We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP615: Current Market Conditions w/ Richard Duncan

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to TIP. On today's episode, I'm joined by Richard Duncan. Richard is the author of the popular book, The Money Revolution, How to Finance the Next American Century. Richard is one of our go-to guests when discussing current market conditions, as he has experienced working with the World Bank in the IMF. During this episode, we cover how our modern-day economy is structured after the U.S. dropped the gold standard in 1971,

Starting point is 00:00:26 how the credit environment has developed since 2020, why Richard foresees a recession and interest rate cuts in 2024, the primary drivers of credit growth and its massive importance in our modern-day economy, economic indicators that investors need to monitor, where the U.S. is at in the AI race, and much more. This episode is packed with insights on where current market conditions sit today, so I hope you enjoy it. Celebrating 10 years and more than 150 million downloads.

Starting point is 00:00:59 You are listening to the Investors Podcast Network. Since 2014, we studied the financial markets and read the books that influence self-made billionaires the most. We keep you informed and prepared for the unexpected. Now, for your host, Clay Fink. Welcome to the Investors Podcast. I'm your host, Clay Fink. And today I am so excited to welcome back Richard Duncan. Richard, welcome back to the show.

Starting point is 00:01:32 Clay, thank you for having me back again. It's a real pleasure. Well, Richard, your book, The Money Revolution, has just been so instrumental in my understanding of our current financial system and how exactly we got to where we are today. It's been over a year since you've been on our show. So I think an update is very long overdue. For those in our audience who missed your previous episode on the show that really discusses a lot of your book and a lot of what's happening in our economy today, how about you give us an idea of the overall premise of, the buck. The overall premise of the book is that our economic system changed in a very fundamental ways back in 1971 when dollars ceased to be backed by gold. Up until that time, the economy worked in a certain way, the way that it had for really more than 100 years under the Brettonwood

Starting point is 00:02:25 system and the gold standard before that. And afterwards, the economy now works in a very different way. And it's really important for everyone, the general public, investors, and policymaking, to understand how the economy works now because it's not the way they were taught at university. And it has very important implications for our future because the way it works now has created a situation that is potentially very dangerous if we don't manage the economy correctly. But on the other hand, it also presents extraordinary opportunities if we make the most of the new way that it does work now. So here's the story.

Starting point is 00:02:59 When dollars had to be backed by gold, that constrained the economy in a number of ways. For example, the Fed was not free to create as much money as it pleased the way that it can do now. The Fed had to hold gold to back all of the dollars that it issued. So that constrained how many dollars the Fed could create. Now, a second and very important change is that when dollars were backed by gold, that meant that the United States had to keep its trade, international trade, in balance. And that's because if the U.S. had a big trade deficit, that it would have to pay for, for its trade deficit by sending its gold overseas to other countries. And that would shrink the U.S.

Starting point is 00:03:39 gold supply. Gold was money. So that meant the money supply would contract. And with the money supply contracting sharply, the economy would go into severe recession or depression. And of course, that couldn't be tolerated. So it was very important that trade within countries had to balance. And up until the Bretton Wood system broke down, the U.S. did have a trade balance. It was invalid. We did not have large trade deficits. But after the Brettonwood system broke down, it didn't take the U.S. very long to discover that it could start running very large trade deficits with other countries, initially Japan and Germany. And it didn't have to pay for the trade deficits with gold anymore. It could just pay with paper dollars or treasury bonds denominated in paper dollars. And there

Starting point is 00:04:22 was no limit as to how many of those the U.S. government could create. So by the mid-1980s, the U.S. trade deficit had grown to just an unprecedented size of 3.5% of GDP, and it just kept growing after that. By 2006, it had reached 6% of GDP. And the cumulative trade deficit, since Bretton Woods broke down, cumulative deficit actually on the current account has been $15 trillion. The United States is about $15 trillion worth of goods from the rest of the world over and above what the rest of the world is bought from the United States. Now, why is this important? It's important because when the U.S. started buying things from countries with very low wages, like it does. Now, China and Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, this was extremely disinflationary. It drove down the cost

Starting point is 00:05:15 of manufactured goods. And it also put downward pressure on wages because instead of hiring Americans, corporations built factories overseas and hired Chinese people working initially for, you know, $5 a day. More now, but in many parts of the world, you can still hire people for less than $10 a day. Tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people. So this was very disinflationary, and it drove down inflation rate in the U.S. In the early 1980s, the inflation was in the double digits. And interest rates were in the double digits. But as globalization kicked in on the back of the growing U.S. trade deficit, this put downward pressure on inflation. Inflation fell and fell. And so interest rates could fall and fall. And this is the reason we didn't have inflation for so long. Between 2000 and the time when COVID started, the inflation was extremely low. Occasionally it dipped into deflation. And the Fed had a hard time of making the inflation rate hit its 2% target. It tended to be below 2% very often. And this is because of globalization. And globalization happened because after the breakdown of Bretton Woods, the U.S. could run big trade deficits for the first time.

Starting point is 00:06:23 This was a very important change, something that had not been possible before. So with very low inflation and very low interest rates, this meant that the government could borrow much more money than it had been able to do in the past, could borrow more money and spend that money and stimulate the U.S. economy without creating high rates of inflation. And if necessary, the Fed could even print some money and buy some of those government bonds to help finance the government's big trade deficits, again, without. causing high rates of inflation. Whereas before, say in the 1960s, if the government sent a lot of money, then because it was a relatively closed U.S. economy, not a global economy, trade had to balance.

Starting point is 00:07:06 If the government overstimulated the economy by spending too much, that would result in full employment, which would tend to push up wages. And it would also result in full capacity utilization. All the U.S. steel factories would be working at full capacity. All the car plants would be working at full capacity. All the industries would be working at full capacity. And prices would tend to go up. And that would lead between prices going up and wages going up. This led to inflationary upward spirals. But once we started buying things from Chinese workers, then that wasn't a problem. The government could run the economy hot by having large budget deficits and a lot of government spending without causing high rates of inflation. So these were all very fundamental changes that

Starting point is 00:07:50 occurred when dollars used to be back by gold. Suddenly the Fed was free to print as much money as it dared, trade no longer balanced. So we had globalization and disinflation and very low inflation and very low interest rates. And the government could rev up the economy with big budget deficits without causing inflation or high interest rates. So this was a fundamental change. And finally, at the same time, total credit started to explode. Not only government debt. debt, but the debt of all the sectors of the economy started expanding. And for instance, the total debt in the United States, and total debt and total credit are two sides of the same coin. One person's debt is another person's asset. So total credit in the U.S. first went through

Starting point is 00:08:31 $1 trillion in 1964. This year is going to go through $100 trillion. So a hundredfold increase in total credit in the United States in, let's say, 60 years. And this credit growth, was so phenomenally strong that it became the main driver of economic growth. I described this as capitalism evolved into creditism. The economy changed in fundamental ways because in the past, under capitalism, the dynamic that drove economic growth at that time was businessmen would invest. Some of them would make a profit. They would accumulate that profit as capital and reinvest. Again, it was investment, saving, investment and saving. That was the, a dynamic that drove economic growth under capitalism. But under the system we have now,

Starting point is 00:09:19 creditism, that's not the way things work anymore. Our economic system is not driven by saving and investment. It's driven by credit creation and consumption and more credit creation and more consumption. And this has been a lot easier than capitalism. This led to much more rapid global economic growth in particular and completely changed our world. Cities like Shanghai would not exist today in their current form. If we, remained on capitalism because China couldn't have run its massive trade surpluses with the U.S. China would still be a very poor developing country as it was when I first saw it in 1986. So that's the premise of the book.

