Lyn Alden：未来既无大繁荣也无大萧条？衰退担忧、比特币与黄金价格之争及债务困境

有时我会对比特币超越其基本面感到些许担忧，其他时候则对黄金的过热表现有所顾虑。眼下，尽管黄金有更多数据支撑，但从情绪面看已有些超买，虽然我仍认为其长期前景向好。但未来六到十二个月内，我会把票投给比特币。

Sometimes I get a little concerned around Bitcoin getting ahead of its keys. Other times, get a little concerned around gold getting ahead of its keys. Right now, I mean, gold, despite more metrics, is kind of sentiment overbought, even though I still think the long term case for it is good. But, I mean, over the next six, twelve months, you know, I I put my vote for Bitcoin.

大家好，欢迎回到节目。请点击订阅并给我们好评，这能帮我们获得新听众。今天我很荣幸能现场连线独一无二的琳恩·奥尔登。

Hey, everyone. Welcome back to the show. Please hit subscribe and leave us a positive review. It really helps us get new listeners. I am here in person with the one and only Lynn Alden.

琳恩，非常感谢你能来。见到你真高兴，最近怎么样？

Lynn, thank you so much. It's so good to see you. How are you?

谢谢邀请，很荣幸能

Thanks for having me. Happy to be

亲临现场。我们有很多话题可聊。当我观察当下的宏观分析时，发现要么极度悲观，要么极度乐观——要么说这是美国的黄金时代，要么预言我们将遭遇导致大萧条2.0的巨大危机。

here in person. Well, there's lots to talk about. And when I watch the macro analysis that's out there, it's either doom or gloom. It's it's ultimately bullish. This is the golden age of America, or we're about to hit a massive speed bump that's going to usher in the Great Depression two point zero.

但读了你的报告后，你总是那么平衡冷静。事情没看起来那么糟，也没看起来那么好。所以我想先听听你对当前经济形势的宏观展望。

And then I read your report, and you're always so balanced, so calm. Things aren't as bad as they seem. Things maybe aren't as good as they seem. So I would love to just zoom out and get your broad outlook on where we are right now with this economy.

这是个好问题。我认为症结在于激励机制——很多人要么追求点击量而走向极端化（因为极度乐观或悲观的论调更吸睛），要么被政治立场裹挟。如果他们不喜欢当权者，就认为一切都很糟；若支持当权者，就认为一切皆好。而我始终努力保持客观，无论局势如何变化。

Yeah. It's a good question. I think that the problem is the incentive structure is a lot of people either they aim for clicks and, therefore, sensationalism, either really good or really bad sells, or people get politically intertwined. So if if if who they don't like is not is running things, everything's bad. If they who they like is, it's all good, and they kinda just fluctuate without kinda that that at least I try to be objective as possible regardless what's going on.

我认为我们现在仍处于财政主导的状态。虽然我一直在重复这个观点，但现在这种财政主导伴随着经济底层略有放缓的迹象，因为我们还面临关税等逆风因素，劳动力市场也出现了一些小裂缝，不过都不算特别严重。这种情况下，你总能找到数据来支持任何观点——如果你想找经济过热的证据，市面上有大量数据点可供选择；如果你想找经济糟糕的迹象，比如房地产市场确实在慢慢出现问题。

I think kinda what we're in now is fiscal dominance still. So the same drum I've been beating for a while, but it's kinda fiscal dominance with a slightly slowing underneath aspect to it because we have other headwinds like tariffs, a little bit of cracks in the labor market, nothing particularly strong. And so it's kind of one of those things where data you can always find data to support something if you want to find the things that are kind of running hot. There's plenty of data points out there to find them. If you want to find the things that are looking really bad, I mean, real estate's slowly been having issues.

显然，住宅房地产市场至少在成交量方面已经冰封许久。就像我说的，劳动力市场出现小裂缝，许多指标仍不乐观。所以任何阵营都能找到他们想要的论据。但总结来说，我认为私营部门目前处于某种疲软状态。不过当你在没有经济衰退的情况下维持占GDP6%-7%的结构性赤字时，这本身就是一种刺激。

And obviously, the residential real estate market's been, at least volume wise, pretty much slammed shut for a while. Like I said, little cracks in the labor market, a lot of indicators still not looking great. So any camp can kind of find what they're looking for. But I think, basically, the summary is the private sector itself is in a somewhat sluggish state right now. But when you're running 6% or 7% of GDP structural deficits without a recession, that is a type of stimulus.

我认为这就是我们当前所处的环境。其中很多因素已经根深蒂固，并非今年或去年才做出的主动决策。这更多是结构性问题——基于福利支出，部分基于利息成本。

And I think that's the environment that we're in. And a lot of that is baked into the cake rather than something that was kind of an active decision this year or last year. It's kind of more structural. It's based on entitlements. It's partially based on interest expense.

还有国防开支等相互交织的因素。这些都已深度嵌入经济体系，使得K型经济或双速经济（无论人们用什么术语）中的某些部分持续保持高位运行。

It's partially defense and all this stuff that's intertwined there. And a lot of that is pretty embedded and keeping things somewhat elevated in kind of that K shaped economy or two speed economy, whatever terminology people use.

所以你的意思是，你并不特别担心我们会突然陷入严重衰退？即使失业率数据在被修正（比如2024年最初报告的工作岗位比实际少了约百万），还有其他正在公布的数据点，你也不认为这意味着我们将突然面临经济衰退或重大崩盘？

So what I'm hearing from you is you're not overly concerned that all of a sudden we're going to go into a severe recession. The unemployment numbers, even though they're being revised, right, we lost like a million jobs that they originally reported from 2024. And some of these other data points that are coming out, you're not saying, oh my gosh, this means that we're suddenly going to have, you know, a recession or some major crash?

我不认为会出现重大衰退。在财政主导时期，衰退会呈现不同形态。按某些指标衡量，2022年就具有衰退特征。我有时将其称为'新兴市场式衰退'——当发达经济体以财政主导方式运行时，其衰退可能更接近新兴市场模式，这意味着通缩压力不会那么明显。

I don't think we're gonna have a major recession. Recessions can look different when you're in fiscal dominance. By some metrics, 2022 had recession like aspects to it. One of the phrasings I try to use or have used sometimes is like an emerging market style recession. And when a developed economy is running in a kind of a fiscal dominant way, some of their recessions can look more like an emerging market recessions, which means they might not be as disinflationary.

失业率可能不会飙升，但痛苦指数会显现出来。对于不了解的听众，痛苦指数就是失业率加通胀率。新兴市场本就更容易通胀，比如2022年痛苦指数就达到了通常伴随衰退出现的水平。

Unemployment might not get as high. But instead, the misery index is where it kind of shows up. And for people that don't know, the misery index is basically unemployment plus inflation. In an emerging market, obviously, they're more inflationary in general. And so, like, in 2022, the misery index reached levels normally associated with recessions.

但这主要是由于通胀方面的问题，而非失业率。消费者信心大幅下滑。采购经理人指数全面走弱，你知道的，各方面都相当负面。甚至出现了连续两个季度的GDP负增长。当然，这是在2021年那种异常高涨后的回落。

But it was mostly because of the inflation side, not because of the unemployment side. And consumer sentiment tanked. Purchasing manager indices stuff rolled over, you know, across the board, pretty negative things. Even had two quarters of of negative GDP growth. That was, of course, off the, you know, kind of the 2021 trigger high.

所以这是否算作衰退尚有争议。但官方并未将其定义为NBER标准下的衰退，主要是因为劳动力市场并未崩溃。我认为未来可能会出现劳动力市场疲软，但不会那么极端。小的裂痕可能扩大，但通常财政赤字会逐渐增加，某种程度上提前支撑了这种局面。

So it's debatably if that counts or not. But you didn't have an an NBER defined recession mainly because the labor market didn't break. And I think that going forward, you know, maybe not that extreme, but you can have a softening labor market. You could have little cracks widen. But then, generally speaking, what happens is the fiscal deficits kinda gradually widen, and they kinda support that almost preemptively.

因此可能表现为失业率小幅上升，但不同于以往那种环境下常见的通缩，这次通胀可能持平甚至微升，原因多样。人们会感觉有些不对劲，但这不是我们熟悉的那种发达市场典型的剧烈就业周期和大规模违约周期——那些我们懂得如何识别的信号。

And so it can show up in you know, unemployment ticks up a little bit, but instead of the disinflation, you'd often get in that environment. Maybe inflation stays flat or even goes up a little bit, you know, for a number of reasons. And so people kind of feel that something's off, but it's not the classic developed market huge labor cycle, huge default cycle that we're kind of known, that we know what to look for, I think.

现在我感觉很多人持悲观态度，几乎处于观望状态，认为坏事即将发生，届时会有大量流动性注入。我们圈内有人称之为'大放水'。你对这些人怎么看？你觉得这种情况近在眼前吗？还是像你所说，会更渐进式发展——虽有裂痕，但不会突然出现像疫情应对时那样的印钞机模式？

Right now, I get the sense that a lot of people are feeling bearish and they're almost in this holding pattern because they think something bad is about to happen, to which they'll respond with a bunch of liquidity. Some in our space call it the big print. What do you say to those people? Like, do you feel like that is around the corner? Or do you see this playing out a little bit more gradually where, to your point, like, there's cracks, but nothing that signals that all of a sudden they're gonna be coming in with the money printer like they did back in the pandemic response.

《币圈故事》由Gemini荣耀呈现。通过Gemini比特币信用卡，投资比特币从未如此简单。日常消费如加油、餐饮、杂货等最高可赚取4%比特币返现，免年费、免跨境交易费、奖励兑换零手续费。今夏高尔夫球场消费更享10%比特币返现。

Coin Stories is proudly brought to you by Gemini. Investing in Bitcoin has never been easier with Gemini's Bitcoin credit card. Earn up to 4% back in Bitcoin on everyday purchases like gas, dining, groceries, and more. With no annual fee, no foreign transaction fees, and no exchange fees on your rewards. And this summer, 10% back in Bitcoin at golf courses.

立即注册，前90天消费满3000美元可获200美元比特币奖励。马上申请：gemini.com/natalie。如果你想和我一样把握比特币动态又不想被噪音干扰，一定要订阅Bitwise资产管理公司的每周CIO备忘录。Bitwise自2017年成立以来管理着超100亿美元资产，涵盖30多种策略。CIO Matt Hogan每周用五分钟简报解读数字资产领域重大事件。

Plus sign up today and get a $200 Bitcoin bonus when you spend 3,000 in your first ninety days. Apply now at gemini.com/natalie. If you're like me and wanna stay on top of Bitcoin without getting lost in all the noise, you've gotta check out the weekly CIO memo from Bitwise Asset Management. Bitwise has been around since 2017 and manages more than $10,000,000,000 across 30 plus strategies. CIO Matt Hogan puts together a quick five minute memo that breaks down the biggest stories in digital assets each week.

