是备受青睐。你不太想要经济敏感型大宗商品，除非有时经济可能表现不错，但通常情况并非如此。比如在魏玛共和国时期，人们用石头来储存全部财富。

It's so it's so interesting. I've, you know, studied history and I've and of course, I've been through a bunch of these like the seventies. Commodities, ideally also those that might do well if the economy doesn't do well because you're dealing also with the inflation environment, is are always gone to. You don't want economically sensitive commodities as much, but unless the sometimes maybe the economy will do pretty well, but there's usually the it doesn't. But in like in the Weimar Republic, give example, rocks were used to store whole the wealth.

现在听起来很滑稽，但当时石头被视为建筑材料。换句话说，石头是用来建造东西的，所以他们把钱储存在石头里。但任何资产都可以。

Now that sounds really funny, but they were considered building ingredients. You know, in other words, the rocks were used to build things with, and so they would store the money in rocks. They but they but any asset.

我该去囤一堆GPU芯片在车库里，上百块英伟达的。对，科技产品

I should go store a bunch of GPU chips in my garage, h one hundreds from Nvidia. Yeah. Technology

会让它们贬值。新技术会让它们贬值。对吧？所以问题在于，哪些东西是无法被贬值的。

devalues them. The new technology devalues them. Right? So that's the question. What is it it is those things that can't be devalued.

顺便说，所有大宗商品，从实际价值看，每一种大宗商品长期来看都会因生产效率提升而贬值。没错。所有大宗商品的实际价值都会因生产效率提升而下降。所以你希望持有那些无法被征税、能自由流动的生产性资产。某些类型的股票就具备这种特性。

Commodities, by the way, in real terms, all commodities, every single commodity in real terms over long decline long periods of time have declined because of productivity. Yeah. Well, every commodity and has declined in real terms because of productivity. So you would like productivity producing assets that cannot be taxed, can move around from place to place. So equities of a certain type tend to do that.

这就是为什么货币贬值会伴随这些现象：货币贬值、利率下降和货币增发会推高股票资产价格——虽然像七十年代那样实际价值未必上涨，甚至可能下跌。但正是这类难以被征税的财富储存形式，反而能从通胀中获益。

That's why currency depreciations are associated with that combination of things. Currency depreciation, lowering interest rates, and producing money causes equity assets to go up, not necessarily in real terms like in the seventies, they didn't go up in real terms, they went down in real terms. But it is those kinds of store holds of wealth that can't be taxed as easily that benefit from inflation rather than not.

明白了。好的。

Right. Okay.

最纯粹的选择是黄金，因为黄金可以在国家间转移。央行将其作为储备，所以央行会持有它——事实上他们正在这么做。相比加密货币，黄金更私有化。加密货币很容易被征税，政府清楚它的去向和持有人。

The purest play is gold because gold can be transferred between countries. It's used by central banks as a reserve, so central banks will go to it, they are going to it, they'll hold it. It can be private Right. More so than crypto. Crypt is very easily taxed, you know, in other words, the government knows where it is and who's doing what and so on.

虽然加密货币也是易征税资产，但它也有优势。负利率时期很有趣，我曾和央行官员讨论利率能负到什么程度。他们解释说，负利率的极限取决于纸币存储容量。他们估算——这其实很滑稽——短期内可以实现高达400个基点的负利率。

And it's also an effective asset to tax, but it has, you know, benefits too. It was very interesting when we had negative rates. I was with a group of the central bankers in a discussion of how negative they can have rates, and they described that they can have negative rates only to the extent that there's not enough capacity for paper money to be stored. So they estimated, it was funny actually, that they could have over a short period of time up to 400 basis points negative rates.

这太疯狂了。

That's crazy.

因为他们觉得还不够，他们计算了金库存储空间有多少，然后算出生产更多金库空间是有利可图的。接着他们说，好处是我们还能征税。明白吗？对，因为数字货币是可以征税的。

Because there wasn't enough they calculated how much vault storage space there was, and then they calculated that they would produce more vault storage space because it would be profitable to do that. And then they said, and the good thing is we can tax it. Okay? Yeah. Because if you have a digital currency, you can tax it.

是啊。雷，你持有比特币吗？

Yeah. Do you own Bitcoin, Ray?

嗯，我有一些。但远不如黄金多。你知道，那算是我的分散投资。我试图找到那些——我必须持有一些，但我更偏向黄金。

Yeah, I have some. Not nearly as much as gold. You know, that's kind of my diversifier. I try to find what are the I have to have some but I'm a gold guy much more than I am

对。我是那种偏爱生产性资产的人。我喜欢拥有能制造东西的企业。所以在这种环境下，我该持有什么样的生产性资产，那种即便在这种通胀效应和贬值过程中，收入仍能增长的企业？比如矿业公司是不是最佳选择？

Yeah. So I'm like a I'm a productive asset guy. I like owning businesses that make stuff. So in this in this environment, what do I own that's a productive asset, that's a business that can still see its revenue and its incomes grow as this inflationary effect and this devaluation occurs as we get through a debt crisis like this? What would be the best kind of productive is it a mining business?

还是大宗商品贸易公司？到底哪种才是正确的——

Is it a commodity trading business? What's the right

我懂你的意思。你看我们开头展示的那张图表里，有这条代表生产率上升的线对吧？我认为我们正处于——对，就是这样。而且这种增长会自我强化。我觉得这就是人工智能的用武之地，虽然具体效果取决于你指的是AI的哪个应用领域。

I'm with you. So you know, that chart that we showed in the beginning has this line productivity going up, you know? And I think that we're in a yeah, that's it. And it and it and it tends to compound on on itself. And I think that that's where AI and that is fantastic, but it depends where you're referring to AI.

我认为这个世界上的超级规模企业存在风险问题。你知道，想想那些超级规模企业、视频平台之类的。科技战争确实关乎生产力，我同意你的观点，老兄，但你想投资生产力。然而存在颠覆，巨大的颠覆。是的，这将发生。

I think the superscalers in this world have risk issues. You know, you think by, you know, the super scalers or video or or, you know, those. I think that the tech war, certainly productivity, I'm with you, man, but you wanna invest in productivity. But there's disruption, great disruption Yeah. That's gonna take place.

会有颠覆者和被颠覆者。不一定是那些制造车辆的人，而是那些因产生巨大影响而实施变革的人。我认为就像科技战争之于AI战争，它实际上更重要。这是一场没有国家能输得起的战争。好吧。

And there are gonna be the disruptors and the disruptees. And it's not necessarily those who are producing the vehicles, but it's those who are implementing and changing as a result of having their big impact. I think that like the tech war for the AI war, it easily is, I think it is actually, more important. It's a war that no country can lose. Okay.