Starting point is 00:09:59 A money revolution got underway when dollars ceased to be backed by gold in 1971. And that has fundamentally changed the way our economic system works. And it's very important for everyone to understand that credit now drives economic growth. And without credit growth, the U.S. goes into recession. And if credit contracts significantly, it goes into a depression. Wonderful. What you said there towards the end was really what stuck out to me when I tuned in to your previous interview is that we no longer live in a world of capitalism.

Starting point is 00:10:34 We now live in a world of creditism. You know, that just really stuck with me because understanding that credit drives our economy today, it's just so, so important. So, you know, that's why I wanted to bring you on to kind of get an update on why it's so important and where we're at today. That's so important, Clay, for everybody to understand this, because if you look at a chart of total credit as far as we can go back, as far as the data goes, the only time credit has contracted was in the 1930s. And we all know what happened then. At that time, we still had a capitalist economy. And during the roaring 20s, there had been a credit boom.

Starting point is 00:11:14 that was really the result of World War I. So much government debt was created in World War I, and the European countries went off the gold standard. They bought a lot of things from the United States. They had to pay for them with gold. So the US got a lot of Europe's gold. The gold supply in the US expanded rapidly. That allowed credit to expand on the back of the gold expansion. And the credit boom created the roaring 20s.

Starting point is 00:11:39 But in 1930, all of the credit created during the roaring 20s couldn't be repaid by the private sector. And the government didn't know what to do. They were a laissez-faire capitalist. They had no clue what to do. They had to back their dollars with gold. So the Fed couldn't create a lot of money and support the economy through quantitative easing, for instance. And so they just stepped back and let market forces work. And market forces worked. The debtors couldn't repay their debts. They defaulted. So the lenders who had lent the money, they all failed. A third of all U.S. banks failed. By 1934, the U.S. economy had shrunk by 50 percent, and the unemployment rate was up to 25 percent. And the entire world went into economic collapse, and it ultimately led

Starting point is 00:12:23 to World War II. And that crisis didn't end, the Depression didn't end until 1940, when the U.S. government realized they were about to be in the war and started spending much more radically on military spending. In 1940, the U.S. economy was still. smaller than it was in 1929. But once they began the massive government spending on the war, that stimulated the economy and the Fed started printing a lot of money to finance the government's borrowing during the war. And by the end of the war, the U.S. economy was five years later in 1945. The U.S. economy was twice as large as it was in 1940. So it was only the massive government stimulus that we got because of the war that ended the Great Depression.

Starting point is 00:13:08 So fast forward, up to 2008, we had a big credit boom. And in 2008, the private sector, the households and other corporations couldn't repay the debt they'd borrowed. And I don't know how well you remember that, but I remember it all very clearly. The banks all started to fail. And Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac failed. And had the government done what it did in 1930, just stepped back and let market forces work, we would have replayed the Great Depression and perhaps now be in World War III. But instead, because we were no longer on the Brenton Woods gold-backed monetary system, they had a whole lot of new options that they didn't have in 1930.

Starting point is 00:13:46 First, the Fed created roughly $5 trillion. First, the government started running multi-trillion. The government ran budget deficits of more than $1 trillion for four years in a row, 2008, 9, 10, 11, maybe into 12. And the Fed created a lot of money through quantitative easing, through three rounds of quantitative easing. They created trillions of dollars that helped finance all of the government borrowing. And all of government spending and the Fed financed government spending, that prevented the economy from collapsing. It prevented credit from contracting.

Starting point is 00:14:20 They pumped the money into the economy. So all of the banks didn't fail. And we didn't fall into a great depression. And despite all of the government spending and all of the money creation by the Fed, we didn't have high rates of inflation either after 2008. The highest the inflation rate went was 3.8 percent, I think in 2011. And by early 2015, we actually had deflation again. So, you know, which was better?

Starting point is 00:14:47 The Great Depression Policy approach, let's call that the austerity approach, a decade of depression and despair followed by a world war, or what's happened since 2008, where the economy just kept growing and, you know, everything has really turned out really very well, but in comparison. And then we got to things were rolling right along and COVID struck. And this time, things were different. The government had two examples to choose from. The 1930 strategy of allowing the economy to collapse or the 2008 strategy of keeping the bubble inflated.

Starting point is 00:15:23 So, of course, they kept the bubble inflated again in 2020. This time, truly massive government borrowing. In just three months, in the second quarter of 2020, the government borrowed $2.9 trillion. in 90 days. Government debt increased by $2.9 trillion in 90 days in the second quarter of 2020. And the Fed financed that by creating roughly the same amount of money at the same time. And so they sent out stimulus checks to the Americans. So even though they were locked at home, they still had money to spend. The problem this time was that we also had global supply chain bottlenecks that caused very big problems. Factories in China were shut down and shipping was disrupted.

Starting point is 00:16:05 And suddenly the Americans had a lot of money to spend, but they couldn't go out and spend it on services. So they went out, so they ordered through Amazon or over the internet. They ordered iPads, telephones, computers, and running machines, all of which are made in China. But because of the global supply chain bottlenecks, they couldn't get to the U.S. And so that pushed up inflation, that contributed to higher inflation. And then as soon as those pressures abate, Russia invades Ukraine. And suddenly that causes a spike in global oil. prices and the spike in wheat prices and other commodity prices. So we got another bout of disruptions

Starting point is 00:16:41 to the global supply chains. So between the disruptions and the global supply chains, combined with all of the money that the Americans had to spend from their stimulus checks, this led to high rates of inflation this time, whereas it didn't after 2008. So fast forward now to February 2024, and we didn't collapse into a Great Depression, but we did have at one point, CPI was up to 9.1% I think in June 2020 at the peak. But now that's gone. Inflation is back down most recently to 3.1%. And so we have a higher level of government debt and we live through some unpleasant inflation for a couple of years, but we didn't collapse into a Great Depression and the global economy didn't implode. And here we are. And everything, the unemployment rate is near the lowest

Starting point is 00:17:32 has ever been in my lifetime, the economy is growing quite rapidly, and the U.S. economy is performing very well relative to most of the other countries in the world. So again, things have worked out very well relative to the way it could have turned out if they had adopted the austerity approach again and allowed the economy to collapse. We wouldn't have had inflation. We would have had massive deflation and massive unemployment. Let's zoom in and talk about how credit has developed the past few years since credit is so essential in how our economy operates. So in 2020, the floodgates of credit really just opened up. The Fed printed around $5 trillion to help backstop the financial system. Interest rates were lower to zero, which really encourages people to borrow

Starting point is 00:18:18 and create even more credit in the economy, you know, businesses, individuals. So given that our economy is dependent on this perpetual credit expansion. Paint a picture for how the credit environment has developed ever since 2020. So there are really only five or six big sectors of the U.S. economy when it comes to who's borrowing the money. The government is the largest, followed by the household sector, and then the corporate sector, and then the GSEs, the government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and then the rest of the financial sector, the banks, and then non-corporate businesses. So if you look at those six and you can see who's borrowing the money. And if you project out how much those sectors are likely to borrow in the future, then you'll have a good