访问bitwiseinvestments.com/ci0memo即可查看。当然，请始终谨慎考虑加密货币的极端风险。《币圈故事》也由Ledin赞助。需要现金但不想出售比特币？Ledin是全球比特币抵押贷款领导者，自2018年以来发放贷款超90亿美元，并首创储备金证明机制。

Just go to bitwiseinvestments.com/ci0memo and check it out. And always, of course, carefully consider the extreme risks associated with crypto. Coin Stories is also brought to you by Ledin. Need cash but don't wanna sell your Bitcoin? Ledin is the global leader in Bitcoin backed loans, issuing over $9,000,000,000 in loans since 2018, and they were the first to offer proof of reserves.

选择Ledden，您将获得保管贷款、无需月供等更多优惠。访问ledden.i0/natalie。

With Ledden, you get custody loans, no monthly payments, and more. Visit ledden.i0/natalie.

是的。我的基本预测是渐进式的。当然突发事件可能发生——各种战争可能爆发，或者任何突发状况都可能出现。但撇开这些几乎无法预测的事件，我预计美联储资产负债表会逐步转向扩张，至少初期他们不会称之为量化宽松。

Yeah. My base case is gradual. Now things could happen. There's all sorts of war could happen and crate you know, any sort of crate stuff can happen. But so putting aside things that are just nearly unpredictable, my expectation is a gradual shift toward Fed balance sheet increases, which I don't think they would call QE at least at first.

我认为最接近的类比是2019年的回购利率飙升，深耕宏观领域的人会明白我的意思。简单来说，在2020年大规模印钞之前，

And I think the closest analogy we have is the 2019 repo spike, which, like, people deep in the weeds in macro would know what I'm talking about. But to to, you know, kinda back up, before we got to the early twenty twenty, like, hyper printing

嗯。

Mhmm.

美联储其实在2019年9月就重启了资产负债表扩张。这在宏观金融圈曾引发巨大反响。但圈外人根本不知道这事，因为就像金融管道的小火灾被悄悄扑灭了。这实际上标志着美联储缩表行动的终结，结束了他们持续相当长时间的量化紧缩政策。

The the Fed actually went back to increasing their balance sheet in September 2019. And there there was this kind of a like, in macro Twitter, that was a really big deal. Mhmm. Outside of macro Twitter, people don't even know what happened because it was kind of this small little financial plumbing fire that was kind of quietly put out. And basically, that marked the end of Fed balance sheet reduction, the end of the quantitative tightening that they had been doing for quite a while at that point.

因为鲍威尔原本想缩减资产负债表对吧？他本质上在尝试，但发现无法

Because Powell wanted to shrink the balance sheet. Right? He was essentially trying, but realized he couldn't

实现。没错。他们当时试图缩表。要知道早在疫情前，财政赤字就已在扩大——那正是我最开始指出这个问题的早期阶段。

do it. Yeah. They were trying to shrink the balance sheet. And back then, they basically you know, the the fiscal deficits were widening even before the the pandemic. That was kind of the really early stages of when I was pointing that out.

还有其他一些人，比如卢克·格罗门，也指出了这一点。

There were some others like Luke Gromen that were pointing that out.

在特朗普时期是一点零吗？

Under Trump one point o?

是的。但再次强调，很大程度上是人口结构问题。嗯。你知道，他实施的未获资金支持的减税政策确实有所影响。嗯。

Yes. But that, again, a lot of that was demographics. Mhmm. You know, his unfunded tax cuts that he did certainly contributed. Mhmm.

但主要原因还是人口结构及其他固有因素。所以，这是多种因素共同作用的结果。无论如何，赤字在扩大。美联储在缩减资产负债表，银行现金水平变得相当低，这是那种综合环境下的必然结果。悄无声息地，这些小规模的流动性漏洞开始显现，于是在隔夜借贷市场上暴露出来。

But a lot of that was was demographics and otherwise baked in. So it's, you know, a combination of multiple factors. But regardless, deficit was widening. The Fed was tightening their balance sheet, and bank cash levels got pretty low, which is a consequence of of that kind of combination environment. And quietly, these little kind of liquidity leaks sprang up, so it showed up in in the overnight lending market.

于是，美联储首先介入，开始进行回购操作。这是一种提供临时流动性的方式。人们议论纷纷，是不是有银行要倒闭？但像我们中的一些人则认为，不，情况没那么糟。

And so first, the Fed stepped in, and they started doing repo operations. It's a way of kind of providing temporary liquidity. And people were talking, is a bank failing? Is but but some of us were like, no. That's not it's not that bad.

本质上将要发生的是，国库券过多而流动性不足。所以看起来美联储可能不得不转向增加资产负债表。他们将不得不购买一些国库券。到了十月，大约三周后，他们确实宣布将直接购买国库券，尽管表面上看似是回购问题，实则反映了更深层次的问题。

It's basically what's gonna happen is there's too many T bills. There's not enough liquidity. So it looks like the Fed's probably gonna have to shift to balance sheet increases. They're gonna have to buy some T bills. And by October, so something like three weeks later, they did in fact announce that they're gonna now outright buy T bills even though what seemed like a a repo problem that was actually kind of a symptom of the underlying thing.

于是他们重新开始购买国库券。他们不愿称之为量化宽松，因为他们没有购买长期债券，也不是因为觉得经济需要刺激。他们这么做基本上是为了扑灭一场流动性火灾，或者说修补流动性管道的泄漏，动机不同。而且动作并不激进。除了最初几周，之后资产负债表的增加相当渐进。

So then they go back to they go to start buying T bills. They didn't wanna call QE because they were not buying duration, and they were not doing it because they felt the economy needed stimulus. They were doing it basically to put out a liquidity, yeah, fire, a a liquidity plumbing leak, different reasoning. And it wasn't explosives. You know, apart from the initial couple weeks, after that, it was kind of pretty gradual balance sheet increases.

我认为他们一定程度上从中吸取了教训。因此他们已建立常备机制，能比当时更快做出反应。我们已看到当他们需要时，回购工具随时可用。我预计他们可能在2026年重新转向增持美国国债，但还需观察。而且这一转变会低调进行。

And I think that they one is they partially learned from that. So they have standing facilities in place ready to respond quicker than they had back then. So we've already seen when they need it, repo is available to tap. And I think that they're they're gonna shift back toward accumulating T bills again probably in 2026, but we'll see. And it'll be without much fanfare.

届时宏观推特和比特币推特圈可能会热议几周，然后就会形成新常态。那将成为美联储资产负债表的新低点。除非发生不可预测事件，我认为不会再现疫情期间那种六个月甚至更短时间内资产负债表暴增万亿美元的情况。但这本质上是个即将发生的趋势逆转，且会是渐进式的。

There'll be probably a few weeks of across macro Twitter and Bitcoin Twitter, a lot of people talking about it. And then that'll be kind of a a new normal. That'll be kind of a new low in the Fed's balance sheet. I don't think we're gonna get, you know, trillion dollars of balance sheet increases in six months or even quicker like we saw during the the pandemic, again, apart from something some unpredictable thing happening. But I think it's basically it's a trend reversal that's gonna happen, and it'll be gradual.

纽约联储某种程度上已在暗示这点。他们在发布资产负债表持有量的年度报告时，就指出大约2026年左右会开始重新扩表，规模大致与GDP增长同步。可以理解为资产负债表占GDP比例基本稳定，但名义金额将持续上升。

And the New York Fed in some ways is already kind of telegraphing that. When they when they, you know, released their annual report about their their balance sheet holdings, they've been kind of pointing to roughly 2026 or so as when they expect to kind of start going back to increasing their balance sheet roughly in line with GDP growth. So you can think of it as the balance sheet as a percentage of GDP is roughly staying the same, but nominally, that'll all be going up.

但美联储和理事会的政治格局正在发生实质变化对吧？我们会有更多特朗普任命的鸽派人士。这是否意味着未来可能出现更激进的降息，仅仅因为掌管印钞机的人选变了？

But the political fabric of the Fed and the Board of Governors is really changing. Right? We're getting more essentially Trump appointees, people that are more dovish. So could more aggressive rate cuts be in the future simply as a result of the people that are actually in charge of the money printer?

这将取决于有多少理事——具体说是FOMC委员——支持这个方向。当然一两个人未必能左右全局，但随着成员更替，确实存在这种可能性。

That will depend on how many people, how many what percentage of that board and that that the FOMC specifically get on board with that. So certainly, you know, one or two can't necessarily pull the whole group. But as as more rotate in and rotate out, it's certainly possible.

鲍威尔什么时候卸任？五月份吗？

Because Powell's out when? In May?

他的主席任期结束。嗯，很可能离职。他应该也会放弃理事席位，但还不确定。我记得他本人对此并未置评。

He well, his chairmanship ends. Mhmm. Well, most likely, he'll be off. He'll he'll he'll also give up his governor's spot, but it's not it's not certain. I don't think I think he's actually chosen not to comment on that.

我们只能推测。但他的主席任期即将结束。

We can only speculate. But his chairmanship ends.

这非常有趣，因为下任继任者似乎会陷入进退两难的境地——如果完全按照特朗普政府的要求降低利率（他们一直在不断施压美联储），会显得软弱可欺；但鉴于债务水平，他们实际上又无法真正强硬起来。对吧？

It's just so interesting because it seems like the next person who comes in, it's they're between a rock and a hard place because they're going to kind of look like a pushover if they do whatever the Trump administration wants, which is clearly lower rates. They've been talking about it nonstop and putting a lot of pressure on the Fed, and they can't play hardball really because of the debt levels. Right?

基本如此。我认为问题是美联储短期内可以摆出强硬姿态，但只要流动性出现漏洞，他们就会立即介入。比如2023年应对高通胀时，区域性银行危机爆发后，他们周末就联合财政部出手救助了。若当时袖手旁观，恐怕会有更多银行倒闭。

Pretty much. Yeah. I think the problem is that the Fed, they can look like they're playing hardball for a little bit, But as soon as one of those liquidity leaks springs, they jump in on day one. So when they were trying to fight inflation back in 2023, back when inflation was higher and the regional bank crisis happened, they were in there that weekend along with the treasury to help. And if they would have stepped aside, you know, there would have been some, you know, more bank failures.

本可能造成更广泛的破坏，虽然只是广义货币供应量中的微小比例——这本是抗击通胀时可调控的变量之一。但他们认为连锁风险超出承受范围，所以选择退让，在必要时提供临时流动性。这让我们明白：无论言辞多强硬，一旦核心体系出问题（无论是主权债券市场还是银行间隔夜融资），他们必定介入。实际上很多预案机制已就位，必要时还能升级应对。

There would have been more of a destruction and, you know, a tiny percentage of the broad money supply, which is, you know, if you're trying to fight inflation, it's one of the variables that you can let happen. But they decided that the the the cascading risks that were too great for their taste, so they they backed off and provided liquidity temporarily when needed. And, you know, I think that's kind of where just understood that no matter how tough they talk, that if there's a if it kind of the core systems, if there's an issue in sovereign bond markets, they're going to step in. If there's an issue in overnight financing between banks, they're going to step in. In many cases, they already have standing facilities to help to kind of preemptively step in Should these things happen, they can always escalate if need be.

