Name: 雷-達里奧將改變一代人的崩潰 (Ray Dalio: The Collapse That Will Change A Generation)
Uploaded: 2025-07-29T18:12:29.000Z
Duration: 14 min 35 s

反身代名詞

Instead of invading Iran like everybody expected, the US has limited itself to some airstrikes.

美國沒有像大家期待的那樣入侵伊朗，而是僅限於一些空襲。

程度副詞

Just like everybody was waiting for the United States to send troops to Iran, it seems like that's not happening.

就像每個人都在等待美國出兵伊朗一樣，但似乎這並沒有發生。

Because invading Iran would have devastating consequences on the entire US economy.

因為入侵伊朗會給整個美國經濟帶來毀滅性的後果。

It had the potential to crack down the entire economy.

And it might sound like I'm exaggerating and I'm trying to scare you, but if you look at the facts and the numbers, you will jump to the exact same conclusion.

聽起來好像我在誇大其詞，想嚇唬你們，但如果你們看看事實和數字，就會得出完全相同的結論。

So here in this video, I'm going to simply give you the facts and the numbers.

是以，在這段視頻中，我將簡單地向大家介紹事實和數字。

And I want you by the end of this video to tell me your opinion.

我希望你們在視頻結束前告訴我你們的看法。

The first and the most important question is that how much will the war actually cost the United States.

第一個也是最重要的問題是，這場戰爭究竟會給美國帶來多少損失。

Because at the end of the day, everything goes back to money.

因為歸根結底，一切都是為了錢。

The United States has the world's largest economy with 30 trillion dollar GDP, while the Iranian economy is valued at 400 billion dollars.

美國擁有世界上最大的經濟體，國內生產總值達 30 萬億美元，而伊朗的經濟總量僅為 4000 億美元。

United States has some of the most sophisticated weapons in the world.

美國擁有世界上最尖端的武器。

It's not easy to operate some of those fighter jets, or send some of those rockets, or use some of those missiles.

操作一些戰鬥機、發射一些火箭或使用一些飛彈並不容易。

However, at the end of the day, it doesn't actually matter how much the war is going to cost.

不過，說到底，戰爭要花多少錢其實並不重要。

Because the United States will borrow that money anyways.

因為美國無論如何都會借到這筆錢。

If you pull out the budget of the US, you will find out that there is a 2 trillion dollar deficit.

如果你拿出美國的預算，就會發現有 2 萬億美元的赤字。

So, whether the war will cost 2 trillion dollars, 3 trillion dollars like in the case of Iraq, it doesn't matter.

是以，戰爭是否會花費 2 萬億美元，還是像伊拉克那樣花費 3 萬億美元，這都不重要。

無論如何，這筆錢都是借來的。

So, the question we should be asking ourselves is that how much will it cost the government to borrow that money.

是以，我們應該問自己的問題是，政府借這筆錢要花多少錢。

When the United States invaded Iraq, the balance sheet or the budget of the government was at around 157 billion dollars.

美國入侵伊拉克時，政府的資產負債表或預算約為 1 570 億美元。

Some governments do not have that kind of government budget.

有些政府沒有這樣的政府預算。

But in 2025, the deficit is around 2.1 trillion dollars.

但在 2025 年，赤字約為 2.1 萬億美元。

Which means that borrowing money this year is going to be much more difficult than it has ever been in the history of the United States.

這意味著今年的借貸將比美國曆史上任何時候都更加困難。

So, to find out the true cost of the war, we have to find out at what interest rate the government is going to borrow money.

是以，要想知道戰爭的真實成本，我們就必須知道政府借錢的利率是多少。

So, for example, if you are borrowing 1 trillion dollars and the interest rate is 1%, then the cost of that debt is 10 billion dollars.

是以，舉例來說，如果你要借 1 萬億美元，利率是 1%，那麼這筆債務的成本就是 100 億美元。

However, if we raise the interest rate from 1% to 10%, suddenly the cost of borrowing a trillion dollars will be 100 billion dollars.

但是，如果我們把利率從 1%提高到 10%，借一萬億美元的成本就突然變成了 1,000 億美元。

So, whether the world will cost 3 trillion dollars or 4 trillion dollars, the most important number that we should be paying attention to is the interest rate.

是以，無論世界將花費 3 萬億美元還是 4 萬億美元，我們最應該關注的數字是利率。

這就是我們擁有債券市場的原因。

But the main question is that who is going to determine at what interest rate the government will borrow that money.

但主要問題是，由誰來決定政府以何種利率借貸這筆錢。

The yields are determined by the supply and demand in the market.

If a lot of people, on one side, if a lot of investors would want to loan their money to the government of the United States, then the government has the option to offer lower interest rates.

如果很多人，一方面，如果很多投資者想把錢借給美國政府，那麼政府就可以選擇提供較低的利率。

But on the other side, when there aren't many people who want to loan their money to the government, then the government will start offering higher and higher interest rates to attract people to invest in the United States debt.

但另一方面，當沒有多少人願意把錢借給政府時，政府就會開始提供越來越高的利率，以吸引人們投資美債。

Investors on the other side will evaluate the risks.