Starting point is 00:19:11 idea of how much credit is going to grow by if you can project correctly. So since the crisis, government borrowing has been by far the biggest. driver of credit growth, ranging from a third to a half most of the time. Most of the credit, most years, the increase in government borrowing has accounted from a third to a half of the increase in all borrowing. But more recently, over the last two years, the rate of credit growth of the other sectors has all started to come down now from relatively high levels. It's all the credit growth has been slowing for all the sectors except the government. But over the last 12 months, government borrowing is now accounted for 55% of total credit growth. And in the most recent quarter,

Starting point is 00:19:57 which was, we have data for the third quarter of 2023, government borrowing actually counted for more than all the credit growth because some of the other sectors actually had a contraction in their credit growth. So we've become very dependent on government borrowing and government spending to keep credit expanding. And if you look back to 1950, every time total credit, This is all the credit in the U.S., the credit of all the sectors that I've been discussing, or the total debt, whichever way you prefer to look at it. Anytime total credit grows by less than 2% adjusted for inflation, in other words, nominal credit growth less the CPI rate, if it's less than 2%, U.S. goes into recession. That happened nine times between 1950 and 2009.

Starting point is 00:20:43 Every time credit grew by less than 2%, the U.S. went into recession. Now, it's been less consistent since 2009, in part because quantitative easing has become such an important part of driving the economy and other factors. So I always refer to the 2% recession threshold. And what we've seen is that the credit is actually growing less than 2% when adjusted for inflation, even with all of this government borrowing and spending. And looking ahead, the total credit number now in the U.S. is something like $97 trillion. It's very hard to make it grow by 2% adjusted. for inflation. If you assume that the inflation rate is going to be 2%, and we need 2% adjusted for inflation, that means we need total credit growth of 4%. Well, 4% on 97 is roughly $4 trillion a

Starting point is 00:21:30 year. So who's going to borrow $4 trillion? The government's going to borrow maybe 1.5, 1.6, who's going to borrow the rest? It doesn't look like we're going to hit the 2% recession threshold again anytime soon. And for that reason, I still continue to believe that it is likely the U.S. will go into recession because credit growth is too weak to drive the economy. And on top of that, the Fed has been removing liquidity through quantitative tightening by destroying $95 billion a month, which is not helpful at all either. So I've, like most other economists, I expected the U.S. to go into recession last year. It didn't. I'm still going to stick to my guns and say, I do think it probably will go under recession this year, although there aren't many signs thus

Starting point is 00:22:12 far that it's headed that way. Let's take a quick break and hear from today. Sponsors. All right. I want you guys to imagine spending three days in Oslo at the height of the summer. You got long days of daylight, incredible food, floating saunas on the Oslo Fjord, and every conversation you have is with people who are actually shaping the future. That's what the Oslo Freedom Forum is. From June 1st through the 3rd, 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum is entering its 18th year bringing together activists, technologists, journalists, investors, and builders from all over the world, many of them operating on the front lines of history. This is where you hear firsthand stories from people using Bitcoin to survive currency collapse, using AI to expose human rights abuses,

Starting point is 00:22:57 and building technology under censorship and authoritarian pressures. These aren't abstract ideas. These are tools real people are using right now. You'll be in the room with about 2,000 extraordinary individuals, dissidents, founders, philanthropists, policymakers, the kind of people you don't just listen to, but end up having dinner with. Over three days, you'll experience powerful mainstage talks, hands-on workshops on freedom tech, and financial sovereignty, immersive art installations, and conversations that continue long after the sessions end.

Starting point is 00:23:30 And it's all happening in Oslo in June. If this sounds like your kind of room, well, you're in luck because you can attend in person. Standard and patron passes are available at Osloof Freedom Forum.com, with patron passes offering deep access, private events, and small group time with the speakers. The Oslo Freedom Forum isn't just a conference, it's a place where ideas meet reality and where the future is being built by people living it.

Starting point is 00:23:56 If you run a business, you've probably had the same thought lately. How do we make AI useful in the real world? Because the upside is huge, but guessing your way into it is a risky move. With NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today. NetSuite is the number one AI Cloud ERP, trusted by over 43. It pulls your financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM into one unified system. And that connected data is what makes your AI smarter. It can automate routine work, surface actionable insights, and help you cut costs while

Starting point is 00:24:31 making fast AI-powered decisions with confidence. And now with the Netsuite AI connector, you can use the AI of your choice to connect directly to your real business data. This isn't some add-on, it's AI built into the system that runs your business. And whether your company does millions or even hundreds of millions, NetSuite helps you stay ahead. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get their free business guide, Dymistifying AI at netsuite.com slash study. The guide is free to you at netsuite.com slash study.

Starting point is 00:25:04 NetSuite.com slash study. When I started my own side business, it suddenly felt like I had to become 10 different people overnight wearing many different hats. Starting something from scratch can feel exciting, but also incredibly overwhelming and lonely. That's why having the right tools matters. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from brands just getting started to household names. It gives you everything you need in one place, from inventory to payments to analytics. So you're not juggling a bunch of different platforms.

Starting point is 00:25:44 You can build a beautiful online store with hundreds of ready-to-use templates, and Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions and even enhance your product photography. Plus, if you ever get stuck, they've got award-winning 24-7 customer support. Start your business today with the industry's best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing... Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopper. Shopify.com slash WSB.

Starting point is 00:26:14 Go to Shopify.com slash WSB. That's Shopify.com slash WSB. All right. Back to the show. You brought up that interesting statistic that looked at data from the 1950s to 2009. There was nine times where real credit growth grew by less than 2%, which ended up leading to a recession. And I feel like this word recession is just used all the time.

Starting point is 00:26:40 and not enough people talk about what it actually is and what it means for you and me as people that operate in this economy. Can you define what a recession is and what the implications of a recession are in the economy? Sure. So under normal circumstances, the economy tends to grow. That means the output that is created by the United States grows every year. In part, it grows because the population grows. and in part it grows because productivity improves. But during a recession, the economy actually becomes smaller. In other words, it produces less than it did the year before.

Starting point is 00:27:18 And when that happens, it tends to cause prices to fall. And falling prices are not welcome because it makes it more difficult for companies to earn enough money to pay interest on their debt, for instance, or to make new investments. And that kind of environment, companies tend to fire their workers. And when you start firing your workers, then the workers have less income. So they spend less. And when they spend less, the factories produce less. And it tends to spiral down for a while.

Starting point is 00:27:50 Normally these things, the recessions tend to be relatively mild. But sometimes they can become very severe and turn into a depression like we had in the 1930s. And so these days, and for some decades now, the government manages. is the economy at the macro level to make sure that the recessions are mild or avoid it altogether. And they do that by increasing government spending, running larger budget deficits, and also that is all facilitated by the Fed creating money to help finance those budget deficits at low interest rates. Or the Fed also tries to control the economy. If it goes into recession this year, for instance, which I think it will, the Fed will reduce interest rates.