这从根本上限制了他们的操作空间。我之前谈过财政主导的问题——关键在于美联储的工具主要针对加速或减速银行信贷。但如果问题不在信贷量（当前银行信贷处于常态水平而通胀仍高企），而是实体端导致的通胀，他们的工具要么失效，有时反而会恶化情况。

And that kind of limits what they ultimately can do. And the challenge and I've you know, when I talked before about kind of this whole fiscal dominance or nothing stops this train, the issue is that the whole the tools that the Fed has are mostly geared toward either accelerating or decelerating bank lending. Yeah. And if that's not the issue, if it's not that, you know, banks shut off lending, if it's not that they're lending too much, if they're just kind of doing average lending, which they are now, and inflation's still hot, it's because it's mostly from the physical side. Mhmm.

因为利率决策实际上无法影响国会拨款，不像对银行那样有效，只会进一步扩大赤字，压缩政策选择。这就是为什么在这种环境下，最终往往会转向收益率曲线控制或维持低利率政策。

And their tools either don't address that or in some cases ironically can make it worse. Because they're like, rate decisions are not really gonna affect congressional decisions for appropriations. So it doesn't really have the same effect that it has on banks. It just blows out the deficit even wider, and that narrows their choices. And that's why when you do get to these environments, you know, something like yield curve control or just low rates, run it hot.

具体操作方式多样，但历史经验表明总会采取这类方向的措施，区别只在于激进程度。

There's multiple ways to do it. But that's something in that ballpark. There's a range there of how extreme you get, but something in that range tends to happen in history.

那么对于那些等待抵押贷款利率下降的人，你想传达什么信息？我不认为我们会回到疫情期间人们幸运锁定的3%利率，但利率有可能降至4%或5%吗？还是你认为我们将长期困在结构性更高的利率区间？

So what's your message to people that are waiting for mortgage rates to come down to say, I don't think we're going get the 3% that people got lucky to lock themselves into during the pandemic, but can they come down to maybe four percent, five percent, or you think we're going to be stuck in a structurally higher range?

我认为5%肯定比4%更有可能实现，但其中有些事我比其他更有把握。首先，我认为抵押贷款利率不会创新低，在我看来那代人遇到的历史低点就是底部基准。当然利率可以从高点回落——看看这周的情况，实际上上次美联储降息（约九个月前）长期利率未必会跟随下调。

So I think five's five's certainly more doable than four, but I think that there's more things there's some things I'm more sure on than others. One is I don't think we're going to see new low in mortgage rates. I think we've seen, like, the generational low, my base case. You know, I certainly think we can go off our highs. I mean, judging by what we saw this week, and and actually the last time the Fed cut rates, which was something like nine months ago, longer rates don't necessarily follow when they cut rates.

因此长期债券、抵押贷款等产品有时会在联储降息时横盘甚至上涨。这可能源于市场对其控制通胀的能力失去信心，从而将风险溢价计入长期利率曲线。有时也可能只是交易决策或流动性分析所致。我的基准预测是我们将维持在这个区间。

So sometimes the long end of the curve, treasuries, mortgages, things like that, sometimes they go sideways to up even if the Fed is cutting. It could be because the market is, you know, losing confidence that they're going to control inflation. Therefore, they they price it into the longer end of the curve, whether it's mortgages or treasuries. Other times, it could just be a trading decision, kind of liquidity analysis, and things like that. My base case is we'll be in this range.

要突破区间下限，可能需要联储采取强力干预，或是劳动力市场出现比当前更严重的崩溃。如果爆发新一轮关税升级或实质性增税，导致经济放缓超预期，长期利率可能被拉低——但这种环境往往伴随失业等问题，并非人们期待的局面。所以核心矛盾在于：无论最终利率落在何处，我认为不会再创新低，这也意味着大规模再融资周期不会重现。

To get lower on that range, it could be that the Fed or others do actions to to push it down. Or it could be, you know, going back to some of those other things that the labor market breaks more than it has been. If you do if if maybe we have another tariff escalation or, kind of basically a major tax increase, if some of these things hit and do slow things down more than we've seen for a little while, you could get a pull down at longer in rates, but it wouldn't necessarily be the type of environment people are looking for because it could be associated with job losses and things like that. So I think the challenge is, you know, regardless of where they end up, I don't think we're seeing a lower low. And that also means that there's no big refinancing cycle.

在以往联储降息周期和抵押贷款利率新低时，消费经济几乎能享受免费午餐——所有房贷持有者都能轻松再融资。无论新旧贷款都会掀起再融资浪潮，借款人降低月供后自然增加消费支出。

So in prior major Fed cutting cycles and new lower lows in mortgage rates, it kind of ends up being a nearly free lunch for the consumption economy. Because everybody who has a mortgage can go ahead and refinance it pretty much. Whether it's recent, whether it's older, there's this whole refinancing wave. And for them, it's mostly a free lunch. They refinance everything and they just lower their bill and they're happy and they can spend Mhmm.

但若利率仅从高点回落而未创新低，只有近几年的贷款持有人具备再融资条件（而这部分存量极少），意味着高利率房贷群体规模有限。

And now if you don't get a lower low, if you only get, you know, off your highs in mortgages, but you don't get a lower low, then the percentage of people that that can actually refinance is only the past few years. Yep. And that was very low volumes. So there's not a ton of people Yeah. That have these higher rate mortgages.

因此再融资周期将非常疲弱，即便不考虑房市，家庭可自由支配资金也会减少。这种萎靡状态与我们之前讨论的双速经济可能持续更久——因为没有大规模再融资周期来拯救经济。当前格局基本已成定局，后续只能观察国会和总统的决策，但大部分趋势已难以逆转。

So you get a very weak refinancing cycle. So that's less even in nonhousing, just less money that's just kind of more freely available to to families to go out and buy stuff. So you can get more of a malaise, and that kind of two speed economy we were talking about earlier Mhmm. Can persist longer than people think because there's no big refinancing cycle coming to the rescue. It's it's mostly just what we what we see now, and we can see what Congress decides to do, what the president decides to do, but a lot of this is already locked in.

财政部长斯科特·贝森特最近在一篇专栏文章中讨论了K型经济。他谈到财富集中程度之高，以及美联储实际上对此推波助澜，且总是救助资产持有者。我很好奇，你认为他们——我是说，斯科特·贝森也写过我们需要货币重置的观点。那么你觉得是否正在酝酿某种计划，试图通过黄金、比特币等手段贬值债务，或许还利用稳定币为国债创造需求？他们将如何让我们摆脱当前的债务困境？

Treasury secretary Scott Bessent recently wrote an op ed where he discussed the k shaped economy. He talked about how much wealth concentration there is and really that the Fed has contributed to it, and it's always bailed out the asset holders. I was curious, you think that they I mean, Scott Besson has also written about the fact that we need a monetary reset. So do you think that there's sort of a plan in motion to try to devalue the debt through things like gold and Bitcoin and using stablecoins maybe to provide demand for treasuries? How are they going to get us out of this debt dilemma that we're in?

我觉得这些在任的聪明人应该正在考虑这个问题，或许正在制定策略。但你怎么看？

I would think that with these smart folks in office, they're thinking about this and maybe devising strategies. But what do you say?

我认为，特别是本届政府，其实任何政府内部通常都存在多个派系。有些团体看到某种发展趋势，而同一政府架构下的其他团体可能持不同看法。无论是贸易问题、债务处理方式等议题都是如此。甚至我们看到的策略手册——比如斯蒂芬·米林2020年（可能是2024年11月）那篇关于重置全球贸易的论文，算是特朗普基本经济团队中贸易主管提出的相当复杂的行动计划。该方案通常要求在加征关税和谈判期间暂时保持美元强势，之后才会坐下来达成类似马阿拉歌协议的方案来削弱美元。

I think, I mean, this administration in particular, but also any administration, there's usually multiple camps within the administration. And so there's certain groups that see a certain thing playing out, and there's another groups within the same umbrella of the same administration kind of seeing it a different way Mhmm. On a given issue, whether it's trade, whether it's what to do about the debt, things like that. Even the playbook we've seen, like, you know, they if you look at Stephen Mearin's paper from, I think, 2020 November 2024, the one on resetting global trade, it's kind of, you know, one of Trump's, you know, basic economist trade czars kind of laid out the, you know, pretty sophisticated approach to what they want to do. And that generally called for a temporarily stronger dollar during tariffs and during negotiations, at which point they'd come to the table and do something like a Mar A Lago accord to weaken the dollar.

但迄今为止，这个剧本并未按预期展开。在关税和谈判期间美元反而走弱了。

And so far, the game plan hasn't played out like they expected. You've had a weaker dollar during the tariffs and the negotiations.

顺便问下，你认为这是什么原因？

And why do you think that is, just by the way?

我...部分原因我觉得是市场某种程度上识破了虚张声势——美国并没有掌握全部优势。我们有好牌，但并非所有王牌都在手。

I I mean, partially, I would say because the market kind of somewhat called the bluff, which is The US doesn't have all the we don't have the strongest hand. We have a strong hand. We don't have, like, we don't have all the cards.

是啊，并非所有...

Yeah. Not all the

利用 我们手中有牌。中国手中有牌。整个金砖国家都有牌。可能削弱了他们大部分牌的是欧洲。所以他们其实没有太多牌可打。

leverage We've got cards. China's got cards. All of BRICS has cards. Probably the probably the block that's weakened a lot of their cards is Europe. So they they they really have don't have a ton of cards.

奇怪的是，这是他们自己造成的。是的，基本上是这样。是的。所以除了欧洲，我是说，很多这些更大的实体确实有牌可打。

And they did that to themselves, oddly. Yeah. Pretty much. Yeah. So other than Europe, I mean, lot of these bigger entities do have cards.

嗯。我认为市场很快就正确地识别了这一点。嗯。而且，你知道，美联储确实助长了财富集中。但同时，我们也在谈论救助银行。

Mhmm. And I think the market correctly identified that pretty quickly. Mhmm. And, you know, the Fed, you know, they do contribute to wealth concentration. But at the same time, we talk about bailing out banks.

美联储有部分自主权，他们可以单方面采取一些行动。你知道，他们可以做些推高资产价格的事情。最大的救助计划是由财政驱动的，或者是财政和美联储共同作用的结果。比如，2008年2月后的整个TARP计划，那是一个财政行动。即使是2023年地区银行的救助，那也是财政部和美联储合作的结果。

The Fed has partial like, they they can do some things on their own unilaterally. You know, they can kind of do things that are inflating asset prices. The biggest bailouts are fiscally driven or a combination of fiscal and the Fed. So for example, after 02/2008, the whole TARP thing, that was a fiscal action. Even the 2023 regional bank bailouts, that was that was, you know, kinda yelling and the Fed working together.