因为这比利润更重要。如果输了，如果中国或美国真的输掉这场战争，这比利润更重要。所以你必须以这种方式应对这场战争，它可能像电动汽车或更偏向中国电动汽车这类，你可以生产它们。所以我不认为——我认为存在这样的预期。我们将看到应用层面的发展。

Because it's more important than profits. If you lose, if China or The US really lose this war, it's more important than profits. And so you have to play that war that way and it could be like electric vehicles or or more in terms of Chinese electric vehicles and the like, you can produce them. So I don't think and I think there's such expectations. I think we are going to see applications.

比如我认为中国在芯片方面稍显落后，但在应用层面处于领先地位

Like I think the Chinese are a bit behind in the chips, but they're ahead in the applications in

是啊。你看到深度求索的公告了吗

terms Yeah. Did you see the DeepSeek announcement

是的。这个

Yes. This

周末？显然市场正在

weekend? And obviously markets That are

已经有一段时间为人所知了。是的。所以我认为你甚至会看到，中国的策略将是芯片，非常便宜的芯片嵌入到制造产品中。你会看到机器人技术。所以你会看到中国人在以难以置信的低成本制造东西方面做得非常出色。

was known for a little while now. Yeah. And so I think you're going to even see well, the Chinese play is going to be chips, very inexpensive chips embedded into manufactured goods. You'll see robotics. So you're you're gonna see Chinese are unbelievably in making things inexpensively terrifically.

他们占据了全球制造业产品的33%，这比美国、德国和日本制造业产品的总和还要多。中国生产得更多。所以，你知道你会看到那种竞争。可能是太阳能板之类的，你知道的。对。

They own 33% of all world manufactured goods, which is more than the combined US, German, and Japanese manufactured goods. Chinese produce more. So, you know you're gonna see that type of competition. And it may be it's like solar panels or something, you know. Right.

利润并不重要。所以你必须去那些我认为有生产力、创新和颠覆者的地方，本质上长期投资那些通过使用或创造具有重大影响的应用而受益的人，这当然是一方面。但你也必须看看不同的国家、地方和事物。最重要的是价格。我认为很多投资者犯的错误是想着我要买好东西。

It's profit doesn't matter. So you have to go where there's I I think that where there's productivity and innovation and disruptors to be essentially long those who are benefiting themselves through usage or creating the applications that are having the big effect is certainly one thing. But you also have to look at different countries and places and things. Most importantly is price. I think a lot of investors make the mistake of thinking I wanna buy good things.

你知道，那是一家伟大的公司。但一家变得昂贵的好公司比一家非常便宜的坏公司要糟糕得多。完全正确。所以你必须看看价格。这都是周期的一部分，你知道的。

You know, that's a great company. But a great company that gets expensive is much worse than a bad company that's really cheap. Totally. So you have to look at pricing. This is all part of the cycle, you know.

每个人都说那很棒，未来会很棒。就像互联网和.com一样，它很棒。好吧？但价格必须被关注。我特别担心那些在我们处于利率如此运作的情况下的公司。

Everybody says that's great and it's gonna be great for the future. And and like, you know, like the Internet and.com, It was it's great. Okay? But the price has to be paid attention to. And I'm particularly concerned of those companies at a time when we are in a situation with the interest rates operating as we

是的。

are. Right.

换句话说，这看起来很像1998年或99年，那时候，你知道的，新热门事物的资产。

In other words, this looks quite a quite a lot alike like 1998 or '99 where the assets of the the, you know, the new hot thing

生产力增长的驱动因素。是的。

The productivity grow drivers. Yeah.

没错。所以是的。市场很热，价格高企。而且利率环境正在上升，这是个典型问题。我们必须关注利率和这些资产的定价，并思考下一步走向。

Yeah. So Yeah. Are hot, the prices are high Yeah. And you have a rising interest rate environment, that is a classic issue. So we have to pay attention to the interest rates and the pricing of those assets and you have to think where is next.

另外我认为分散投资极其重要，因为所有人都在杠杆做多。大家都想着买入会上涨的资产，如果资产优质，还会加杠杆操作。既然全球都在高杠杆做多，你至少需要同等关注相关性。这就是为什么我觉得黄金这类非关联资产很有意思。

The other thing is I think diversification is very, very important because everybody's leveraged long. Everybody thinks, you know, I'm gonna buy assets that are gonna go up. If they're good, I'm gonna do that in a leverage way. So the world is so leverage long, you have to pay at least as much attention to correlation. So that's why when I look at, you know, something like gold or these uncorrelated assets, it's interesting.

将其加入投资组合能降低整体风险。在这种环境下必须重视非关联资产，可以从地域角度考量...这部分属于组合构建策略。

As you add it into the portfolio, it reduces the risk of the portfolio. So you have to pay attention to the uncorrelated assets in that kind of an environment. And those could be geographically looked at or Right. But but so that's part of portfolio construction.

所以听众们没有简单的买入答案，但我认同书中提到的组合观点——建议同时持有10-15项非关联投资。您语境中的'真正非关联'与多数人不同，他们买美股就以为是跨行业分散，实则美股间存在高度相关性。

Well, so there's no simple answer for the audience on what to buy, but I do think this portfolio point of view in the book, you actually talk about having 10 to 15 uncorrelated bets at any given time. And I I would imagine in your context, truly uncorrelated, whereas most folks buy US equities and think that they're in different sectors. But obviously, there's a great degree of correlation when you're buying a bunch of US equities.

要记住，经通胀调整后，股价实际购买力曾多次下跌60%-70%。

Equity prices, just to keep in mind, there's many times equity prices and inflation adjusted, purchasing power times have declined 60 or 70%.

确实惊人。这是个需要消化的惊人事实——即使市场上涨，经美元价值调整后股价实际遭受重创。我还听说...

Yeah. That's incredible. That's an incredible fact for folks to take in. So when you adjust for the the value of your dollar, equity prices have really taken a hit even though the market's gone up. And I hear this a

各位，从1966年到1984年，你们的实际回报率确实是负的。

lot, everyone. And from from 1966 Yep. Until 1984, you had a negative real return.

雷，我认为这一点极其重要。我想深入探讨一下，然后再讨论美国的情况。很多人谈论市场上涨时，却忽略了衡量这些市场的计价单位——在这里是美元。当你审视美元的实际价值，即便股市上涨，你用这些美元能换取的商品其实并未显著增加。人们实际上遭受了损失，我认为这非常关键。

I think this is super important, Ray. I just wanna double click on this, and and then we'll talk about The US. But a lot of folks talk about markets going up without taking into account what is the denomination that those markets are measured in, in this case, US dollars. And when you look at the value of your US dollar and you look at the market going up, even if you bought equities, what you can now turn that dollar into has actually not gotten much stronger. Folks have really taken a hit, and I think this is super important.

是的，我很高兴你提到这点。我也认为这极为重要，必须强调要以实际美元价值来看待回报。

Yeah. So I just I'm glad you're bringing it up. I think it's super important too and I just wanna emphasize, you have to look at your returns in real dollars.