Starting point is 00:28:31 And lower interest rates will help stimulate the economy because then businesses can borrow it at a lower rate of interest and become more profitable. And households can also borrow at a lower rate of interest and for instance, making it more affordable for them to buy homes or even to spend more on their credit cards. So this is how the government attempts to manage the economy at the macro level and by making sure the recessions don't get out of hand. And so many people don't like to hear this, the idea of the government managing the economy, is very disturbing to a lot of people, but everyone still needs to be aware of the fact. This is the reality. If you don't understand the government is managing the economy at the macro level, you may do some very foolish things. So it's very important to try to anticipate what the government is going to do next and how that's going to impact credit growth and liquidity and how that will impact the financial markets in the economy. You mentioned, I'm going to reference that statistics you said again, where real credit grows by less than 2%, we tend to enter a recession. But there's many interesting things happening today

Starting point is 00:29:35 that, you know, make today different than a year's past. I think that statistic ends right before 2010, 2011 time frame where we did see some credit contraction. But you mentioned that QE was likely a big reason that we didn't enter a recession during that time period. And then another interesting thing about, you know, 2024 is we just had this huge boost in credit and then the stimulus checks. in 2020 and 2021. And that's sort of helped the economy sort of trudge along and continue to head upwards in 2023. We had GDP growth in 2023 after, I believe, a contraction in 2022.

Starting point is 00:30:12 So I'd like to hear more of your insights on why you foresee a recession in 2024. Well, so I think the reason that we didn't have a recession in 2023 is that the amount of stimulus that the government hit the economy with during 2020, 2021. in 2022 was so enormous. It was on a scale almost as if the country were on a war footing. It was kind of government spending that you would experience during a major war. When World War II happened, of course, the government pulled out all the stops and spent as much as it had to make sure that we won the war. And that increased government debt very radically. But all of that increase in government debt during the war, that continued to stimulate the U.S. economy for the next

Starting point is 00:30:58 20 years onto the early 1960s. And I think what we're experiencing now is something similar. There was so much in stimulus. The total government debt just over the last four years has gone up by $11 trillion by a third in four years. So this is such massive stimulus that I think the economy is still benefiting from that. And just consider the boom that happened in the stock market And across all the financial asset classes, after the initial downturn, in late 2020, 21 and 22, the stock market soar, right? People became very much wealthier, anyone who had financial assets. And money was just so freely available.

Starting point is 00:31:43 We had the SPAC frenzy. And so companies could borrow, could obtain money so easily that this must have given a significant jolt to the tech industry, for instance. Companies like Open AI would have had such easy access to money that it would have funded them and perhaps facilitated some of the major technological breakthroughs that we're now experiencing on the AI front. So this, I think this explains why the economy has been as strong as it has been. And in fact, it may explain why the economy will continue to be strong this year. And who knows for how many more years. We'll see. I'm also interested to get your take on the

Starting point is 00:32:23 primary drivers of credit growth. You had mentioned the sectors of the economy that drive the overall credit growth, but you know, you have all these private corporations, private individuals that think about things like interest rates and then the government can sort of do a lot of what it wants to do since it has a bit of access to the money printer. So other than interest rates, are there any other primary drivers of credit growth? Interest rates, but also, of course, as we've discuss the government borrowing itself is such an important component of the total overall total, as I've said, between a third and a half of all credit growth is government. So therefore, it's very important to keep an eye on politics and on, for instance, the push toward

Starting point is 00:33:10 austerity that we often hear about, because everyone needs to be aware that if they become very alarmed about the size of the U.S. government debt and therefore decide that we must reduce the government debt, we must reduce government spending and reduce government borrowing, then that's going to cause total credit growth to contract. And when total credit growth starts to contract, the U.S. will go into a severe recession and corporations will become unprofitable. They will fire workers. Unemployment will go up very sharply. Consumers will spend less. And the GDP will shrink. The economy will become significantly smaller. So austerity, rather than bringing down the level of debt to GDP, Instead of making the level of debt to GDP go down, it will actually make the level of debt to GDP go up because it will cause the GDP to shrink so significantly.

Starting point is 00:34:01 So that's why austerity is such a bad idea. Let's keep it simple. Austerity is equal to death. You have enough austerity you're going to kill the economy and result in a new depression that is not going to be something relatively mild, as we frequently see. significant austerity, any attempt to bring down government debt in a meaningful way, would bring about a new Great Depression like the 1930s with consequences that would be catastrophic for us not only in terms of personal suffering through unemployment, but also on a geopolitical scale. If the U.S. economy goes into a depression, then the geopolitical consequences of that could also be

Starting point is 00:34:44 catastrophic. We perhaps could no longer afford to maintain military bases abroad, which would embolden our enemies to take advantage of the situation. For instance, encouraging China to take over Taiwan, which would be a disaster in its own because all the computer chips that we rely on are made in Taiwan. And this is particularly problematic now that we are in this AI revolution that is changing the world. Whoever develops artificial general intelligence first, first, wins. And if we lose Taiwan, then we're going to lose the AI race. And then that means the future belongs to China and will be relegated to a secondary or worse status in the world at China's mercy effectively. So we're talking about if we have significant austerity, this is, we're looking at

Starting point is 00:35:35 the consequences would be something like a fall of Rome scenario. You know, when Rome fell, there was a recovery. It just took a thousand years. So austerity is death. That's what we need to avoid at all cost. Yes, is it a problem that the U.S. government has increased, if government debt has now increased to $34 trillion? Yes, that's unfortunate. It's unfortunate that we have to pay a lot of interest on that government debt.

Starting point is 00:36:00 But the alternative would be cataclysmic if it had not increased to that level. And so the question is how do we get out of this situation? And I believe the best way we get out of this situation where we have high levels of government debt is for the U.S. government to borrow and fund a very large-scale investment program in new industries and new technologies through joint venture projects with the private sector. For instance, I believe that it would be very easy for the U.S. government over the next 10 years, for instance, to fund a $5 trillion or even a $10 trillion investment program with the government borrowing the money and setting up joint venture companies with the private sector.

Starting point is 00:36:42 picking out the 10,000 most promising American entrepreneurs and scientists and setting up joint venture companies with them, funding these joint venture companies lavishly with borrowed money, with the Fed perhaps financing some of this borrowed money as required, and setting up joint venture companies in targeting industries such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, nanotechnology, green energies, neurosciences, and all of the other advanced industries that you can Imagine. That sort of investment would turbocharge U.S. economic growth. So the GDP, rather than growing one or two or three percent as it has recently, we would start seeing economic growth rates of, you know, five to six, seven percent a year. And the economy would grow rapidly enough so that

Starting point is 00:37:32 the ratio of government debt to GDP would shrink. Meanwhile, these investments would produce technological miracles and medical marvels. If we make that sort of investment, which I believe we can easily afford to do. Seriously, we could cure all the diseases. We could expand life expectancy by potentially decades. And we could shore up U.S. national security so that we don't have China nipping at our heels now as they're the second global superpower

Starting point is 00:37:59 on the verge of becoming the first global superpower. These sorts of investments would finance the next American century. So that was the name of my book. The Money Revolution, the subtitle was How to Finance the Next American Century. And this is how to do that by making large investments in new industries and technologies. And then when some of these joint venture companies do invent a cancer vaccine or a cure for Alzheimer's disease, lists them on NASDAQ for a trillion dollars with the government keeping, because the government has a 60% equity stake in these companies, the government reaps massive benefits