嗯。基本上是财政部和美联储合作。所以我认为财富集中问题，总是容易归咎于单一因素。如果只是美联储，或者只是某位总统，或者只是这个。实际上是几十年来一系列决策的累积。

Mhmm. The basic treasury and the Fed working together. And so I think the the concentration, it's always kinda easy to blame one thing. If it's only you know, it's say it's just the Fed or just this president or just this. It's kind of this accumulated multi decade set of decisions.

我要说的是，可能和美联储同样重要的是这一路上的财政决策组合。你知道，谁得到了减税，谁被加税，刺激资金花在哪里，所有这些都累积起来。比如，PPP贷款计划，我已经多次指出。因为当我们想到COVID时期的刺激措施时，我们总是想到刺激支票。那是最大的一个，或者是儿童税收抵免。

And I would say that the probably the the, you know, the equally as big as the Fed would be the combination of fiscal decisions along the way. Who, you know, who gets tax cuts, who gets tax increases, where stimulus is spent, all these things add up. Even, for example, the PPP loan program, I've kind of pointed out a couple times. Because when we think of COVID era stimulus, we always think of the stimulus checks. That's kind of the the big one or or child care tax credits.

但PPP贷款实际上是事后分析中更倾向于顶层的那部分。很多贷款给了企业。当然，许多小企业主本身就相当富有。他们中的许多人一开始并没有打算裁员。然后这些贷款变成了赠款，基本上意味着钱直接流向了企业所有者。

But the PPP loans were actually some of the more kind of concentrated toward the top when they did analysis on it afterward. A lot of those, you know, they they give loans to businesses. Many, of course, small business owners are are fairly wealthy themselves. Many of them were not in a position to really be planning on laying in one off to begin with. And then those loans turned into grants, which basically means that it just it just, you know, went to the the owners of the business.

那可能是25万。也可能是50万。甚至可能高达100万。或许更多。他们做过分析——虽然具体数字我现在记不清了——但确实进行过相关研究。

That could be a quarter million. That could be a half a million. That could be a full million. It could be more. And they've done an I don't have the numbers in my head right now, but they they've done analysis on this.

我在《破碎货币》和其他地方引用过这个数据，流向超级富豪阶层的比例。每次体系崩溃时总是这样：'哎呀，我们不小心让前10%的人拿得比预期多'。然后历史重演，又是'哎呀'。

I've cited it in broken money and elsewhere, the percentage that went to very wealthy people. And so it's it's kinda like whenever the whenever things kinda break apart, it's always like, oops. We accidentally shifted more than we intended Yeah. To the top 10%, and then it happens again. Oops.

我们又犯错了。是啊。这种循环到现在已经重复了四五次了。

We did it again. Yeah. And it's it's we've had, like, four or five of these kinda cycles now.

从历史上看，这个循环不断重演，富人越来越富，这正是大众沮丧的原因。你在我节目中也说过：无论左派右派、蓝党红党轮替，债务持续堆积，普通人的生活水平因购买力被侵蚀而逐渐恶化。所以你的建议是让个人配置硬性稀缺资产？而比特币似乎是最易入手的选项？

Well, it seems like because we've known in history that this cycle just keeps repeating and the rich keep getting richer, which is why everyone's frustrated, and you've made this comment on my show before, we go from left to right, blue to red, and look, our debt just keeps mounting, and the average, like the standard of living for the average person sort of deteriorates because their purchasing power is being destroyed. So is your message to empower the individual to acquire hard scarce assets, essentially? And Bitcoin seems to be the most accessible one to me.

是的。我们只能专注于可控之事。短期内别指望救世主出现，财政体系在我们可预见的投资周期内难以改善。这意味着人们必须自主行动。根据知识水平、风险承受能力等因素，不同资产各有所长。

Yeah. I think we can only kind of focus on what we can control. Mhmm. I would not anticipate the cavalry's coming anytime soon, so I wouldn't expect, you know, the fiscal side to get its act together in our any sort of investable time horizon, which basically means that it's it's on kind of people that have to do it themselves. And, you know, depending on their level of knowledge, their volatility tolerance, all sorts of things, there's different assets that can do it.

我认为比特币是赛道上最快的骏马。保罗·都铎·琼斯等人多年来一直这么主张，我同意。有人青睐黄金，有人偏好股票，也有人选择比特币。

You know, I think that Bitcoin is the fastest horse in the race. Paul Tudor Jones and others have kind of been saying that for years, and I agree. Know, some people like gold. Some people like equities. Some people like Bitcoin.

有人投资房地产，有人组合配置以上资产。我个人倾向股票、黄金和比特币。不过五年后回看，比特币很可能是其中表现最佳的，十年周期内可能同样如此。

Some people like real estate. Some people like all of the above or some subset of the above. I'm kind of in the I like equities and gold and Bitcoin. Mhmm. But I do think that Bitcoin is you know, if you look back five years from now, it'll probably have had the best performance of that group, I'd expect, probably ten years as well.

这是你可以做的事情之一。当我们从公共层面来看，除非真正解决医疗保健开支问题，或者彻底改革政府的整体收入和税收体系，否则很难实质性地解决这个问题，而这最终主要还是得靠个人。

And it's one of the things you can do. When we look at, like, the public level, I mean, nothing short of, like, really fixing health care expenses, for example, or fixing just the overall, you know, revenue and taxation aspect of the government is really gonna meaningfully address this, which which mostly puts it down to the individual.

《币圈故事》由Speed Wallet赞助播出。想通过回答简单的比特币知识问答赢取100万聪吗？每周前50名玩家可获得免费聪奖励，月底还将有一位幸运儿赢得百万聪大奖。Speed Wallet让比特币变得简单——这款增长最快、最受欢迎的闪电网络钱包支持即时收发、兑换稳定币、购买礼品卡、玩游戏赚币以及探索迷你应用。

Coin Stories is brought to you by Speed Wallet. Wanna win 1,000,000 sats just by answering simple Bitcoin trivia? The top 50 players win free sats every week, and one lucky winner gets a million sats at the end of the month. Speed Wallet makes Bitcoin simple. It is the fastest growing and most loved Lightning Wallet that allows you to send and receive instantly, swap to stable coins, shop gift cards, play games to earn, and explore mini apps.

Speed正在推动真正的应用落地。Stake and Shake现已通过speed支付在全国范围接受比特币支付。访问speed.app/coinstories并使用优惠码coinstories10即可获得5000聪奖励。接下来介绍BitKey——这款2024年入选《时代》年度最佳发明的比特币硬件钱包，具备多重签名安全保护、继承系统和适应现实生活的恢复机制，无需复杂设置，无需助记词。

Speed is also driving real adoption. Stake and Shake now accepts Bitcoin nationwide via speed payments. Head to speed.app/coinstories and use code coin stories 10 for 5,000 free stats. Next up, BitKey, a Bitcoin hardware wallet with multisig security inheritance and a recovery system designed for real life. No complex setup, no seed phrase.

真正实现无压力的自主托管。使用优惠码stories可在bitkey.world享受8折优惠。接下来是The Bitcoin Way——要100%保护你的比特币免受政府、政客和第三方风险威胁，唯有自主托管这一条路。

Just true self custody without the stress. Named one of Time's best inventions in 2024. Use code stories for 20% off at bitkey.world. Up next, the Bitcoin Way. There's only one way to protect your Bitcoin from government, politicians, and third party risk, that is 100% self custody.

我在The Bitcoin Way的朋友们将指导你第一次就正确掌握方法，绝不妥协。访问thebitcoinway.com/natalie与专家探讨如何确保比特币的安全性和隐私性。《币圈故事》还由Genius Group赞助播出，这家比特币储备公司（NYSE American代码GNS）正朝着万枚比特币储备目标迈进，并刚刚推出Genius Academy，提供包括Safedinamoose和我本人等专家的课程。

My friends at The Bitcoin Way will train you how to do this the right way the first time. No compromises. Go to thebitcoinway.com/natalie to speak with the experts about making sure your Bitcoin is secure and private. CoinStories is also brought to you by Genius Group, a Bitcoin treasury company listed on the NYSE American Undertaker GNS. Genius is building toward a 10,000 Bitcoin treasury and just launched the Genius Academy, featuring courses from Safedinamoose, myself, and more.

立即登录geniusacademy.ai免费开始学习。Genius Group——天才不以IQ衡量，而以比特币衡量。请再谈谈稳定币，因为立法层面似乎确实在重点推进它们。

Start learning for free today at geniusacademy.ai. Genius Group. Genius isn't measured in IQ. It's measured in Bitcoin. Talk to me a little bit more about stablecoins because it seems like they are really prioritizing them, at least at the legislative level.

现在他们专注于《清晰法案》。虽然《天才法案》已通过，但你认为它们将如何融入现有金融体系，并真正帮助财政部应对部分债务需求呢？

And now they're focused on the Clarity Act. We already have the Genius Act passed. But how do you see them assimilating and kind of coming together with our current financial system and really helping, I guess, the treasury with some of the demand for our debt?

这些都是巨大的资金池，本质上就是现代版的欧洲美元。离岸美元是它们最主要的应用场景，当然也可以出于特定目的将部分资金引入境内。任何进行过国际汇款的人都能体会到稳定币的优势及其高效性。对于那些在难以获取实体美元的地区需要美元的人而言，这显然也是个极具价值的应用场景。

These are really big pools of capital. It's basically the modern euro dollar. So offshore dollars is kind of the biggest use case for them, but, of course, you can bring some of them onshore for certain purposes too. Anyone who send an international wire can potentially see the benefit of Stablecoins and how efficient they can be. And, of course, you know, people that want dollars in jurisdictions where it's harder to get physical dollars, it's also obviously a a pretty powerful use case.

因此我认为政府想要规范其运作方式是合理的。银行自然会对它们感到恐慌，所以试图限制稳定币直接支付收益等功能，以避免与银行存款形成过度竞争。嗯...历史上央行和政府对于类全额准备金模式始终存在担忧。

So I do think it makes sense for the government to want to codify how they work. Naturally, banks get spooked by them because so they try to make it so that stablecoins can't directly pay yield and things like that so that they don't compete too much with bank deposits. Mhmm. There's been a long history of whether it's central bankers, whether it's the government kind of being fearful of kind of full reserve looking things.

是啊。确实。

Yeah. Yeah.

正是如此。因为他们担心，如果某物采用全额准备金而另一物采用部分准备金，部分准备金体系会怎样？资本岂不是会被全部抽走？

That's right. So because they worry that if if something is full reserve or something fraction reserve, what happens to the fraction reserve one? Why wouldn't all the capital just suck out?