你能买到什么？

What can you buy?

对，你能购买什么？这很有趣，因为我看着价值涨跌，甚至货币汇率波动，但这其实是扭曲的视角。

Okay. What can you any and purchase what can you buy? Yeah. It's funny because I watch the value go up and down, even the currency go up and down. And it's a distorted perspective.

就像在起伏的船上却误以为是陆地不稳定。

It's like being on a boat that's going up and down and judging the land to be volatile.

完全正确。我想回到美国的话题，谈谈你对美国未来必须或应该采取哪些措施以避免更严重的债务危机的看法。你常提到的'良性去杠杆'概念——当国家面临高额债务危机时，通过多管齐下的方式以最小伤害化解危机。

Yeah. Absolutely. Okay. I wanna come back to The United States, and I wanna talk about your point of view on measures that The United States is going to have to take or should take going forward in order to avoid a more cataclysmic debt crisis. In fact, you use this term often, the beautiful deleveraging that's possible when there's a great deal of debt and a country faces a debt crisis, that there are several actions that can be taken together to try and resolve the debt crisis in a way that is least harmful.

但我想先谈谈你分享的风险衡量指标。首先是你展示的所谓美国长期政府债务风险指标。你既有长期国债的风险指标，也有短期国债的风险指标。短期方面，你说美国政府债务的风险指标是0%，意味着短期内没有风险。

But I first wanna talk about the measure that you share of risks. So first is you you show what you call your risk gauge for US long term government debt. And so you've got this risk gauge on the long term and the risk gauge on the short term for US government debt. On the short term, you say US government debt is a 0% risk gauge. There's no risk in the near term.

经济形势似乎相当平衡。但长期来看，你的风险指标高达100%。接着你又对央行进行了分析，指出央行短期风险指标为0%，长期风险指标为46%，几乎是你见过的最髙值。能否解释下这些风险指标的构成意味着什么？我们稍后再讨论应对措施。

The economy seems fairly balanced. But over the long term, your risk gauge is a 100%. And then you follow that up with an analysis of the central bank, and you say the central bank, short term, 0% risk gauge. Long term, 46% risk gauge, nearly the highest you've seen ever. But maybe you can just say what's the the composition of these risk gauges and what does this tell us, and then we'll come back to the actions.

需要澄清的是，100%并非指事件发生概率为100%，而是表示风险达到历史最高水平，处于峰值状态。这个长期风险指标是通过量化现有债务规模，结合我之前提到的供需关系和偿债压力形成的挤压效应来测算的。就像去医院体检，医生会告诉你检测结果——血管斑块含量、压力测试表现、动脉状况等，这就是第一个指标的含义。

Just to be clear, a 100% does not mean 100% probability of it happening. It means 100% that's the highest that it's ever been. You know, it's at the kind of maximum. But yeah, to describe it, the longer term risk gauge is taking existing amounts, projecting those two things that I've described before, the supply demand and the debt service creating the squeeze. So think of it as going into, you know, your doctor and having him give you your test results and how much plaque is in there and what it's looking like and how you did on your stress test and what your arteries are looking like and what your condition is.

第二个指标则显示危机正在发作。这意味着那些预警信号正在应验，比如出现抛售现象、长短期利差扩大（即长期利率独立于短期利率上涨）、央行被迫做出艰难抉择——大规模进场实施债务货币化，同时信用问题和债务货币化正在发生，因为你已深陷其中。

That's what the first measure is. The second is you're in a seizure. In other words, now so that second measure of the dead is exhibiting, okay, it's now happening. Yeah. And happening means things like you're seeing the selling, you're seeing the spreads widen, in other words the interest rates rising on the long end without the short end, you're seeing that the central bank is put into that position of being able you know, having to make the difficult choice of coming in there and monetizing everything very much and then credit problems and debt monetization because you're in the middle of it.

这就是右侧指标的含义。如果我现在向政府决策者喊话，你们的健康状况非常糟糕。注意，目前尚未进入危机爆发阶段。

That's what the that's what the one on the right means. So what we have is if I'm speaking to you as the government policymakers, your condition is is very bad. Right. Okay. You're not in the middle of it now.

换句话说，我们还没看到那种特定动态全面爆发，但你们必须改变'饮食结构'，可能需要植入'血管支架'之类的措施。你刚才问指标构成——现在我就具体说明。

You in other words, we're not seeing that particular dynamic transpire, but you have to change your diet. You have to change your you have to maybe have a stent put into the equivalent. So you asked about what that is. Okay? Okay, here's what it is.

雷，我快速调出这张图表给你看。重点是美国国会预算办公室（CBO）的预测数据：美国政府债务占财政收入比例将达到700%，意味着未来十年（如果这张是十年期图表），政府债务水平将是其年收入的七倍——你在书中强调这个比值比债务/GDP更重要，必须关注政府实际收入与债务的比例关系。

Let me me pull up this chart for you real quick, Ray. So I I just wanna highlight the CBO projection, right? So this is the US government's debt as a percent of the US government's revenue, which you you indicate in your book is more important than debt to GDP. You've gotta look at the actual revenue being generated by the government and how much debt they have. And the CBO highlights this expansion to 700%, meaning the government is gonna have a debt level that's seven times the income it's making every year over the next, I believe this is a ten year, chart.

你在书中提出了一系列措施，试图让债务水平在未来十年保持平稳——这本书的核心正是这些建议。我想再次强调，你着重指出了四项举措：一是增税，这显然会让民众资产缩水、收入减少。

And you propose a bunch of actions that can keep it flat over the next ten years, which is the basis of the book is there's a series of recommendations in the book. I just wanna kind of voice over again. You highlight that there are four actions. One is increased taxes. So, obviously, citizens are gonna lose assets and and lose income.

因此当这种情况发生时，民众将承受损失。其次是削减开支或财政紧缩，这意味着政府提供的公共服务减少，民众将失去福利待遇。第三种是央行购债，这通常会推高通胀，因为更多货币涌入市场导致物价上涨，相当于变相征税——你的美元和资产都会贬值。最后是债务重组，同样会导致货币贬值全民受损。我想梳理这些观点，或许你能为我们进一步阐释。

So there's a loss to the citizens when when this happens. Cutting spending or austerity, and there's obviously a loss of services by the government provided to the citizens, so the citizens are gonna lose services, they're gonna lose benefits, a central bank buying the debt, which will typically increase inflation because more money will come to the markets and everything costs more, So that's another form of taxation where the value of your dollar, the value of your assets goes down. And then this kind of restructuring of the debt where, again, the currency gets devalued and everyone loses things. And so I just wanted to kind of walk through that and maybe you could frame this up for us a little bit.