Starting point is 00:38:35 from the listing of these companies when they make technological breakthroughs. And not only would it bring down the total level of government debt relative to GDP, there's a real possibility we could pay off all the national debt through this sort of investment program. So that's what I mean by our economic system has evolved from capitalism and decreditism. Creditism, we need to understand how it works and manage it. It is being managed. The question is it going to be managed well or is it managed badly? If it's managed badly and we have austerity and allow creditism, allow credit to begin to contract

Starting point is 00:39:06 through government austerity, then credit will contract and we'll contract and we'll collapse into depression because we have a very big credit bubble. And creditism must have credit growth to survive. But keeping that in mind, since the economic system must have credit growth to survive, let's have the government borrow the credit and invest it in new industries and technologies. That's the opportunity that we have under this new economic system of ours. So those are the choices. Austerity is death. Investment is prosperity. I'm advocating the investment. I think you're absolutely right that austerity is not a path that the government wants to go down. And I do want to touch on AI a little bit later,

Starting point is 00:39:45 but I had a few more questions on kind of what's happening today. Many have forecasted that the Fed is going to be cutting interest rates in 2024 in light of falling inflation. CPI inflation topped out around 9.1% in June 2022. And now it's all the way down to 3.1%. But that's still above their overall target of 2% inflation, but it's on its way down to potentially heading that direction. So I'm curious if you anticipate rate cuts in 2024. I do anticipate rate cuts in 2024. Yes, as you mentioned, the inflation rate has been coming down. It looks like it's going to continue to come down. The most recent CPI number was a little higher than people had expected or hoped. But the Fed focuses on personal consumption expenditure price

Starting point is 00:40:35 index, the PCE price index, and it also looks at the core PCE price index. It's comprised of three parts, that index. One is core goods inflation, and we're actually seeing deflation there. Goods prices are falling. So we have deflation in the goods prices. The second component is housing services, and there we still have high rates, something like 5.6% annual inflation. But the way this is calculated, it's almost certain that this is going to fall very sharply because there's a big lag in how they account for the decline in REMs. So that's going to fall as well. And the remainder is core services inflation excluding housing. And that too has been coming down significantly and is likely to probably continue to come down. So if you just take the last six months of the monthly

Starting point is 00:41:28 data and annualize it, we're now actually at a rate of inflation that's below the Fed. 2% inflation target. So it does seem very likely that the Fed will cut interest rates this year. The Fed itself has said they expect to cut rates three times. Until recently, the market was expecting the Fed would cut rates six times, but now they've dialed that back a bit. Yes, it's very likely that we will see rate cuts this year, unless there can always be unexpected developments. For instance, if we have a war or anything else that once again disrupts global supply chains, then we'll get high rates of inflation again, and then all bets will be off. But hopefully that won't happen.

Starting point is 00:42:04 It probably won't happen. So we're looking at rate cuts ahead. And that should create a favorable environment for the stock market. And it might be interesting to discuss at this point how the Fed actually controls interest rates because it doesn't control them the way it used to in the past. The Fed created so much money through quantitative easing that there's just more supply of dollars than there is demand for dollars. So remember when the federal fund rate was 0%, the 10-year government bond yield,

Starting point is 00:42:32 dropped as low as 60 basis points. And between 2020 and 2022, the government 10-year government bond yield ranged between 60 basis points and 2%. Now, when the Fed decided it was time to raise interest rates, how did they do that? How do they make the interest rates? How do they make the federal funds rate go up? They did that by actually paying interest on bank reserves. When the Fed creates money, it buys a government bond, usually. And it pays for that government bond by making a deposit into the reserve account of the bank that it bought the bond from. All the banks have bank accounts of the Fed. They're called reserve accounts. So when the Fed buys a government bond from a bank, it pays for it by making a deposit into the reserve account of that bank at the Fed. And that creates bank reserve. The money that the

Starting point is 00:43:28 Fed is depositing is not money that already existed in the past. The act of making that deposit creates the bank reserves. It creates money. Bank reserves are one of the components of the money supply. Bank reserves plus currency and circulation. That is base money. That is the base money supply. So the Fed creates money. That's how they create money by creating bank reserves from thin air. They created so many bank reserves that the banks didn't have any place to invest all of these bank reserves without pushing interest rates down toward 0%. Now, in order to make the interest rates go up, the Fed had to actually pay interest to the banks on the bank reserves, something that they had never done before 2008. They were not legally allowed to do this before 2008. But now the Fed is paying 5.4% interest on bank reserves.

Starting point is 00:44:19 And so the banks won't lend that money to anyone else at anything less than 5.4%. Because why would they? The Fed's going to pay them 5.4% on their bank reserves. So they're not going to lend money to anybody else at less than 5.4%. Now, when the Fed wants to begin lowering interest rates, what is how it does that is instead of paying 5.4% on bank reserves, it will reduce that to 5%. And interest rates will come down because the Fed's no longer holding them up. and later it would reduce it to four and a half percent, and then four percent, maybe three and a half

Starting point is 00:44:52 percent. The only thing that is holding interest rates up now is the Fed paying interest on them. So many people are worried that the government budget deficits are so large that the government's going to have to borrow a lot of money and that's going to push up interest rates. In this environment, we're in now with so much excess liquidity created by quantitative easing, that's not the case, that's not the way it works at all. If the government borrows money, that does take money out of the money. the financial system. But as soon as the government spends the money that it borrows, that re-injects the money right back into the financial system. So there's no reduction in liquidity

Starting point is 00:45:25 because of the government borrowing, as long as the government spends the money that it borrows. Government budget deficits in this environment are not going to drain liquidity and push up interest rates the way they did in the old days. They used to call it crowding out. Right now, we have so much excess liquidity that the government borrows and then it spends. And so it just re-injects the money into the financial system. The only thing that is going to change the level of liquidity is quantitative tightening. And that's what the Fed's doing now. The Fed is destroying these bank reserves through quantitative tightening. Quantitative tightening is the opposite of quantitative easing. I just explained how quantitative easing works. The Fed buys a government bond and it pays for that

Starting point is 00:46:06 bond by making a deposit into the reserve account of the bank from which you bought the bond, thereby creating bank reserves and creating liquidity, creating money. Now the opposite is occurring. The Fed is, in essence, to make a long story short, is essentially selling government bonds that is bought in the past. And when it does, it sells them to a bank. And when the bank buys the bond, the Fed takes payment by debiting the reserve account of that bank.

Starting point is 00:46:32 It takes money back out of the reserve account. And so there's less money in bank reserves, which means there's less money in the financial economy, in the financial system altogether. And that drains that, and that destroys the liquidity. When the Fed sells a bond and takes the money back from the bank, it doesn't keep this money in some safe somewhere. The money just disappears when the Fed takes it back. Just in the same way that the Fed creates money out of thin air, when the Fed does the opposite through quantitative tightening, it destroys the money goes back, disappears back into thin air. And so the government budget deficits are not going to drain liquidity and drive up interest rates as long as we have so much excess liquidity.