完全正确。

Exactly.

那这对现有利益相关者所依赖的整个信贷体系会造成什么影响呢？

And then what does that do to the entire current lending dynamic that has all the existing stakeholders that like it the way it is?

好吧，抱歉打断你，但这某种程度上体现了稳定币作为商业模式的卓越之处，对吧？因为你发行一种代币，它与美元一比一挂钩。然后你把那些美元存入收益率4%的国库。这本质上就是在印钱。我是说，这些项目利润极其丰厚。

Well, and sorry to interrupt you, but it kind of goes to the brilliancy of stablecoins as a business model, right, because it's like you're issuing a token. It's backed one to one with the US dollar. And now you're taking that dollar, putting it into a treasury that's yielding 4%. So you're essentially just printing money. I mean, these are extremely profitable ventures.

对吧？

Right?

是的。只要——其实它们很难做起来，因为存在流动性网络效应。所以开银行比发行稳定币还容易些。这某种程度上奖励了那些最早入场、如今成为顶级稳定币发行方的前两三家机构。但对于能做到这点的项目来说，利润确实非常可观。

Yes. As long as well, it's they're hard to get because there's liquidity network network effects in play. So it's easier to start a bank than it is to start a stablecoin. So it kind of rewards the the earliest movers that that got through things that are now the top one, two, potentially, you know, three stablecoin issuers. But for those that can get to that point, it's it's it's quite lucrative.

换个说法就是：国内那些真正的大银行拥有大量近乎零利率的存款基础，而许多小银行却难以留住存款，不得不支付更高利率。当前稳定币甚至在相关法律限制收益率之前就能支付利息——显然市场对它们的需求足够大，即便不传递任何收益。由于具备网络效应的发行方寥寥无几，这个领域一直异常暴利，堪称人均创收最高的行业之一。我认为这在某种程度上是我们这个时代的特殊现象，属于早期进入者的套利机会，最终其他实体也会逐渐分一杯羹。

Another way of putting it is that the really big banks in the country, you know, they can have they they have a pretty big deposit base of, like, near zero yielding deposits, whereas a lot of smaller banks struggle to retain their deposits, they have to pay a higher rate. So stablecoins right now are able to pay even before certain laws kind of make it harder to pay yield. Just clearly, there's been enough demand for them without them passing on any of that yield. And so and there's because there's fairly few issuers that have any sort of network effect to speak of, they've it's it's been extraordinarily profitable, like, kinda up there, like, the most profit you can get per employee. I think that's to some extent, that's an anomaly of the era we're in now that just early mover arbitrage, this happens, and then eventually, kinda other entities can kinda take their cut over time.

但这显然是个利润丰厚的领域。我倾向于淡化'稳定币能解决美国债务问题'这种观点。嗯。我们常见的情况是，人们总想找到无需经历阵痛的完美解决方案。于是稳定币就成了新的指望对象。

But it is clearly a very profitable space. I I tend to downplay the idea that stablecoins are gonna, like, fix US debt, basically. Mhmm. I think that a common thing we see is people always want clean answers for how we're gonna get out that don't involve pain. So then it's like, well, stablecoin is this new thing that we can point to.

花旗约半年前有份报告（具体发布日期记不清了），财长也曾提及。细读其内容会发现，他们对2030年稳定币规模做了保守预测和乐观预测——基线预测是新增万亿美元需求，乐观预测则超过3万亿美元，但其中大部分来自现有的美元资金池。

And there is a report by Citi, you know, maybe six months ago. I don't know the exact date that it came out, but, like, the treasury secretary referred to it as well. And if you dig into what they covered, you know, they kinda had a a bare base and bull case for how much stablecoins there could be by, I believe, 2030. And, you know, their their their base case was over a trillion in new stablecoin demand. Their their bull case was over 3,000,000,000,000, but a lot of that was from existing pools of capital that are already, dollars.

这本质上意味着资金从货币市场或银行转移到稳定币。而原先持有的部分资产本就是国债，所以只是改变了国债的持有方式。没错。对美元和国债的全新批发需求虽然在该报告及类似分析中存在，但只占 headline数字的一小部分。

So that that basically represents, say, taking out of money markets or taking out of banks and putting it into stablecoins. And yet part of that thing that they were holding before was already holding treasuries. So it kinda shifts where you hold treasuries. Yeah. Wholesale entirely new demand for dollars and treasuries, while present in that report and similar analysis, is only a fraction of the headline number that you see.

因此我确信稳定币能带来数十亿，随着时间的推移甚至数千亿的新国债需求。但当我们谈到每年2万亿美元的新赤字，也就是每年新增的国债供应时，这不过是众多变量中的一个。它并非整个财政环境的救世主。

So I certainly think that stablecoins can add billions and, you know, over time tens or hundreds of billions of new treasury demand. But when we're talking 2,000,000,000,000 in new deficits per year, so basically new treasury supply per year, that is just one variable among many. It's not some sort of saving grace for the whole fiscal environment.

明白了。那你认为每家美国银行，那些'大而不能倒'的银行，都会发行自己的稳定币并与国际发行者竞争吗？因为在我看来，美国似乎想包揽这一切——希望相关活动都扎根于此。我们看到Tether正在创建类似USAT或US...是叫USAT吗？

Got it. And do you expect every US bank, like all the too big to fail banks, to issue their own stablecoins and then compete with maybe international issuers? Because it seems to me like The US wants all of this. They want to have the activity really be based here. And we see Tether creating like a USAT coin or US, is it US USAT?

他们刚发布的稳定币叫什么来着？懂了。但感觉他们想通过这些稳定币延伸美元霸权，所以希望所有相关总部都设在美国。

What's the stablecoin, I think, that they just released? Understand. Yeah. But it seems like they want to extend dollar dominance through these stablecoins, and so they want to have all of it sort of headquartered here in The US.

我认为任何规模足够大的实体都会研究发行稳定币。有些会尝试。但挑战在于网络效应的存在。问题在于，稳定币能否超越自身生态实现规模效应？嗯。

I think that any entity that, you know, is large enough, you know, will investigate issuing a stablecoin. Some will try. I think the challenge, is there's there's network effects at play. And then then the question is, is there stablecoin kind of scaling above their own ecosystem? Mhmm.

举例来说，如果某实体只是用稳定币替代部分自有存款，这与通过发行稳定币获取大量新增管理资产（AUM）有本质区别——后者需要你的稳定币真正流行起来。这又回到了货币的本质问题：当前稳定币能作为货币或类货币资产运作，正是因为其种类有限。当人们想用稳定币支付时，不需要从37种里挑选，大家都知道该用哪一两种。

So for example, if if an entity just replaces some of its own deposits with stablecoin or stablecoin like things, that's not the same thing as basically having stablecoin issuing it and collecting a lot of new AUM, a lot of new assets under management because your stablecoin has taken off. And it kind of goes back to the kind of the whole point of what money is and why stablecoins, at least kind of currently work as as money or money like assets, is because there's not that many of them. When people, you know, potentially wanna pay in stablecoins, it's like instead of saying which of the 37 stablecoins are we gonna pick from, it's kinda known which which one or two you're gonna

确实。

Yeah.

使用。因此它几乎等同于其锚定的美元。我认为我们会看到一场稳定币参与的混战，但最终货币网络效应会让市场趋向单一主导者。

Use. And and and so it's kinda synonymous with the thing that it's underlying the dollar. Yeah. So I do think that we'll see somewhat of a scramble for kind of stablecoin participation. But, ultimately, I think that that monetary network effects settle closer to one.

如今有了技术，交换可以变得超级简单。基本上，当买家和卖家持有不同的稳定币时，比如一方持有某种稳定币而另一方持有另一种稳定币，你可以随时根据需要即时交换。已经有解决方案了。但问题是，你现在构建的东西是否比你要替代的更复杂？因为关键在于压缩开销，提高效率。

Now with technology, swaps can make things super easy. So, like, basically, you can always kinda just exchange things on the fly when you have to if, like, the the buyer and the seller have, say, different you know, one has a certain stablecoin and someone else has a different stablecoin. There are solutions for that. But then the question is, are you is the thing you're building now, is it more complicated than the thing you're replacing? Because the whole point is to compress overhead, make things more efficient.

这正是让人们愿意使用它的原因，或者说它能让他们获得美元，而以前他们甚至可能无法获得美元。或者比美元更好，比如一个基本的银行账户。嗯，就像离岸银行账户。基本上，我认为最能引起共鸣的说法是，稳定币是全球中产阶级和工薪阶层的离岸银行账户。过去，如果你所在的国家货币不稳定，你想要某种在一定程度上不受政府控制或更能抵御通胀的东西，你的选择之一就是在海外开设美元银行账户。

That's that's what makes people wanna use or that it gets them dollars, whereas before they couldn't even potentially get dollars. Or or better than dollars, like a a basic bank account Mhmm. Like an offshore bank account. Basically, the I think the phrasing that just clicks a lot is stablecoins are offshore bank accounts for the middle class and working class globally. So offshore it used to be that if you were in a country that didn't have a great currency and you wanted something, you know, that's either out of the reach of your government to some extent or you wanted something that's that's more protected from inflation, one of your options is offshore bank account in dollars.

但考虑到开销和在一个国家开设银行账户的麻烦，显然只有相当富有的人才能享受到这种服务。

But with the overhead and the you know, having a bank account in another country, they're obviously only going to cater to you if you're quite wealthy.

是啊。

Yeah.

而稳定币利用技术将开销成本压缩到非常低的水平，从而让世界上任何拥有智能手机的人都能使用。我认为这是需求的一部分。但在内部，尤其是在跨境方面，它能提供帮助。就像我之前提到的，任何涉及国际电汇的系统都非常过时，急需更快、更透明、更便宜的国际转账方式。许多金融科技产品也只是在代理银行系统上叠加了一层，而稳定币则绕过了这个系统。

And stablecoins basically use technology to suppress you know, narrow that overhead cost to very low, which then makes it available to anyone with basically a smartphone in the world. And I think that that's that's part of the demand. But then internally, where it can help, especially cross border, so anything that involves set like I mentioned before, any sort of international wire transfers, that's a very kinda outdated system. It's ripe for, faster, more transparent, and cheaper international sending. Even a lot of things even a lot of fintech stuff, it just overlays on top of the correspondent banking system, and stablecoins kinda just go around that.

所以确实有需求，但我倾向于认为这更像是需要戴上风险投资的帽子才能看到的需求。而当我戴上宏观分析的帽子时，我主要关注的是万亿美元级别的流动。对吧？这是必须达到的范围。因此，我将整个稳定币的动态视为更像风险投资的机会，而不是能改变我对任何事物的宏观观点的东西。

So there is demand for it, but I tended to think, you know, that's it's more I had to put my venture hat on to see demand there, whereas the way I put my macro hat on, I'm mostly looking at things like a trillion dollars and up. Right? So that what what kind of packed kind of global macro flows, that's the range that has to things have to reach. So I kind of view this whole stablecoin dynamic as more venture like opportunities than something that kind of changes my high level macro thesis on anything.