当然。就像那张图表，如果你回顾那张图表，可以把它想象成动脉里的斑块——债务偿付就是如此。你可以计算所有数据，清楚看到整体状况。首先是所谓的'3%解决方案'。

Sure. Like that chart. If you go back to that chart, think about that chart as being, you know, your plaque, so to speak, in the arteries and the debt service so you could calculate all those numbers and you know what the picture looks like. And that is a stability. So number one is I call it my 3% solution.

解决方案是必须将赤字（相当于债券发行量）削减至GDP的3%。目前预期是7.5%。不同人对削减方式有不同见解，这不重要，关键是要达成共识。国会和总统等各方都应承诺实现这个目标，具体执行方式可以再议。

The solution is you must cut the deficit, which is the equivalent of bonds selling, down to 3% of GDP. And it's seven and a half percent expected. Now different people have different views as to how to cut it. Forget it, I don't really care, just you have to have a unified agreement. Everybody in Congress and the president and so on should pledge to do that, and then the question is how to do it.

但他们必须明确这个数字目标。

But they shouldn't they should know that number.

那意味着每年削减约9000亿美元。是的，粗略估算，如你所说需要将现有赤字削减过半。

That's about 900,000,000,000 a year Yeah. Roughly, and that means cutting it, as you point out, by cutting the deficit by more than half from where it sits.

没错。如果延续现行减税政策，赤字率将维持在7.5%，而我们需要压降到3%。这听起来严苛，但我们在1991至1997年间就完成过类似调整。关键在于三个要素...

Yeah. Well, it's yes. Because with the continuing the the tax cuts, strum tax cuts, that's that'll be 7 and a half percent and you want to get it down to three. And and it sounds draconian, but we did that kind of change from 1991 till 1997. And the key there are three keys to this.

趁时机正好、经济景气时尽快行动。换句话说，现在就做。立刻。明白吗？人们往往会说‘我们要循序渐进，三年后再实施’，这种想法要抵制。

Do it soon, fast, when the time is good, when the economy's good. In other words, do it now. Now. Okay. The temptation is going to say, well, we're gonna ease into this and we're gonna be there and we're gonna do it in three years from now.

但若经济低迷，你就无法推行。懂吗？那才是最糟的。现在经济形势最佳，越早行动成效越大。所以3%解决方案，必须立即执行并确保兑现。

But if you have a bad economy, you cannot do it. Okay? And that's the that's the worst. So we have the best economy, and the sooner you do it, the more you're gonna do it. So 3% solution, do it now and recognize that you have to deliver it.

比如政府削减开支时，你必须对数字负责。每个人都需承诺3%。具体实现方式可以讨论，但目标必须坚守——甚至该立军令状：若达不到3%就让我下台，因为我必须完成这个指标。当涉及政府开支削减时，那个两万亿的数字真的准确吗？

So if you're having, let's say, cost cuts in government, you have to own the number. So everybody's gotta pledge 3%. Now the the the argument says how to get there, but you have to own the number. So much so that you'd say if it's not 3%, throw me out of office because I've gotta I've gotta deliver that number. So if somebody if government cost expense cutting, you know, and the is it really the 2,000,000,000,000 number?

是一万亿？还是五千亿？

Is it the 1,000,000,000,000 number? Is it a half a trillion dollar number?

我们

We

都在随口说这些数字。你必须明确目标并达成3%，且不能只依赖单一措施。当然也要明白，如果分摊执行，每个领域压力都不会太大——没有什么是不可克服的。

all throw those numbers around. You gotta own the number and you gotta get to three, and you can't make it any one thing. Right. But you also have to realize, like if you did it spread out, nothing's gonna be that big. So I mean, nothing's gonna be insurmountable.

为此我详细核算过书中的数据。顺便说，这本书可免费在线阅读，人人都能获取。

That would mean I I go through the numbers in the book. By the way, this book is online free and everybody everybody can get it.

我周末读了它。我有一本，而且我很久以来第一次使用了荧光笔，雷，所以里面有很多精彩内容可以提炼。我可能会使用人工智能

I read it this weekend. I have a and I and I used a highlighter for the first time in a long time, Ray, so there was a lot of great content to pull out of there. I might use AI

数据被公布出来不是为了卖书。总之，所有内容都是免费的，所以每个人都可以了解其中的机制。但关键是要找出你可以削减或构建的部分。那么你能削减什么呢？看看政府支出，大约70%的政府支出是你无法削减的。

data is which being put out not to sell books. Anyway, it's all free so everybody can go through the mechanics. But the main thing is you take the things you can cut from or build from. So what can you cut from? And you look at government expenditures, roughly 70% of government expenditures are you can't cut.

所以最终你能削减的只有一小部分，但你要弄清楚能削减多少。重要的是3%。另外要意识到，如果你采取这些措施，债券市场及其将受益。你看，这样一来利率

So you so it comes down to a small percentage that you can cut, but you you find out how much can you cut. So the important thing is 3%. The other thing about it is to realize that if you make those moves, the bond market and what it will benefit. You see, this and so interest rates

利率会下降。

Interest rates will go down.

没错。利率下降，利息支出是最重要的。

Right. And interest rates going down, interest rate expense is most important.

所以前几天总统接受采访时说，我们需要让他们降低1%的利率，他指的是中央银行，他实际上是在试图强迫或胁迫中央银行采取降息行动。而如果我们削减支出，我认为这非常重要，如果联邦政府大幅且快速地削减支出，市场自然会做出反应，降低利率。

So when the president does an interview the other day and he says, we need to get them to cut interest rates by 1%, and he's speaking about the central bank, he's effectively trying to force the central bank or coerce the central bank to take rate action when if we were to cut spending, I think this is so important, if the federal government were to cut spending significantly and quickly, the market would naturally react to lower rates.

正是如此。

That's right.

好的。我认为这对每个人来说都非常重要。

Okay. I think that is so important for everyone to hear.

他说得对。如果你看看我的计算，利率每降低100个基点，就相当于大幅削减支出。所以他没错。但如果不配合其他措施，这样做只会抽走资金，让持有这些矿产资源的吸引力下降。

He's right. If you look at the my calculations, you need a 100 base if if you get a 100 basis points cut in rates, that's equivalent to significant cutting in spending. So he's right. But you but if you do that without the other parts, you're gonna take money away. You're gonna make it less desirable to own these things, these mines.

因为这将成为问题。如果同步实施这些措施，它们能相互支撑。换句话说，可以削减支出。

And because that's that's gonna be a problem. Where if you do these things together, they can support each other. So in other words, fine. Cut it from spending.

顺便说一句，雷，我们等待的时间越长，由于利率更高，累积的利息就越多，债务也会不断堆积。最终会陷入这种算术级数般的恶性循环。拖延越久，未来需要削减的幅度就越大——这不是线性增长，而是需要非线性削减。所以行动越快，需要削减的就越少。

And by the way, Ray, the longer we wait, the more interest accumulates because it's at a higher rate, the more the debt accumulates and ultimately, this is the arithmetic depth spiral that you get into. The longer we wait, the more you have to cut in the future to get out of the hole. It's not linear. It's a nonlinear cutting that's needed to get so the faster you do it, the less you have to cut. Right.