Starting point is 00:47:12 The Fed has to pay interest on bank reserves to keep the interest rates as high as they are now. And it's going to start paying less, and so interest rates are going to fall. But if quantitative tightening continues, right now, the Fed is destroying roughly $95 billion a month. That adds up over a year. That's something like $1.1 trillion. So right now, the amount of excess liquidity is roughly, my estimate is, I would say, $4 trillion. They're not going to destroy all of that excess liquidity. The last time they tried quantitative tightening was in late 2019, and they went too far.

Starting point is 00:47:47 They destroyed too much liquidity. This caused a little crisis in the repo market, and they had to relaunch quantitative easing more or less turned around on a dime. It went from quantitative tightening to quantitative easing again in September 2019 to ensure that there was sufficient financial liquidity in the markets. So this time, the Fed is not going to continue with quantitative tightening for too long. In fact, we're already beginning to hear the Fed talking about when is going to start winding down quantitative tightening. They will probably tell us more at the next Fed meeting. So it looks

Starting point is 00:48:18 like they're going to start reducing the amount of quantitative tightening sometime later this year and probably end it all together sometime in the first half of next year, if not earlier, so that they don't drain too much liquidity from the financial markets. And every time the Fed reduces the amount of quantitative tightening that is doing, the stock market will welcome that. Just like every time the Fed reduces the federal funds rate, the stock market will welcome that. So looking ahead, it looks like we're going to have rate cuts and less quantitative tightening, both creating a positive environment for the stock market and investors. Of course, something bad could always pop up.

Starting point is 00:48:55 But at least that seems to be positive. Very positive, in fact. If interest rates come down, we'll see tech stocks rally even more in particular, and that riskier asset classes will tend to perform the best when interest rates are coming down. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. No, it's not your imagination. Risk and regulation are ramping up, and customers now expect proof of security just to do business. That's why VANTA is a game changer.

Starting point is 00:49:22 Vanta automates your compliance process and brings compliance, risk, and customer trust together on one AI-powered platform. So whether you're prepping for a SOC 2 or running an enterprise GRC program, Vanta keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Instead of chasing spreadsheets and screenshots, Vanta gives you continuous automation across more than 35 security and privacy frameworks. Companies like Ramp and Riter spend 82% less time on audits with Vanta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time for growth. If I were running a startup or scaling a team today, this is exactly the type of platform I'd want in place. Get started at Vanta.com slash billionaires.

Starting point is 00:50:06 That's vanta.com slash billionaires. Ever wanted to explore the world of online trading, but haven't dared try? The futures market is more active now than ever before, and plus 500 futures is the perfect place to start. Plus 500 gives you access to a wide range of instruments, the S&P 500, NASDAQ, Bitcoin, gas, and much more. Explore equity indices, energy, metals, 4X, crypto, and beyond. With a simple and intuitive platform, you can trade from anywhere, right from your phone. Deposit with a minimum of $100 and experience the fast, accessible futures trading you've been waiting for. See a trading opportunity, you'll be able to trade it in just two clicks once your account is open.

Starting point is 00:50:52 Not sure if you're ready, not a problem. Plus 500 gives you an unlimited, risk-free demo account with charts and analytic tools for you to practice on. With over 20 years of experience, Plus 500 is your gateway to the markets. Visit Plus500.com to learn more. Trading in futures involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone. Not all applicants will qualify. Plus 500, it's trading with a plus. Billion dollar investors don't typically park their cash in high-yield savings accounts.

Starting point is 00:51:26 Instead, they often use one of the premier passive income strategies for institutional investors. private credit. Now, the same passive income strategy is available to investors of all sizes thanks to the Fundrise income fund, which has more than $600 million invested in a 7.97% distribution rate. With traditional savings yields falling, it's no wonder private credit has grown to be a trillion dollar asset class in the last few years. Visit fundrise.com slash WSB to invest in the fundrise income fund in just minutes. Fund's total return in 2025 was 8%, and the average annual total return since inception is 7.8%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, current distribution rate as of 1231, 2025.

Starting point is 00:52:15 Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. This and other information can be found in the income funds prospectus at fundrise.com slash income. This is a paid advertisement. All right. Back to the show. Yeah, there is that idea that's been going around that large budget deficits are going to drive up interest rates, slow down the economy, but that seems to not be the case. Now, we broke off the gold standard in 1971, and you shared that statistic earlier that sort of blows your mind when you think about it, a 100x increase in credit over a 60-year time period. So our money

Starting point is 00:52:55 supply is just exploded ever since, you know, we're no longer constrained by the gold standard in money creation and credit creation. And this has really offered a host of benefits to society. And it's brought about a lot of abundance in many different ways. But it also hasn't come without its negative effects. I'm curious to hear your take on the primary drawbacks of our modern day economy of creditism and this dramatic rise of credit and the money supply in our economy. Okay, yes.

Starting point is 00:53:27 But first of all, just let me reiterate that while, there are problems with they are so much less severe than the problems we would have faced if credit had not expanded like this or heaven forbid we allow credit to contract. So with that on the table, there are two, I think very important concerns. One is our new economic system, creditism requires credit growth to expand. You know, we have nearly in 2024 total credit will exceed $100 trillion in the U.S. And if credit contracts, then we'll go into a severe recession or depression. And that's a very big problem. So that's a problem. That's one of the negative consequences of this new economic system. We have a credit bubble. If we don't keep it inflating,

Starting point is 00:54:09 it pops. And if it pops, it effectively, you know, the consequences could be catastrophic. So that's a very big concern. That's why we have to keep the credit expanding, which we can easily afford to do, by the way, because for instance, U.S. government debt to GDP is roughly 120%. Japanese government debt is 260%. So Japan hit our level of government debt to GDP a quarter of a century ago, and they're still going strong. So we don't need to worry about suddenly hitting some sort of, you know, real debt ceiling limit. We just need to worry about the Congress imposed unrealistic debt ceiling limit, which they're opposing on the economy. So we can definitely keep the credit growing if we have with the right government policies. And so that's one worry is that we won't. do it. The politics will intercede and that there'll be a big demand for austerity and that ruins everything and pops the bubble and we go into crisis. That's the big drawback of this creditism is that we don't keep the credit growing, even though we easily can do. Now, a second drawback of this system is that it has allowed China to emerge as a grave national security

Starting point is 00:55:19 threat to the United States. China's economy has evolved from being a very poor developing country in 1986 when I first moved to Asia to being, you know, the second most powerful country in the world. And they have a plan. They have a plan to invest in new industries and new technologies on an extremely aggressive scale. They've written all about it. And that's what they're doing. And they're on the verge of overtaking us technologically. And if they do, then they will overtake us economically and militarily as well. So that wouldn't have happened under capitalism. That's only something that has happened as a result of creditism. Now, I think the politicians on both sides of the aisle, understand that China is a threat and they're taking measures to

Starting point is 00:56:00 try to rein China in or slow China's growth. And at the same time, they've also taken important steps in the direction that I'm advocating. For instance, the Chips and Science Act passed a couple of years ago allocates $52 billion of investment in semiconductor factories to be built in the United States, along with something like another $280 billion to be invested in the other high-tech industries that I mentioned earlier. So that was a big step forward. It's just not enough. And we also had the Inflation Reduction Act, which seems now set to result in people

Starting point is 00:56:37 say up to $3 trillion of new investments in over the next decade in green energies and technologies like that. So those are important steps forward for the United States to invest in new industry. and technologies, the problem is just not enough. Even if you look at the entire Chips and Science Act, I think it was it $380 billion, 360 billion. You know, we need to be doing that every year, not, you know, not once every five years, because China is going to be doing that every year. And if they do, and we don't, they win and we lose. Is that simple? So that's the second problem with this creditism system. It's allowed the rise of China to become a severe threat to U.S.