哦，这真的很有趣。好吧。那么，考虑到我们的债务规模如此庞大，我们能否以某种方式利用黄金？或者，我知道我们听到特朗普说我们会用加密货币信用卡来偿还债务，但我认为短期内比特币不太可能实现这一点。但有没有什么计划来应对我们的债务呢？

Oh, that's really interesting. Okay. So, I mean, when we think about how massive our debt is, can we somehow use gold? Or, I mean, I know we heard Trump say we'll pay it off with a crypto credit card, but I don't think that's happening anytime soon with the with Bitcoin. But is there a plan to somehow address our our debt?

我认为个人可以有自己的计划，但是否有足够多的个体共同制定一个集体计划？我猜答案是否定的。但个人确实有。至于利用黄金来实现这一点，我的意思是，账面上确实存在这样的机制。你不需要凭空构想。

I think individuals can have plans, but are there enough individuals together that have a collective plan? My guess would be no. But the individuals do. As far as using gold to do it, I mean, there is a on the books mechanism to do this. It's not like you'd have to think it up.

这已经存在于美联储的操作手册中，基本上就是他们可以重新定价黄金。

It's already there in, like, the Fed operating handbook, which is basically that they can they can reprice gold.

是啊。

Yeah.

通过这样做，他们实质上会在财政部总账户中获得增值部分的信用。这其中还有些细节，但基本就是现行法律下政府少数几种无需发债即可支出的手段之一。嗯。但这某种程度上涉及一种违约形式。

And by doing so, they basically get credited in the treasury general account with the amount of of the increase. You know, there's a couple more details on that. But that's basically it's one of the very few mechanisms the government can do under current law where they can spend without issuing debt. Mhmm. But it instead involves it's a type of default in a way.

你是在让美元相对于黄金贬值。是的。目前存在一点免费午餐的性质，或者说像是一张未兑现的支票——即他们只需将美元相对于黄金贬值到当前市场价格。因为他们账面上仍保持着上世纪七十年代的价格。

You're you're you're devaluing the dollar relative to gold. Yeah. Now the there is a little bit of a free lunch currently or kind of more like an untapped check there, which is that they only if they only devalue the dollar relative to gold to current market prices. Because they have it on on on the books back in, like, nineteen seventies prices.

是啊，四十多美元一盎司。

Yeah. 40 something an ounce.

对，差不多。所以如果他们按当前水平重新定价，那只是反映了他们尚未动用的资源。嗯。不过到时候舆论可能会对此提出质疑。

Yeah. Something like that. So, if they were to reprice it to current levels, that's just kind of reflecting an untapped thing that they still have. Mhmm. The optics would be questionable, at that point.

你看，很多这类事情的核心，包括美元在内，很大程度上是基于信心的。所以这可能会引发人们的讨论，但从某种机械逻辑上讲得通。技术上他们确实可以将黄金重新定价高于当前水平，你可以用这种方法来推高黄金价格。

Like, the whole point a lot of these, you know, dollar included. A lot of this is based on confidence. So it would it would maybe people it would get people talking, but that could, you know, make some degree of mechanical sense. Now they technically could reprice it higher than the current level. You could you could you could use that approach to to, you know, price gold higher.

他们可以直接选个价格，比如每盎司5000美元？

They could just pick a price, like 5,000 an ounce?

对，对。他们可以选择其他数字，但这样做是有代价的——他们会因此充实财政部的金库，能够在不发行债务的情况下进行支出。这看起来会像大规模量化宽松，甚至效果更显著。

Yeah. Yeah. They could pick other numbers, but they have a cost, which is so they they would then fill the TG up. They'd be able to spend without issuing debt. It would look kind of like QE at a pretty big scale, but it would even look more there.

这看起来可能像是财政政策与量化宽松的结合，具体取决于他们如何处置这笔资金。这将是个相当支持流动性的举措，所以很可能对资产价格非常有利。边际上可能会引发通胀。如果黄金价格大幅上涨，其他金属可能也会跟风。

It would look like, you know, potentially fiscal combined with QE depending on what they decided to do with that money. It'd be kind of the pretty pro liquidity move. So it'd probably be very good for asset prices. Around the margins, it probably would be inflationary. You know, if gold goes up a ton, other metals could follow suit.

其中部分金属具有实用价值，这可能导致相关制品价格上涨，再加上系统中充斥的流动性。这是他们可以采取的手段，但本质上是通过债务贬值和激进财政来解决问题。与其像我们现在6%-7%的赤字那样逐年消化，这更像是直接撕开创可贴一次性解决，但挑战在于后续仍没有止血的计划。嗯。比如二战时期，他们显然面临巨额赤字和高通胀。

Some of those have utility purposes, which could then make the things they go into more expensive combined with all this liquidity that's now sloshed around the system. That is something that they can do, but it's it's basically a way of devaluing the debt and running it hot. And that's kind of instead of doing it by 6% to 7% a year, like the deficit numbers we have, that's kind of like pulling the Band Aid off and and getting a lot done at once, with the challenging part being that there's still no plan in place to then fix the bleeding going forward. Mhmm. So for example, if you look back at World War II, they obviously they had huge deficits, huge inflation.

但他们通过两种主要方式共同摆脱了困境。一是通过通胀消化了大量债务——如果你持有债券或现金，相比其他资产你的财富就缩水了，相当于你为此买单。二是他们在实施紧缩政策的同时实现了经济增长。

But then part of it, they got out of it in two main ways together. One, they did inflate a lot of it away. So if you were holding bonds or cash, you just you just compared to everything else you could have owned, you got devalued. You you paid for it. But then two, they grew out of it while doing austerity as well.

嗯。所以本质上，通胀是种变相违约，不是名义上的违约，而是购买力的违约。他们相当于承认：我们要对现有债务的大部分进行违约，但之后我们会为下一代大致实现预算平衡。这就是他们的做法。

Mhmm. So it was like, basically, the inflation was a type of default, you know, not a nominal default, but it's a purchasing power default. So they said, okay. We're basically defaulting on a big percentage of our existing liabilities, but then we are gonna more or less balance our budget for, you know, the next generation. That's kind of what they did.

因此，如果他们仅仅进行货币贬值，却没有解决实际持续的赤字漏洞问题。是的，那更像是新兴市场的表现。如果他们专注于修补漏洞，却忽视了对庞大债务堆的处理——那些既未充分违约也未充分贬值的债务——那么风险依然存在，前方仍有隐患。

And so, if they just do the devaluation, but then they don't, you know, fix the actual ongoing deficit leakage Yeah. That's more like an emerging market at that point. If they fix the if they focus everything on trying to fix the leakage, but then they saw this big, you know, debt pile that's not been sufficiently, you know, kind of defaulted on or devalued, then there's still risk for you know, it it that there's that still lies ahead.

没错。

Yeah.

这就像是组合拳的效果。我们已经见证了部分债券贬值。过去五六年里，相对于几乎所有其他资产类别，债券和现金持有者的境遇堪称惨淡。是的，我认为这个过程尚未结束。

So it's kinda like that one two punch happens. We've already seen a partial bond devaluation. Like, the past five years, six years have been awful for bond and cash holders relative to practically every other asset class. Yeah. I just don't think it's done yet, basically.

我认为未来五年在这方面的影响可能不会像过去五六年那么显著。但我们并未完成整个周期，回归到某种可持续的基准状态。

I think the I think that maybe the I don't think the next five years maybe will be as significant in that regard as those five, six years were. But it's not as though we've kind of completed that full cycle and are back to some sort of sustainable baseline.

但这是机构可以持有的无风险资产，即便它处于亏损状态。我们已经看到黄金的优异表现。像雷·达里奥这样的大投资者都在公开建议，现在应将10%-15%的资产配置黄金。你认为比特币为何表现相对逊色？

But it's the risk free asset institutions can hold, even if it's underwater. We've seen the outperformance in gold. And people like Ray Dalio, all the biggest investors, they're coming out. They're saying 1015% of your portfolio in gold now. Why do you think Bitcoin has sort of underperformed?

我的意思是，它是数字黄金，解决了实体黄金的部分缺陷。尽管自去年以来已上涨100%，但人们为何对整个形势感到悲观？

I mean, it's a digital gold. It solves for some of the defects in the physical version. So why why do people even though I know we're up a 100% since last year, by the way, but people are feeling kind of bearish about the whole situation.

我认为是现实与预期的落差。我之所以没有太失望，部分原因在于我常自称为'看涨的熊派'——对比特币持保守看涨态度。我的预测总是相对谨慎：我认为它会跑赢多数资产，但短期内不会一飞冲天。我们可以深入探讨其中的原因。

I think it's because it's reality versus expectations. Part of why I've not been that disappointed is because I've I've been more in the I I sometimes describe myself as, a bearish bull Yeah. On Bitcoin. I thought I'd always have conservative bullish targets, which is that, you know, it's like I'm always like, I think it's gonna outperform things, but I don't think it's going to the moon anytime soon. And, you know, we could talk about why that is.

但我喜欢同时持有两者的部分原因在于它们的表现并非总是同步。有时比特币会超前，有时黄金会超前。黄金

But part of reason I like to hold both is because they they don't always perform well at the same time. Sometimes Bitcoin gets ahead of itself. Sometimes gold gets ahead of itself. Gold

现在是黄金。

Now it's gold.

没错。黄金依然是规模更大的资产，大约是比特币的十倍。许多大型资金池对黄金的理解仍优于比特币。比特币更多被视为一种科技投资，需要深入研究才能把握，而黄金，你知道的，已经存在很长时间了。有时候我会对比特币价格超出其内在价值感到些许担忧。

Yeah. Gold still and gold's the larger asset by a factor of about 10. A lot of the biggest pools of capital still understand it better than Bitcoin. Bitcoin viewed more as like a tech play, something that has to do homework on to figure out, whereas gold has, you know, been around for a while. And, you know, I sometimes I get a little concerned around Bitcoin getting ahead of its keys.

其他时候，我又会对黄金价格虚高感到担心。眼下，从多个指标来看，黄金虽然长期前景依然向好，但情绪面已经有些超买。不过在未来六到十二个月内，我会把票投给比特币。我认为会出现这种轮动——当然我可能判断错误。也许半年或一年后回看，黄金可能再次跑赢。

Other times, I get a little concerned around gold getting ahead of its keys. Right now, I mean, gold, just by more metrics, is kind of sentiment overbought, even though I still think the long term case for it is good. But, I mean, over the next six, twelve months, you know, I I put my vote for Bitcoin. I I think that that kind of that rotation and I could be wrong in this. Maybe we look back six six, twelve months from now, and maybe gold still outperformed again.