这至关重要。请允许我重申：对于正在聆听的政府人员，行动越早，所需削减的幅度就越小。

Think that is so important. Let me just say that again. The fat for any person in government listening, the faster you cut, the less you have to cut.

没错。而且可以循序渐进地实施。知道吗？这里减一点，那里减一点，积少成多。

Yes. And you can do it in a manageable way. You know what? A bit here, a bit there, these bits add up. Right.

如果不这样做，就会陷入复利增长的困境。

And if you don't, you're gonna have this arc of compounding.

那么让我们暂时谈谈政治。Doge及其概念是否足够，还是我们需要在此采取立法行动？然后我想讨论考虑到选举周期，所需立法行动的政治影响。

So let's talk let's talk politics for a second. Is Doge and the concept of Doge enough, or do we need legislative action here? And then I wanna talk about the politics of the legislative action needed given, like the election cycles.

这是个复合性问题。不仅仅是Doge。这涉及减少监管、AI可能带来的生产力变革，这些变革会转化为利润，可能是资本利得利润，也可能是其他形式的利润。但说实话，当我审视这个问题时，情况看起来非常棘手。同时，关税也能产生财政收入。

There's a combination of a question. It's not just Doge. It's a matter of less regulation, productivity changes that might come from AI which then have translate to profits that might be capital gains profits, they might be profits and all of that. And so but it really you know, when I look at it, it looks it looks very tough. And and but there's also, you know, revenue also tariffs produce revenue.

但问题是，人们在考虑关税时不会把税收视为通货膨胀，可税收其实就是通货膨胀。

So but, yeah, people think on the on the tariffs people don't think of taxes as inflation, but taxes are inflation.

没错。

Right.

因为这让你花费更多。所以当你分析数据时，真正的难题在于很难精确预测：有多少增长会来自AI和新技术带来的效率提升所创造的生产力和利润增长，又有多少来自其他因素。我们实际上并不清楚，但关键是我们正处于临界点，不能把它变成一场赌博。数字必须控制在3%，所以你需要的是稳妥策略，而不是孤注一掷，要明确达成这个3%目标的路径。

Because you it costs you more. So the real question as you play with the numbers is it's very, very difficult to know and be precise about how much is gonna come from productivity and profit increases from the efficiencies gained by AI and new technologies, how much is gonna come from this and that. We don't honestly know, but the important thing is not to we're at the edge and not to make it a crapshoot. Right. And and to get the the number must be 3%, and so you should have handle, not Hail Mary passes, but a clear passage to that 3% number.

在当前背景下，特朗普当总统是否比拜登胜选对我们更有利？

Are we better off with Trump as president versus if Biden had won in this context?

是的。从财务角度我相信如此，因为在盈利能力和削减政策的可能性方面，共和党人比民主党更可能采取这些行动。但你也必须考虑社会影响的因素。

Yes. I do believe we are from in the financial context because in terms of profitability and the likelihood of cutting, I think the the Republicans are probably more likely to make these moves than the Democrats. But you also have to take into consideration the impacts, the social impacts,

而且没错。

and Right.

由此引发的其他影响。我们正处于内部内战与国际战争同时爆发的状态，所以存在二阶效应。我认为关键是以3%的实际数据为依据，而非猜测。说实话我担忧这个断层，即AI何时能带来盈利的问题。我很担心

The other impacts that are going to come from this. We're at a civil war internally we're at an international war simultaneously, so there are second order effects. I think the main thing is take those numbers and make them real at at 3%, not speculating. I I worry honestly about the gap, like the idea of when profits kick in from AI. I'm worried

这正是我接下来要问你的。当AI爆发式发展，我们会失去大量工作岗位——150万、300万甚至500万从事客服、汽车生产线等工作的人将失业。但在AI带来的生产力提升创造新市场和经济领域之前，我们将面临大规模失业。届时政府代表和政客们会举手表示：必须扶持这些人，必须推出刺激计划。

That's what I was gonna ask you next. So AI AI takes off, we lose a lot of jobs. We have a million five, 3,000,000, 5,000,000 people that become unemployed, that work in call centers, that work on automotive lines, etcetera, etcetera. They lose their jobs and but while before the productivity kicks in from AI that creates new markets and and use parts of the economy, we have a lot of unemployed people and the government representatives, the politicians raise their hands and say, have to support these people. We have to introduce stimulus.

我们必须推出新的援助计划。随着AI上线，难道不是极有可能出现对这种转型期公共支持的巨大需求吗？

We have to introduce new support programs. And is it not likely the case that with AI coming online, we are going to see a fairly significant demand for, you know, public support on this transition that's coming.

确实如此。但有两个维度：短期来看，我不认为利润影响和生产力带来的财务效应能足够及时解决当前的供需问题。假设是今年还是明年？

That's right. But there are two dimensions. The near term is what will the prop I don't think the profit impact and the financial impact on productivity is going to be nearly enough, near enough to deal with the supply demand issue that we now have. So let's say we have is it this year? Is it next year?

想象你正面临心脏病发作风险，而我说终有一天生产力转化成的利润会弥补财政赤字。这个未来或许存在，但远水救不了近火。另一个关键维度是这块蛋糕如何分配——这将极具政治性，因为颠覆性影响会非常巨大。而我们对这些影响的预测都只是猜测。

Just imagine you are at risk of a heart attack, you know, and then I say someday we'll have the productivity conveyed to profits that will cover the budget deficit. Okay. It may be out there, but it's not as immediate as it needs to be. And then we have the other aspect of it which is how is that pie divided, which is gonna be very political because the disruptive effects will be enormous. And we're really all guessing on how those disruptive effects will be.

这确实...但你说得完全正确。大量工作岗位将消失，动荡中会发生巨变。我们该如何制定计划？甚至如何就应对方案达成共识？

It's it's too much of a but you're you're absolutely right. Lots of jobs are gonna be lost. Lots of change is gonna happen in terms of turbulence. And how do we have a plan? How could we even agree on a plan of how to deal with that?

别以为我们处在一个容易达成共识的时代，或许在我们有生之年都难以实现。我认为我们将看到各州从中央政府中分裂出来。你会看到世界范围内的大分裂，不仅在美国，大多数事务上都无法达成一致。因此我对时间线感到担忧。试着这样理解时间线。

Don't think we're in a time, maybe in the rest of our lifetimes, that agreement is going to be easy. I think we're gonna see fragmentation of states from from the central government. Think you're gonna see big fragmentation in the world, not just in The United States, on the failure to agree on most things. And so I'm worried about the timeline. Think of the timeline as this way.