Starting point is 00:57:16 National Security and everything we hold dear. Yeah, I would also argue that the way our modern day economy is set up, you know, it really creates this situation where you have winners and losers at the individual level. I'd argue probably globally, but I know certainly in the U.S. where you have this wealth divide and income inequality. And I think this creditism, you know, the way it's designed, it really favors asset owners. So the top 1%, the top 5% that own a lot of the assets like real estate, the stock market, they just get wealthier and wealthier over time as their incomes continue to go up.

Starting point is 00:57:53 And the assets that they own continue to go up as well. And then when you look at what the bottom 50% of people own, they tend to get left behind as their incomes don't keep up with inflation. And then they really don't own much, if any, assets such as investing in the stock market and such. Yes, but I do think you should also add that while the income inequality gap is increasing. The overall, even the level of well-being of the people at the bottom end tends to be higher than it was before. So it's not as though they are becoming absolutely poorer. They're just not becoming richer at the same rate as the rich. I tend to avoid talking about taxes because a lot of people don't want to be taxed. And I don't want to alienate those people.

Starting point is 00:58:39 But if you are concerned about growing income inequality, and if your listeners are concerned about income, growing income inequality, which is undeniable and extreme, then you should all vote for politicians who will raise taxes on the wealthiest people in the country. That's the easy solution. We don't want to stop the pie from getting larger. We want the pie to keep growing. If you want to prevent it from all going to the wealthiest, then we just make the growing, we just redistribute the growing pie. There's a very easy solution. Just vote for politicians, demand that billionaires pay taxes. you know, one might argue that anyone making more than a billion dollars a year in income could pay 50% interest on everything above a billion dollars a year income. I don't think they would

Starting point is 00:59:23 suffer as a consequence personally. But that's not a policy I'm going to advocate. But, you know, anyone who's concerned with income inequality, there's a very simple solution. If you all vote for politicians who vote, you know, who promise to tax the wealthiest people, this problem goes away and everybody gets richer. So in being a student of history and reading books like yours, it sure seems that the rules of the game of investing have really changed since 1971 when we broke off the gold standard. And one could maybe also argue that the rules have also changed since the great financial

Starting point is 01:00:00 crisis when the Fed turned on the QE spigot and started implementing that QE on a massive scale. So from an investor's perspective, I'm curious if you're. would agree with this assessment. And I'm also curious what you believe are the key things for investors to sort of watch in this modern day economy. Okay. So what investors need to watch is they need to keep in mind that credit growth drives economic growth. So you need to monitor how the credit is growing now and try to forecast how it's going to grow in the future because that's going to have a major impact on economic growth. Secondly, they need to keep an eye on liquidity because liquidity tends to be one of the most important factor is driving asset prices. So what I mean by liquidity is when the Fed

Starting point is 01:00:43 creates money through quantitative easing, it tends to push up asset prices, as we saw immediately after 2020 and also after 2008. And when the Fed is destroying money through quantitative tightening, as it's doing now, you know, better be careful. If that goes on too long, is going to result in insufficient liquidity causing asset prices to fall. I think we've avoided that so far, since quantitative tightening has been going on. Quantitative tightening, I sometimes describe it this way. It's like imagine a ballroom full of investors and they're having a party and everything's fine. The Fed begins quantitative tightening, which is essentially sucking air out of the ballroom. But first, no one notices, but after a while when it becomes difficult to breathe, they notice and they all run for the exits and then you have a financial crash.

Starting point is 01:01:31 So we're getting to the point now where the investors are just beginning to notice a little bit that it's getting a bit stuffy in here. And the feds notice that also. So they're likely to stop quantitative tightening before too much longer. But if they don't, it's going to be a big problem. So keep an eye on liquidity and credit growth, but also it's very important to keep an eye on politics because if the austerity side wins, then it's going to be a disaster both for the economy and for the financial markets.

Starting point is 01:01:58 You know, I try not to be political in my views. I think what I advocate generally benefits everyone, and I try to avoid all discussion of politics whenever possible. But I am confused by why so many Republicans are demanding austerity, because it actually flies in the face of their most successful economic policy in my lifetime. The Republicans were most successful under President Reagan. And under President Reagan, U.S. government ran huge budget deficits. And during his eight years in office, I believe U.S. government did.

Starting point is 01:02:28 it tripled. So President Reagan understood that the United States needed government, needed to invest in the military, and he did. And that created the biggest economic boom of my lifetime. And this was the greatest, most successful policy. I believe the Republican Party is experienced during my lifetime under President Reagan. And now they are advocating the exact opposite. Rather than having the government invest in our country, they're advocating making the government spend much less, which is the opposite of Reaganomics. It would have catastrophic consequences. So I think they should rethink that. And go back to the policies of their favorite president, President Reagan, do what Reagan did. And that's my advice to both political parties. What they need to do

Starting point is 01:03:10 is to run on a campaign of investing in new industries and new technologies and invest on such a great scale that it will supercharge the economy and make everyone much better off. Because we're not investing on the scale that the government is not investing in new industries and technologies on the scale that they did as recently as the 1960s, for instance. They're much half the level that they did in the past. And I was very fortunate in being able to, I was in a congressman saw my book. And since I spoke with you last, invited me to come to Washington and explain the ideas in the money revolution to some of his colleagues. So just about a year ago, I went to Washington and at a policy dinner told 15 members of the House Ways and Means Committee, more or less what I've done.

Starting point is 01:03:51 been telling you today that we need to invest. And if we do, we'll thrive and prosper. And the money revolution makes it possible for us to do that because the economy doesn't work the way it did in your great-grandfather's day. When dollars were backed by gold, there's been a money revolution that creates extraordinary opportunities if we just take advantage of them. Now, I had said that I did want to get back to AI here. And the last third of your book is actually committed to what you've been talking about with the need to reinvest. our economy. And from here, I'd like to get your perspective on, you know, where the U.S. is at in this sort of AI race. Because I think many people sort of naturally believe that the

Starting point is 01:04:33 U.S. is far in lead with, you know, companies like Nvidia, Tesla and all the other magnificent seven names. How do you view where they're at globally? It does appear now that the U.S. has really developed a lead. It wasn't clear that was the case when I wrote the money revolution, I started writing that book in 2018, 2019. It was more less finished by the time COVID started and delayed because of COVID. It wasn't clear that the U.S. was in the lead. But now as a result of these generative AI models, it certainly appears that things are accelerating almost exponentially. But I think AI is now a macroeconomic event. So over the last six months, I've made videos on each of the magnificent seven. And it truly is

Starting point is 01:05:17 extraordinary what they are doing. Invida dominates the chips that AI runs on. And between OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, Bard, Gemini, and all the other models, they're growing so rapidly. And the people at the center of this revolution are telling us, you know, if you think GPT4 is impressive, wait two years, it's going to be 10 times more powerful. So China doesn't have the chips. I don't think they, I mean, I think they are investing a lot of money in AI, but they're not on par with where the U.S. tech is now. And that could be fatal to them in that given the lead we have and the exponential growth that is occurring, hopefully we are going to win this race in a very clear and undeniable way. Because if we lose it, it's going to mean that we'll be dominated by