但我的猜测是比特币可能会领跑一段时间。部分原因是我们需要看到某些矿业公司（比如估值过高的矿业公司）的NAV（净资产价值）出现一定程度的缩水。当我们看到替代币矿业公司上市时——嗯，基本上到那时，你会预期市场将经历一轮洗牌，把比特币及其周边领域的投机客清理出局。但这反而为重建提供了基础平台。

But my guess would be Bitcoin is probably gonna take over for a while. I think partially we had to see some of the MNAV's, like, overvalued MNAV's of treasury companies deflate to some extent. Once we saw, like, altcoin treasury companies coming to market Mhmm. Basically, at that point, you just kind of expect there's gonna be a washout to to kind of get the kind of tourists out of the the system, both in Bitcoin and around Bitcoin. But then that allows for a platform to to rebuild from.

现在美联储政策转向鸽派，部分泡沫已经被挤出，我认为比特币在未来六到十二个月将处于更有利的位置——这是我的基本判断。

And now that we see the Fed getting a little bit more dovish, we've seen some of that kind of already get washed out, I think Bitcoin's in a better place for the next six to twelve months going forward would be my base case.

我想听听你对比特币矿企的看法。正如你所说，很多矿企的NAV已经缩水，市场情绪偏悲观，近期有些矿企确实遭受重创。我知道这主要是由于部分锁定期结束引发的抛售。你如何看待比特币矿企现状？投资者应该如何评估它们？

Well, I wanted to get your outlook on the Bitcoin treasuries because to your point, a lot of the MNAV's have compressed. People are feeling a little bit bearish. Some of them have really gotten decimated recently. I know that that was largely due to some lockups that came up and then obviously people sold. But how are you feeling about the Bitcoin treasuries and how should people evaluate them?

因为我听到很多人说，MSTR确实是经过验证的选择，尤其是他们新推出的信贷工具，这让人们很难评估其他国库公司的价值。

Because for so many people that I hear from, it's like, well, MSTR is really the proven one, and especially with the new credit instruments that they've put out, they they have a difficult time figuring out how to value the other treasury companies.

是的。我认为这是一个新兴行业，所以这种情况很正常。其中许多公司确实带有投机成分。我唯一持有过的就是MicroStrategy。在某些估值下，我也会考虑持有MetaPlanet。

Yeah. And I think it's a new industry, so it makes sense. Many of them do have elements that are speculative. The only one that I've ever owned is is MicroStrategy. I would own MetaPlanet in in certain valuations.

我一直在关注MetaPlanet，现在它的价格已经回落。我认为这家公司管理得非常出色。在我看来，这两家是目前行业中的佼佼者。一个好的国库公司通常需要成为所在市场的流动性领导者——在美国就是MicroStrategy。

I've been watching that one now that it's come down. I think that one's very well managed. I think those are kind of the two cream of the crop that are out there. I think what makes a good one is that you generally wanna be the liquidity leader in your market. So in The US, that's MicroStrategy.

在日本则是MetaPlanet。其他主要资本市场也存在类似机会。市场已经明确表明，如果一家公司没有盈利能力，往往会对其大打折扣，因为这被视为对比特币长期战略的负担。此外，如果在流动性排名中位列第三、第四甚至更靠后，处境就会很艰难。这时候就需要通过差异化来突围。

In Japan, that's MetaPlanet. There are other opportunities for other other big capital markets as well. And I think the markets made it clear that if one is unprofitable, they tend to put a pretty big discount on that just because they view it as a liability to the longer term Bitcoin strategy. In addition, if you're the if you're the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, most liquid one at what you're doing, it's just challenging. Now that's where they can add differentiation.

如果公司有现金流，可以宣传自己是混合实体——既有比特币业务也有其他业务，两者风险可以相互平衡。嗯，他们需要探索市场认可的方案。但我认为当前的市场出清是健康的，因为当某件事开始看起来像免费午餐时...嗯...

If one has cash flows, they can kind of market that and say, we're we're a hybrid entity. You know, we have this other business that's not Bitcoin, and so we can kind of put the two together, they can balance out each other's risk. Mhmm. So they have to kind of explore what's going to work for the market. But I do think it's healthy that a lot of this was washed out just because whenever something starts to look like free money Mhmm.

就会有更多机构涌入。就像我之前说的，甚至出现了山寨币国库公司上市的情况。这个领域确实需要调整。我仍然认为这个模式是成立的——目前主要有两种模式：一种是纯粹玩法...

That's when more entities are gonna come in. That's when you're gonna get like I said, there were, like, altcoin treasury companies coming to market. It kinda needed a reset. I still think the model makes sense, which is and there's a couple different models here. One is the pure play.

这种模式下，成为所在市场的领导者至关重要，最好是前两名之一。另一种则是长尾模式——任何公司，无论主营业务是什么，都可以将比特币纳入资产负债表并给出合理解释。我认为这仍是长期可行的策略。现在市场泡沫消退后，我们反而处于更健康的发展阶段。

I think that one, it really helps to be a leader in your market, you know, kind of the one of one of the top two or so. But then there's a long tail of just any company, if they want if if they if you're selling whatever the case may be, to to have Bitcoin on your balance sheet and make some sense of that. So I think that's still a long term strategy. And I think that we're in a healthier spot now that some of this has been kind of the froth has been reduced.

那么在接下来的一年里，你认为自己最看好什么？又有什么让你感到些许担忧？

So over the next year, what would you say you're feeling the most bullish about? And then what gives you a little bit more concern?

我认为比特币在未来十二个月处于有利位置。我们已经看到了相当程度的出清。所以目前无杠杆、托管稳健的比特币，我认为正处于绝佳时期。一些财务状况中性或正向、MNAV大幅下降的优秀国债公司，尤其是那些杠杆率较低的企业，我认为它们的风险已经有所降低，这些公司状态不错。

I think Bitcoin's in a good space for the next twelve months. I think we've seen decent amount of washout. So just unlevered, soft custodial Bitcoin is, I think, in a great space right now. Some of the the better treasury companies that are either cash flow neutral or positive and their MNAV have come down a lot, I think that that's been somewhat derisked, especially if the the ones that also have pretty low leverage. I think those are in decent shape.

黄金的话，长期来看还行，但我内心的价值投资者觉得它涨得有点快有点高了。

Gold, like longer term, but I the value investor in me is a little bit it came up pretty high pretty fast.

是啊。

Yeah.

我四月份就开始预警这个情况，当时经历了相当长的盘整期。最近才刚突破这个阶段。所以我变得稍微乐观了些，但市场还是有点泡沫。我们走着瞧吧。

I I started warning about that back in April, and I did this pretty long consolidation. It it recently just broke out of it. So I got a little bit more kind of bullish again, but it's still just a little frothy. We'll see. K.

新兴市场其实是我一直比较看好的领域，当然要精选。之前它不在大家视线范围内，但我对其相当乐观。嗯。未来十二个月左右我可能还会保持这个观点，我认为这个领域还有周期性的机会。

Been, emerging markets are one of the areas that, you know, I've actually kind of liked, really select emerging markets. It was kind of off people's radar, but it's something that, you know, I've been pretty bullish on. Mhmm. And I still kind of continue to be probably for the next twelve months or so. I still think there's kind of room in the cycle for that.

不过我确实认为，目前无杠杆的比特币确实处于非常有利的位置。

But I do think that probably unlevered Bitcoin is in a pretty good space right now.

好的。那么有什么让你稍微感到担忧的？你最密切关注的是什么？我们之前提到经济数据在恶化，但还没有迹象表明我们会陷入严重的国债市场失灵或大规模流动性危机。那么市场上有什么让你可能有点担心的吗？

Okay. And what gives you a little bit of concern? What are you watching most closely where, you know, we had the economic data worsening that we talked about at the top, but nothing that's making you think that we're going to slide into something significant like a treasury dysfunction or a huge liquidity crisis? But what gives you a little bit of maybe worry in the market?

可能是AI资本支出。这是经济中少数几个真正强劲的领域之一，原因我相信听众都明白。但即便是这个领域也可能暂时过热。嗯。即便只是收缩10%左右或持平一年，影响都可能相当大。

Potentially, AI CapEx. That's been one of the few kind of really strong areas of the economy for reasons that I'm sure listeners know. But even that can get over skis temporarily. And because of the sheer scale of it Mhmm. Even that contracting 10% or so or just just going flat for a year, could be pretty big.

所以我认为AI增长飞轮暂时放缓的可能性，或者说这种可能性本身，是我正在关注的。我也认为住宅房地产市场正处于横盘状态。看空阵营认为，由于我们之前讨论过的结构性高利率——比如抵押贷款利率不会创新低——这些虚高的价格终将崩盘。嗯。

So I think just the the AI flywheel, just taking a breather is something or at least the potential for it is something I'm watching. I also think that residential real estate I've been in the camp that it is kind of in a sideways pattern. So there's been the the bear camp, which has argued that because of these now structurally higher rates we talked about earlier, like, don't think mortgage rates are hitting a new low. The bear camp is basically saying that because of that, these inflated prices are going to just crash. Mhmm.

我的观点一直是：全国平均水平下（当然房地产是区域性市场），住宅地产虽不会表现亮眼，但在财政主导环境下，其横盘时间会比人们预期的更长，可以通过时间而非价格来消化调整。市场修正主要有两种形式：价格回调，或是通过长期横盘来消化——可能是三年、五年甚至七年。

My view has generally been that nationwide average so obviously, real estate is a very local market. But nationwide average, not going be amazing performance in residential real estate, but that because of the fiscal dominant environment, that it's going to kind of levitate longer than people think and that you you can work that out through time rather than price. So there's there's two main types of corrections that can happen. Obviously, you you can get over your skis, you can come back down in price, or you can get over your skis, and you can go sideways. And you can chop along sideways in three years, five years, seven years.

甚至可能以低于其他资产类别的速度缓慢上升，这本质上是另一种时间换空间的修正方式。当人们对比房价与工资图表时，发现差距过大就断言必须崩盘——但实际上，可能是房价横盘而名义工资随通胀上涨，五年后两者差距自然缩小。

You could even go sideways to up, but at a slower rate than other asset classes. So it's another way. And that's a kind of a way of correcting over time. And, you know, when you look at charts like residential real estate prices compared to wages, and they say, well, the this delta got really big. It has to collapse.

在通缩性崩盘情境下情况会不同，但在财政主导环境中发生这种情况的门槛要高得多。过去两三年我一直持横盘观点，实际通胀调整后也基本如此。考虑到维护成本、保险费用以及抵押贷款支出等因素，目前全国平均水平的住宅地产并非我最看好的市场。嗯。

It's like, well, it could be the prices come down, or it could be the prices go sideways and and nominal wages keep going up and Right. With inflation. I mean, they're not necessarily, like, actual wage increases, but just with with inflation. And they kinda meet in the middle five years from now. And that's been more my camp because if you have a more disinflationary or deflationary bust, that's one thing.