首先是头一百天。我们正处于蜜月期。我经历过——我年纪大了。你知道，我经历过很长时期，清楚蜜月期过后会是什么样子。

There's the first hundred days. We're in a honeymoon period. I've been through I'm old. You know, I've been through this a long time. I know what the honeymoon is like right afterwards.

在这一百天里你可以推动立法变革。行动迅速且众人同心。接着下一个重要节点是两年后的中期选举。大约在选举后十八个月，事情开始偏离所有人的预期。可能会出现这种供需状况。想想我们的周期规律。

There's a hundred days that you can change legislation. You move quickly and everybody's there. Then there's the next important time horizon is two years to the midterm elections. You get in about years, you know, eighteen months after the election, and now not everybody goes everything goes as anyone expects. You could have this supply demand situation And think of our cycle.

我提到过，平均周期大约是六年，上下浮动三年。所以我们将进入周期后期。我们正面临这种供需状况。

I mentioned, you know, the average cycle is about six years, give or take three years. And so we're gonna be later into the cycle. We have this supply demand situation.

没错。

Right.

形势能否持续向好直到中期选举？以及那个授权问题。我认为中期选举期间可能会有激烈争斗。

Are things going to stay good into the midterm elections? And and and that mandate. I think there'll there could be a lot of fighting in the midterm elections.

请允许我问两个问题。第一，如果我们大幅削减开支，将导致大量失业。如果人工智能发展迅速且成功，也会造成显著失业。若出现大规模失业，这是否会助长社会主义在美国的兴起？

Let me ask you two questions. The first, if we do significant cuts, there will be a lot of job loss. If AI is successful and moves quickly, there will be significant job loss. If there is significant job loss, does that not fuel the rise of socialism in The United States?

我认为我们可以做到。当我谈到3%的解决方案时，我认为我们可以削减并在几个百分点上进行调整，从而在不造成巨大创伤的情况下实现目标。因此，我们能够完成这一限制而不经历重大动荡，并且这将得到利率变动的支持。这是首要的。我们可以完成这件事。

I think that we can do it. When I talk about the three percent solution, I think that we can cut and make the adjustments in a few percentages to be able to do this without great trauma. So we can get to having that limitation done without great trauma and it will be supported by interest rate moves. So that's first. We can get this thing done.

我们必须完成那件事。如果我们不这样做，那么我认为我们显然将进入一个美国内部充满巨大冲突的时代。这不是通往涅槃的坦途。你知道，届时将会出现法律挑战。一个州内，民主党、蓝州、红州之间，以及各州内部都将出现大量混乱和不满，而这将关乎金钱与权力。

We must get that thing done. And if we don't, then of course I think we are in an era that, of course, we're going to have great conflict in The United States. This is not a run to nirvana. This is, you know, the the moment there you're gonna have legal challenges. One state, the Democrats, you know, the blue states, the red states, and within the states, you're going to have a lot of disruption and you're going to have a lot of dissatisfaction, and it's gonna be about money and power.

所以这就是即将面临的局面。正如你所说，有社会主义者、左翼、右翼，这就是为什么这类内战或内部冲突将伴随我们。这不是一条直达涅槃与繁荣的直线跑道。与此同时，你还面临着其他因素，即我所说的五大力量。所以我们讨论过的债务货币问题。

And so that's ahead. And so like you say, there's the socialists, the left, the right, and that's why you're going to this type of civil war or internal conflict is gonna be with us. This is not a straight race to nirvana and prosperity. And and you have that at the same time as you have the other elements, you know, they're the five big forces. So what I'm calling so you have the debt money we talked about.

还有我们将考验法律体系的内部冲突，要知道，我们当前所处的环境是强权即公理。在国际上，你也将面临同样的冲突。我们提到了中国。冲突不可避免。你不再拥有一个合作的，甚至试图合作的世界秩序。

There's the internal conflict that is we're gonna test the legal system and, you know, and we're in an environment now that might is right. Internationally, you are going to have the same kind of conflict. We touched on China. We're going to have conflict. You no longer have a cooperative, even an attempt at a cooperative world order.

像世界卫生组织、世界贸易组织这类机构都已过时。因此我们将再次面临强权即公理的局面，这将是一个冲突加剧的时期。技术战争将爆发。在这种环境下，军费开支可能增加，从而引发预算问题。而气候问题既是环境问题，也将成为经济问题。

Things like the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization, all of those are obsolete. And so we're going to have again, might is right, and so it's gonna be a period of greater conflict. You're going to have a technology war. You can have increased military spending in this kind of environment that creates a budget issue. And climate will have it will be an economic issue as well as an environmental issue.

所以这些开支将会上升。所有这些因素交织在一起。是的，左派、右派和冲突都将摆在我们面前。

So these things, these expenses are gonna go up. So all of those coming together. So you're yes, left, right, and conflict will be ahead of us.

这会是一场激烈的内战吗？人们会走上街头吗？我的意思是，这会如何解决？显然，我们有过社会起义的历史先例。但在未来十年，美国会发生什么？

Is this a hot civil war? Do people take to the streets? I mean, how does this resolve? Obviously, we've got historical context for social uprising. But what happens in The United States over the next ten years?

我认为其中两个重要方面是：法律体系是否运作良好，比如最高法院——你问过我关于央行独立性的问题——法律是否有效？我认为会面临许多挑战。我并非说它无效，而是说这是个值得探讨的问题。

I think two important aspects of it is does the legal system work well so that the Supreme Court, you know, you asked me about the independence of the central bank. You know, did the does law work? And I think there's gonna be a lot of challenges. I'm not saying it doesn't work. I'm saying that's the question.

这将因州而异。你会看到各州与中央政府之间的冲突。那么这种决策体系如何维持？是否强权即公理？比如庇护城市这类问题。这些将如何妥善解决？

And that'll be very much state by state. You're going to see conflicts between the states and the central government. So how does that decision making system hold up? Is it might as right, you know, sanctuary city issues and such? How is is that going to all work well?

我的意思是，这才是最关键的问题。当我们处于巨大压力和挑战时期，情况会恶化。目前形势尚可，还算不错。但未来会变得更糟。

I mean, that's, you know, that's the most important thing. And then we in a time of great stress and challenge, you know, when things get worse. Right now, things are good. This is pretty good. And but they're gonna get worse.

同时国际局势也在变化。各国内部也存在类似冲突。欧洲正在发生这种情况，同样的动态正在上演。我们讨论过美国面临的债务等问题。

And then you have the international going on at the same time. And so internally within countries, we have the same kind of conflict. You're seeing it happen in Europe. You're seeing the same same dynamic. We talk about the problems that The United States is having regarding debt and so on.