Starting point is 01:06:12 China. It will be China's world. I'm also curious if you have a view on this. It seems like China is sort of going through a crisis of their own right now. Their stock market has really been dropping in 2024, as it did in 2023 as well. Are they making policy errors and, you know, looking at the bigger view of how we need this perpetual credit expansion or how do you view what's happening in China? I view what's happening in China with alarm for a number of reasons. It is true that their economy is facing very serious problems now. I've lived in Asia since 19, 86 most of the time. And I watched the big economic boom here. I was in Thailand during the first half of the 90s. And at first, 1990, 91, 92, 93, everything was great. But by late 94, 95, 96, it was

Starting point is 01:07:02 clearly a bubble. And that bubble blew up in 1997. There was too much credit, too many condos that nobody could afford to move into, too much excess capacity of everything. And the bubble popped, and Thailand stock market fell 95% in dollar terms, and the economy shrank by 10% in 1998. And something similar happened in Malaysia, Indonesia, and Korea. And at that time, I expected the same thing was going to happen to China. That was a quarter of a century ago. China's bubble didn't pop. They've just kept it growing year after year, and that has radically improved the standard of living in

Starting point is 01:07:38 China. China has much better infrastructure than the United States does. And as I've said, they've become the second global superpower now and may overtake us if we're not very careful. But they've reached the point where they probably have twice as many condos as there are people to live in them. So they can't keep growing through the property sector anymore. And that's as much as 25% of the economy, perhaps, when you take everything into consideration. Also, the rest of the world is sick of absorbing more and more Chinese exports every year. And so they're beginning to put up trade tariffs against Chinese goods.

Starting point is 01:08:08 And that's creating very big problems for China. So China is struggling because it's very difficult to keep this credit bubble growing. But at the same time, Xi Jinping has really reasserted the Communist Party's control over the economy and seems that there's no one who can stop him from doing whatever he chooses to do. So if he's certainly choosing to invest very aggressively in new industries and technologies, but if he one day decides to attack Taiwan, then no one can stop him as far as I can tell. although I am not the world's greatest authority on China or Chinese politics, but so it seems to me. And if China does attack Taiwan, then the United States will defend Taiwan, and there will be a very

Starting point is 01:08:50 terrible war. And in that war, I foresee the real possibility of China occupying very large parts of Southeast Asia, because not much divides China from Thailand, for instance, just a thin strip of Laos and Burma. They now have bridges connecting southern China to northern Thailand. It wouldn't take Chinese tanks long to get here. So if a war were to occur, it would be very difficult to keep China out of Southeast Asia, and no telling how far that would reach, essentially as far as their tanks could drive. And this would be catastrophic for me personally and for this part of the world. And of course, the war would be terrible for everyone.

Starting point is 01:09:31 We wouldn't have access to Taiwan semiconductors. And so the whole AI dominance that we currently enjoy would be threatened. and it's a real problem. That's why I think it's so important for the United States to continue to support Ukraine because if an authoritarian state is allowed to win in taking over this neighbor democracy, then it will embolden China to try to do the same in Taiwan with catastrophic consequences. So just as it would have been better to stop Hitler in the 30s instead of appeasing him, you know, it would have been far cheaper to have stopped Hitler early.

Starting point is 01:10:07 You know, we're in the same sort of situation now. It's cheaper to stop the aggression now by showing dictators that they can't conquer their neighbors than it is to allow them to conquer them and to keep the conquest expanding until it becomes a world war. So, yes, I am worried about China. China is a real threat to U.S. national security and its economy, though, is also facing dangerous. And as China slows, they're going to try to pump more cheap products into the U.S., which will be in globally, which will be deflationary. And another reason, inflation is likely to come down,

Starting point is 01:10:41 and interest rates are likely to come down. We already have trade tariffs on Chinese goods to keep out their cheap products. Otherwise, prices in the U.S. would be cheaper than they are now. Tying back to your points on AI, I'm also curious if funding really needs to come from the government, because I think about how these magnificent seven companies, a lot of them have just massive balance sheets.

Starting point is 01:11:05 Like, think about all the capital that out, Apple has put into buybacks, for example, you know, that could have been reinvested back into things like AI and artificial intelligence and such. And, you know, with Tesla and Nvidia being a more recent rise. So is it a problem of needing capital or is it really just a matter of time of, you know, letting these top tier engineers continue to innovate and really just a matter of, you know, letting them do what they need to do? Well, rather than focusing just on AI, let's talk about fusion. Is there enough private capital going into fusion? You know, how long is it going to take to develop fusion?

Starting point is 01:11:40 Fusion would solve all of our problems. Free, you know, low-cost fusion. I mean, if we can bring it down, then we have an infinite supply of non-polluting energy, which will allow us to run all of our AI and cure, you know, with AI, creating all the miracles, it will create. So there's not much money going into from the private sector going into developing fusion. The government could devote a trillion dollars into developing fusion over the next five years without causing a ripple in the financial markets. And so rather than getting

Starting point is 01:12:10 fusion 25 years from now, we could get it seven or 10 years from now. And that would be a complete game changer. So that's just one example. There may seem to be a lot of money in AI at the moment, and it is relative to what was the case in the past. But if you look across the whole spectrum of high-tech industries, the government could fund this on such a greater scale that it would produce results in such a quicker time frame. Now, I'm all for curing all the diseases and extending life expectancy as quickly as possible. So I'm advocating, you know, rather than austerity, the alternative is Florette. So I'm in the, I'm in the Flore at camp. Let's put the pedal to the metal and invest in these new industries and induce a new technological revolution that makes us all

Starting point is 01:12:54 healthier and wealthier soon rather than later and keep the credit growing so that the economy doesn't implode. Richard, I really appreciate you joining me on the show. You just have so many interesting takes that I just find so valuable and think the audience will as well. Before I let you go, how about you give the audience, you know, let them know how they can get in touch with you, get in touch with your book, and any other resources you'd like to share with them. Well, great. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my views with your very large audience. But as I mentioned, my business is MacroWatch.

Starting point is 01:13:28 A MacroWatch can be found on my website, which is Richard Duncanneconomics.com. That's Richard Duncanneconomics.com. Every couple of weeks, I make a new video with a PowerPoint presentation describing what's happening in the global economy and how that's likely to impact asset prices. So your listeners can sign up to my free blog there. They can also contact me through that website and send me messages. So take a look at Richard Duncan Economics.com. Amazing.

Starting point is 01:13:55 I'll be sure to get all that linked in the show notes. Thank you so much, Richard. Thank you, Clay. Thank you for listening to TIP. Make sure to follow We Study Billionaires on your favorite podcast app and never miss out on episodes. To access our show notes, transcripts or courses, go to theinvestorspodcast.com. This show is for entertainment purposes only, before making any decision consult a professional. This show is copyrighted by the Investors Podcast Network.

Starting point is 01:14:24 Written permission must be granted before syndication or rebroadcast. casting.

We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP615: Current Market Conditions w/ Richard Duncan

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.