（最终结论）因此综合考虑维护成本、保险费用以及抵押贷款等持有成本，当前全国平均水平的房地产并非我最看好的投资标的。嗯。

The the hurdle for that happening under a fiscally dominant environment is just much higher. So for two, three years now, I've been in the sideways real estate camp, and that's you know, we've been in the sideways to up process or, like, inflation adjusted has been roughly sideways. I think that's probably gonna continue. So it's not the you know, when you factor in maintenance, when you factor in insurance, when you factor in if you do buy it on mortgage, the expense of doing so Mhmm. Real estate's not my favorite nationwide average market right now.

当然。

Sure.

但这不同于说我认为它会直接崩溃或怎样。

But that's different than saying that I expect it to just, you know, crash or anything.

没错。正如你一直说的，你完全正确，没有什么能阻挡这列火车。我很想以积极的调调结束。但说实话，林恩，我对我们国家目前的状况感到非常焦虑，因为我们如此分裂，我认为很大程度上源于许多人怀有的经济怨恨。我的意思是，这不是导致我们分裂、两极化的唯一原因，但对年轻人来说，他们确实感到被远远抛在后面，我认为这滋生了那些寻求政治解决方案的阵营，有时会寻找承诺最多免费福利的候选人，对吧？

Right. And as you've been saying, you've been totally right, nothing stops this train. I would love to end this on a positive note. And I have to be honest, Lynn, like, I have been feeling just really nervous about just where we're at as a nation because we're so divided, and a lot of that I do think comes from the economic resentment that so many people feel. I mean, it's not the only thing that's leading to our division, our polarization, but certainly for young people, they have felt so left behind, And I think that that just breeds these teams that are looking for a political answer and sometimes looking for candidates that are going to promise you the most free things, right?

我只是对我们当前的分裂状态感到忧心。你有什么想传达的？因为当

I just worry about where we're at given how divided we've become. What's your message? Because when

我

I

想到你时，你总是那么鼓舞人心。你是白手起家的。你自学投资。我们最初采访中你的整个背景故事，我经常回想你所创造的一切。你在分析每个资产类别时都令人叹服，而且你已经投资多年了。

think about you, you're so inspiring. You are self made. You taught yourself how to invest. I mean, your whole backstory from our original interview, I think about it a lot and what you've created. And you're just incredible when it comes to analyzing every single asset class, and you've been investing for years now.

我觉得普通人有时似乎准备放弃。他们不知道该做什么，不知道该转向哪里。但你让一切看起来都有可能。那么对于那些对现状感到更悲观、对社会走向及未来几年经济前景持看跌态度的人，你有什么想说的？

I feel like the average person sometimes feels like they're just ready to give up. They don't know what to do. They don't know what to turn to. But you make it seem like it is possible. So what is your message to people that maybe are in the camp of feeling more bearish, more more bearish about, like, the sentiment, this is where society's at, and and where they're gonna be economically in a couple years?

所以我认为这很难。我的意思是，承认当前环境艰难是可以的，毕竟并非所有环境的难易程度都相同。对许多人来说，现在无疑是困难模式。我的一条建议可能是：人们容易陷入那种永远在线的陷阱，因为太容易沉浸并连接到网络上发生的一切，然后就被吸进去了。虽然网络在我们生活中所占的比重显然比过去大得多，但它终究不是真实生活。

So I think it is hard. I mean, I think it's it's okay to acknowledge that it is a hard environment, and not every, you know, not every environment's as hard or easy as other ones. This is certainly, I think, hard mode right now for a lot of people. Probably one of my pieces of advice would be the the trap that we people can fall into is kind of that perpetually online trap where, because it's so easy to get dialed in and connected to everything that's happening online, people can then just kind of get sucked into it. And online is it's obviously a bigger share of our lives than it was a long time ago, but it's also not real life.

确实。

True.

网络上的我们，基本上是被剥离了面对面时的共情能力和其他社交线索的版本。是的。我认为那未必是人们的真实面貌。更何况我们处在一个连机器人都能操纵舆论的世界里。

Online is, like, basically the version of us that then has, like, our in in person, like, enter empathy and other social cues stripped away. Yes. And that's not who necessarily people are, I think. And then, of course, like, we're in a world where, like, bots can manipulate sentiment.

而且它们确实在这么做。

And they do.

没错。它们能够也确实会随着发展倾向不同的叙事。我认为最重要的是要自我审视：我是否陷入了某种循环？人们可能陷入各种循环。最关键的是不要让自己陷入绝望，或者像有些人那样认为毫无希望而沉沦下去。

Yeah. They they can and do lean into different narratives as they go. And I think the number one thing is to kinda check yourself and say, am I am I falling into, like, a loop here? And there's there's different loops people can fall into. And I think that's the number one thing is don't kind of black pill yourself or, you know, the like, when people kind of say think there's no hope or they kind of go down that.

我认为应该退后一步，循序渐进，看看你能在自己的周边生活和本地社区中做出哪些改变。要知道，我们的父母、祖辈和曾祖辈——对他们而言，这个世界也常常显得毫无希望。想想二战时期的世界在他们眼中是什么样子。

I think the thing is kind of take a step back and just just one step at a time, see what can you change going forward in your more local area, in your own local life. Because, you know, our parents and grandparents and great grandparents, I mean, the world often seemed hopeless to them. Imagine what the world seemed like during World War two.

是啊。

Yeah.

而且，根据我对历史的了解来判断，我宁愿选择这个时代而非那个时代。是的，所以还好。至少我们没有处于最糟糕的时期。

And, I'd rather I'd you know, judging from what I know from history, I'd rather pick this time than that time. Yeah. So it's okay. We're at least we're not in the worst. Yeah.

历史上确实有些时期——比如中世纪——绝不会是我向往的时代。虽然可能存在某些比现在更好的小片段，但如果你必须选择在全球某个时间点出生，你会冒险不选择现代这个环境吗？

There there were periods of time I mean, the Middle Ages would not not be on my high list for times to be. I mean, it's kinda it's one of those things that gets there's little pockets that might be better than now, and I think there are. But if you kinda just especially when you say, okay. Not necessarily in The United States, but globally. If you if you just had to be born somewhere in the world at a given time frame, would you would you take the risk of not being born in the modern era, like, in in this environment?

我可能不会冒这个险。因此我认为应该提醒自己保持感恩：虽然存在许多现实问题，特别是那些更隐性的社会结构问题，它们比战争更难具象化。二战的问题显而易见，但如今...

I I probably would not. So I think that's kind of the gratitude to remind yourself with is that is that there are a lot of real problems, especially kind of the softer problems, the social fabric, the things that are harder than literally like, they're harder to kind of point to than a war. Yeah. World War two is not hard to explain what the problem was. Mhmm.

如今的社会脱节、网络叙事漩涡等问题确实存在。但关键是要记住这些并非全部，现实生活依然美好，机遇仍然众多，我们需要主动把握。

Here, the kind of the social disconnection, the the online, the, you know, the the the narrative kind of flows people can get into. But I think the main thing is remind yourself that's not everything. There is still real life. Things, you know, are still pretty good, and there still are a lot of opportunities. And we just have to pursue them.

我最近在网上提到过'极端语境'的概念：当你看到任何统计数字时——无论这个指标现在看起来多糟糕——都要追问其背景。

Another thing I kind of mentioned online recently is the idea of kind of radical context, which is you can always see a statistic. You know, any like, there's a whole any number of infinite statistics. People can say, you know, this metric is at this level now, and it sounds horrible. But then always kind of ask yourself, what is the context? Yeah.

这个指标五年前、十年前、二三十年前是什么样子？有些可能比你想象的更恶化，但...

What did that look like five years ago, ten years ago, twenty years ago, thirty years ago? Mhmm. What did that metric look like? Some of them will be getting worse than you think. Mhmm.

有些并没有那么糟，甚至比十年前更好。我们必须训练自己避免陷入绝望或愤怒的循环——虽然不同人倾向不同，比如我虽不易愤怒，但可能会沮丧地摊手说'不知该如何是好'。

Some of them were not as bad as you think. Some of them were literally better than they were ten years ago. And I think we have to kind of train ourselves to not fall into these, either despair loops loops or anger loops. You know, people might be prone to different it's easy to fall. Like like, I don't really I'm not really prone to anger, but I might be prone to, like, kind of put my hands up and say, I don't know what you I don't know what we're doing here.

哦，就像那个巫师梗图吗？

Oh, like that meme with the wizard guy?

对。对。对。邓布利多。这有点像是我陷入的循环。

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Dumbledore. That's kinda that's kinda my loop that I Yeah.

我就像，我不知道你们在干什么。我不想参与其中。我认为关键是要不断尝试远离这些绝望循环、愤怒循环或部落主义群体，看看我们能做些什么让周围的事情比昨天稍微好一点。

Fall into. And I'm like, I don't know what you guys are doing. I don't I don't wanna be part of it, though. And I think the main thing is just to constantly try to step away from falling into these either despair loops or anger loops or tribalism groups and seeing what we can do to make things around us just slightly better than they were yesterday.

这真是个很棒的信息。事情没有看起来那么糟。你最近发过‘去接触大自然’，对吧？别太紧张。我们周围有很多厄运，但总有希望。

That is such a good message. It's not as bad as it seems. You recently posted, go touch grass, okay? Don't stress out. There's so much doom around us, but there's always hope.

你真的给了很多人很多知识和希望。非常感谢你的工作。大家请访问lynnaldon..com，订阅你精彩的通讯。Lynn，能亲自见到你真是莫大的荣幸。谢谢你加入我。

And you have really given a lot of people so much knowledge and hope. Thank you so much for your work. Everyone, please go to lynnaldon..com, subscribe to your amazing newsletter. Lynn, it's just such an honor to have you in person. Thanks for joining me.

谢谢邀请。

Thanks for having me.

非常感谢收看本期《Coin Stories》。请确保订阅节目，以免错过新剧集。如果可以，请开启通知并给我们好评。它们真的能帮助节目自然增长新听众。我们还有免费的每周通讯。

Thank you so much for checking out this episode of Coin Stories. Make sure you're subscribed to the show so you don't miss any new episodes. And if you can, turn on those notifications and leave us a positive review. They really help the show grow organically with new listeners. We have a free weekly newsletter.

您可以在newsblock.substack.com上注册。本节目仅用于教育和娱乐目的，不应被视为正式投资建议，您应始终自行进行研究。我随时欢迎反馈和嘉宾推荐，请随时通过info@talkingbitcoin.com联系我。下次见。

You can sign up at the newsblock.substack.com. This show is for educational and entertainment purposes only. Nothing should constitute as official investment advice, and you should always do your own research. I'm always open to feedback and guest suggestions, so please feel free to reach out at info@talkingbitcoin.com. I'll see you next time.