欧洲内部也存在相同的支出问题。你会看到更严重的左右两极分化，经济问题导致更多对抗。这种趋势正在全球范围内显现。因此我们将进入一个可能随时间推移——不是立即——冲突加剧的环境。

You have then the expense same problem within Europe. You're seeing greater polarity, left, right. You're seeing economic problems cause more confrontation. And so you're seeing this around the world. So you're coming into an environment that is likely to have over a period of time over a period of time, not immediately, greater conflict.

谈到十年周期，在这十年里将会出现一个极其艰难的阶段。届时我们处理问题的协调能力将面临更大挑战——问题会更严峻，而解决问题的合作意愿却会更低。

When you talk about ten years, there's gonna be a period in that ten year period where it's going to it's gonna be hellacious in that ten year period where, you know, the coordination of dealing with our problems. Our problems will be greater and the cooperation for dealing with problems will be less.

关于这点，请谈谈你观察到的外部冲突在解决内部财政挑战中的作用。你在前作《变化中的世界秩序》中讨论过，历史上外部冲突似乎与金融周期相伴相生。能否结合美国现状，谈谈美中关系可能的发展？当国内处境艰难时，我们是否更有倾向发动战争？毕竟战争具有经济刺激作用？

On that point, talk about the role that you have seen external conflict play in resolving the fiscal challenges internally. So you talk in your prior book, Changing World Order, about the historical relationship between external conflict as a cycle that seems to follow or flow with this financial cycle. Maybe you can talk a little bit about what's gonna happen between The United States and China given the condition in The US today. Do we have a higher propensity when things are difficult at home? Folks tend to go to war, war is stimulatory?

这里有司机吗？你认为未来十年中美之间在功能上会发生什么变化？

Is that a driver here? And what's gonna happen functionally with China over the next decade, do you think, in The US?

有一个与资金变化相关的周期，当你资金不足时，需要资金来支持国际冲突，也需要资金让国内民众满意。然后权力真空出现，国际间缺乏裁决体系——联合国失灵，世界卫生组织失效，整个系统瘫痪。于是强权便趁虚而入。

There's a cycle that has to do with changes in money and all of these things where you don't have enough money, you need money to support con international conflict. You need money to make domestic people happy. And then there's no power, you know, there's no system for making judgments internationally. The, you know, the United Nations doesn't work, the World Health Organization, they don't work, so there's no system. So you come into this power.

当我们讨论这些全球性的财务问题时，必须意识到全球范围内的两极分化——财富差异与价值观对立。这种矛盾不仅存在于国家之间，也存在于民众内部。而国际社会又缺乏规则体系，最终形成弱肉强食的局面。如今这些因素正特别集中地交汇在一起。

So when when we're talking about the financial problems that we're talking about that we covered and recognize that that's worldwide. And then you have the polarity worldwide that has to do with well different wealth and values. And you have that problem within the population. And then you have no rule system internationally, so it is a might is right series. You have that confluence of things particularly now.

再加上重大颠覆性因素，比如技术。我们讨论过输掉技术战争就等于输掉军事战争。这种对必需资源的紧张争夺极具煽动性，当前局势确实危机四伏。当然生产力提升能缓解矛盾，但必须理性看待其作用边界。

And then there's disruptions, big disruptions. Technology, we talked about how you can't lose the technology war because you'll lose the military war. All of that stress and shortage of what is perceived to be needed is incendiary. You know, it's it's a it's a risky situation. Of course productivity helps, but it was like you have to understand, put it in its place.

看看1920年代股市泡沫前的十年，那是发明创造、专利创新和生产力飞跃的黄金期，但同时债务激增，贫富差距与价值观裂痕不断扩大。历史规律难以逃脱。在这个各方难以协作的世界里，紧张局势将持续加剧。纵观历史战争形态——既有热战也有非热战，虽然我无法断言我们会陷入军事冲突...

The nineteen twenties leading up to the stock market bubble, that that was the decade that we had the greatest number of inventions, patents, innovation, great productivity increases while we simultaneously had big debt increases and we simultaneously had these wealth gap and values increases. And so you don't get away from that. So this is going to be a lot of tension in a world where it's difficult to get all the parties to cooperate. In wars, if you look at history, when I say wars, there are military wars there and then there's less than military wars. And and I can't tell you that we're gonna go into military wars.

就像美苏当年因惧怕大规模毁灭性武器而避免直接开战那样。但从历史维度看，我们即将迎来一个异常艰难的时期。

I think like The Soviet Union and The United States, because of the risk of mass destruction, yeah, was able to avoid those. But it it it in history, it's going to be it's gonna be a very it's gonna be a very difficult period.

你在书中对比了中美作战方式的差异。如果我没理解错，美国是正面硬刚的公开对抗，而中国更偏向《孙子兵法》式的迂回策略——更加诡谲谨慎，从不暴露真实意图。这样的描述准确吗？

You describe in your book the difference between how The United States goes to war and how China goes to war. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you speak to The US goes to war head to head, open confrontation, whereas China is much more like a Sun Tzu art of war style. It's a little bit more tricky, a little bit more careful. They they never let you know what they're going to do. Is is that a fair characterization?

是的。

Yeah.

中国人对战争艺术的普遍信念，自古至今都是如此，即如果你不得不通过战斗来赢得战争，那说明你不够聪明，无法在不战斗的情况下取胜。你通过欺骗和操纵来获胜，因为战斗会给你带来巨大的损失。你不想遭受损失，你想实现你的目标。这就是他们进行战争的方式。

The the general belief of the Chinese on the art of war, and this has existed throughout and it exists today, is that if if if you're going into a fighting war, you must not have been smart enough to win without a fighting war. And you win through deception and manipulation because fighting wars are gonna damage you a lot. You don't wanna be damaged. You you wanna get to your objective. So that's how they fight wars.

这听起来是一种聪明的战争方式。在国际关系方面，还有所谓的朝贡体系。朝贡体系就是你的实力决定了你在等级体系中的位置。如果你有更多的实力，就有更高的等级。你在等级体系中处于更高的位置。

That sounds like a smart way to fight wars. Also international relations there's what's called the tribute system. And the tribute system was your power determines where you are in your hierarchy. If you have more power, have more hierarchy. You're higher in the hierarchy.

这有点像混乱。每个人都应该知道彼此的实力，实力较弱的一方应该向实力较强的一方进贡，这是国际上的做法，而实力较强的一方应该尊重这一点，双方应该合作，保持和谐，而不是冲突。因为这一切都是为了得到你想要的，和谐和繁荣是你想要的，而战斗会破坏这一切，这不是你想要的。那位曾担任副总统的中国伟大历史学家，名叫王石山的人向我描述过地中海的方式。

It's like confusion. And if you are everybody should know what each other's power is and the lesser power should give tribute to the greater power, and this is internationally, and the greater power should respect that and treat and they should work and have harmony together rather than to have the conflict. Because it's all about getting what you want, harmony, and prosperity is what you want, and fighting that destroys things is not what you want. Whereas, yeah, the man who was vice president, great historian of China, a man by the name of Wang Shishan described it to me that there's the Mediterranean approach. Right.

就是这样。是的。地中海的方式是一种非常不同的方式，它起源于那里有家族而没有边界。它的运作方式是没有限制的。事实上，我们没有有边界的国家，也没有不能跨越边界的观念，直到17世纪中叶的威斯特伐利亚和约之后，我想大概是1650年左右，他们经历了三十年的战争，每个人都在战斗。

That's what it was. Yeah. And the Mediterranean approach, which is a very different approach, really began out of that there were families and there's no borders. And the way it worked is there were no limitations. In fact, we didn't have countries with borders and ideas that you don't cross borders until what's the piece of Westphalia after 30 in the mid seventeenth century, I think it was like 1650 something, up they had thirty years of war and everybody would fight.

所以他们是战斗专家，这就是当时的常态。经过三十年的战争后，他们决定，好吧，让我们划定一个边界，看看会发生什么，然后这就是你的事情。这就是它的由来。顺便说一下，这也是历史上中国和日本经历所谓的百年屈辱的原因之一，当外国列强在19世纪30年代末入侵时，他们发生了战斗，鸦片战争等等，西方列强在战斗方面很强，因为他们经常练习。然后就是他们所说的百年屈辱，外国列强入侵。

So they were fighting experts and that's what the norm was. And then after thirty years of war they decided, okay, let's draw a boundary around it and try to see what goes on and then there's your business. And that's how it came about. So and that's by the way in history one of the reasons that the Chinese and Japanese lost what they called their hundred years of humiliation when the foreign powers came in in late eighteen thirties and they had a fight, the the Opium Wars and so on, the western powers were strong at fighting because they were practiced at it. And then there was the hundred years of humiliation, they call it in China, where they they the foreign powers came in.

总之，我给了你太多的历史，但我想说的是，对待这种游戏的态度是完全不同的。所以这就是我认为你会看到的。你知道，现在我们回到芯片战争，看看今天的新闻，我们就在那里。

So anyway, I've given you too much history, but I'm saying that there's a whole different attitude about how to play that game. And so that's what I think you're gonna see. You you know, that's when we come back now to the chips war and you took a look at today's news, you know, there we are.

好了。听着，雷，我总觉得这就像初中生站在讲台上宣布‘我要让自动售货机免费’就能赢得学生会主席一样。不幸的是，民主制度下的选举过程也遵循类似的模式。这非常困难。这周我观看了听证会，当听到参议员们说‘我为选民争取到了这笔钱’时，我感到深深的沮丧。

There we are. Well, look, Ray, I feel like I always tell people the the kid that stands up at the middle school and says, I'm gonna make the vending machines free wins the the presidency of the middle school. And, unfortunately, in a democratic system, the elect election process kinda follows a similar pattern. It's very hard. I watched these hearings this week, and I was deeply frustrated when I hear senators say, I got this money for my constituents.

‘我搞定了’。他们的初衷是站出来承诺‘我会为你争取这个’。他们进入国会，为你拿到那笔钱。久而久之，政府开支膨胀，却没有任何削减的动力。

I got this. Their initiative, their intention is to stand up and say, I'm gonna get you this. They go into congress. They get you that money. And over time, government spending swells, and there is no incentive to reduce it.

现在我们正站在一场严峻危机的边缘。我真心希望政治家们能展现出领导力，站出来说‘我们必须做艰难的决定，因为十年或二十年后，如果不这样做，我们所有人都会陷入困境’，并将这个信息传达给民众。我衷心希望你的书能触动他们，希望他们的领导力能促使他们迅速而彻底地实施这些艰难的改革，以维护联邦。只要他们能做到，我们就能继续前进，建设我们的生活。非常感谢你花时间撰写这本书并与我们分享，我真诚希望它能被听见。这实在太重要了。

And we find ourselves now on the precipice of a really difficult crisis. And I really do hope that politicians find within themselves the leadership to stand up and say, we need to do difficult things because ten years from now or twenty years from now, if we don't, things are gonna be very bad for all of us and convey that to people. And I really do hope that your message gets to them and that their leadership allows them to stand up and say, we need to make these really difficult changes deeply and quickly in order to preserve the union and that they can make those changes and we can move forward and continue to build our lives. And so I really appreciate you taking the time to write this book, share this with us, and I really do hope it's heard. I think it's so important.

所以非常感谢你，雷。

So thank you so much, Ray.

我们能做到。如果我们不行动，美国的国力将大幅削弱。这关乎国内，也关乎国际。戴夫，我很感激我们能进行这样的对话，只希望人们能理性行事——虽然这要求可能太高了。

We can do this. And if we don't do this, the power of The United States is going to be greatly diminished. So it's domestic, it's international. So I appreciate yeah, appreciate you, Dave, that we can have this kind of conversation, Just have people behave logically. Maybe that's too much to ask.

不，听着，我的意思是，我们暂时别承诺免费自动售货机，先考虑如何让学校为下一代维持开放。不过说得很棒，谢谢雷。

Well, no, look, I mean, let's not give away the vending machines for a couple years and, you know, kinda think about keeping the school open for the next generation. But that was great. Thanks, Ray.

你见解独到，非常出色。这些内容无比珍贵。感谢你为听众们所做的贡献。

You know your stuff. You're great. And this is really invaluable. Thank you for doing that for your listeners.

雷，我也认为这极其重要，为此我花费了大量时间思考并担忧。你的信息如此清晰且意义重大。我认为你表达得当，文笔出色。这个周末我读完了你的整本书，感谢你将这一切呈现出来。我真心希望华盛顿收听我们节目的听众能听到这些内容。

I think it's so important too, Ray, and I spent a lot of time thinking worrying about it. Your message is so clear and important. I think you present it well and write it well. I read your whole book this weekend, and I appreciate you putting it all out there. I really do hope that the folks that listen to our show in DC listen to this.

我、我、我无法形容在参加完就职典礼周末后的失望之情。我见到了许多国会议员，会晤了新内阁的大部分成员，但那种共识根本不存在。我感到沮丧，为此心灰意冷。总之，我认为持续强调这个问题仍然很重要。

I I I cannot tell you how disappointed I was after I spent the weekend at the inauguration. I met a lot of members of congress. I met most of the members of the new cabinet, and it's just not there. I'm just frustrated and I'm disheartened by it. So anyway, I think it's important to keep harping on it though.

我们不会停止，我会继续发声，同时也感谢你在此所做的努力。

We're not gonna stop and I'll keep talking about it and appreciate your efforts here too.

我们只需尽力而为。

We just have to do our best.

没错。非常感谢你，雷。

That's right. Really appreciate it, Ray. Thank you.

谢谢你，戴夫。再见。嗨。

Thank you, Dave. Bye. Hi.