另一方的投資者將對風險進行評估。

If the risks are too high, they will demand a higher interest rate.

如果風險太高，他們就會要求更高的利率。

If the risks are too low, then they will accept a much lower interest rate.

如果風險太低，他們就會接受低得多的利率。

Take two governments, the US government that has the most powerful economy in the world and Venezuela that is on the brink of catastrophe.

就拿兩個政府來說，一個是擁有世界上最強大經濟實力的美國政府，另一個是正處於災難邊緣的委內瑞拉政府。

If you are loaning your money to Venezuela, you are going to demand a very high interest rate.

如果你把錢借給委內瑞拉，你會要求很高的利息。

Just like if you are investing in a very risky crypto project, you will demand a 20% interest rate.

就像如果你投資一個風險很大的加密項目，你會要求 20% 的利率。

But if you are investing in the S&P 500 that has been growing consistently at around 8 to 10% for the last 100 years, you are not expecting more than 10%.

但是，如果你投資的是標準普爾 500 指數，而該指數在過去 100 年中一直以 8%至 10%左右的速度增長，那麼你的期望值就不會超過 10%。

If you are investing in a very solid company such as apple that has a very great track record and has proven products in the market, you are not expecting apple to grow by 2000% within the next year.

如果你投資的是一家非常穩健的公司，比如蘋果，它有非常好的業績記錄，並且有經過市場驗證的產品，那麼你就不會期望蘋果在未來一年內增長 2000%。

But if you are investing in Palantir that is a very risky business, yes, they have actually proven to be a really great company, they have developed some of the most sophisticated technologies, but they don't have a very good track record of growing a solid company.

但是，如果你投資 Palantir，那風險就非常大了。是的，事實證明他們是一家非常偉大的公司，他們開發了一些最尖端的技術，但他們並沒有發展成為一家穩健公司的良好記錄。

That's why investing in Palantir makes you expect a much higher return than if you are investing in apple.

這就是為什麼投資 Palantir 會比投資蘋果獲得更高回報的原因。

The same thing works when you are buying debt.

同樣的道理也適用於購買債務。

So how risky loaning your money to the US government?

那麼，把錢借給美國政府的風險有多大？

Well, technically or theoretically, it should be risk-free.

那麼，從技術或理論上講，它應該是無風險的。

That's why US government bonds are considered in the market as risk-free investments.

這就是為什麼美國政府債券在市場上被視為無風險投資品。

However, a lot has changed in the last 30 to 40 years.

然而，在過去的三四十年裡，情況發生了很大變化。

The United States has exhausted its ability to borrow money.

Even though that it has a GDP of 30 trillion dollars on one side, its debt is much bigger than its economy, which makes its ability to pay off its interest rate or its debts much more difficult.

儘管它的 GDP 有 30 萬億美元，但它的債務卻遠遠大於其經濟規模，這使得它的還本付息或償還債務的能力變得更加困難。

So even though on one side, the United States has the most powerful military in the world, it has the largest economy in the world, 160 million taxpayers, the world's largest corporations, the world's biggest number of millionaires, it's still risky to loan your money to the US government because it has so much debt.

是以，儘管美國擁有世界上最強大的軍隊、世界上最大的經濟體、1.6 億納稅人、世界上最大的公司、世界上最多的百萬富翁，但把錢借給美國政府仍然是有風險的，因為美國政府負債累累。

Secondly, the government is running a 2 trillion dollar deficit just to meet its domestic needs.

其次，僅僅為了滿足國內需求，政府就出現了 2 萬億美元的赤字。

If you are not making enough money from your taxes to cover social security, medicare, and cover your basic expenses, do you think people are going to trust you with the extra money that you are going to borrow to invade another country that isn't really a big priority right now.

如果你從稅收中賺到的錢不足以支付社會保險、醫療保險和基本開銷，你認為人們會信任你，把多餘的錢借給你去侵略另一個現在並不重要的國家嗎？

And that's why investors are very worried should they loan their money to the US government or not.

這就是為什麼投資者非常擔心他們是否應該把錢借給美國政府。

And that's why, even though the US debt is considered to be a risk-free investment, yields on the US government bonds are much higher than you expect.

這就是為什麼儘管美債被認為是無風險投資，但美國政府債券的收益率卻遠高於你的預期。

Currently, or at the time that I am recording this video, yields are anything between 4% and 5%.

目前，或者說在我錄製這段視頻時，收益率在 4% 到 5% 之間。

Let's compare that to another government, such as Germany.

讓我們將其與德國等其他國家的政府進行比較。

German government bonds or 2-year bonds have a yield of less than 2%.

德國政府債券或 2 年期債券的收益率低於 2%。

Germany does not have the global reserve currency, just like the US.

德國並不像美國一樣擁有全球儲備貨幣。

Germany does not have the world's largest military.

Germany's economy isn't growing as fast as the US economy, so why can't the German government borrow money at a much lower interest rate than the US government?

德國的經濟增長速度不如美國，為什麼德國政府不能以比美國政府低得多的利率借錢呢？

And that's because Germany does not have as much debt as the US.

這是因為德國的債務沒有美國多。

德國的債務與國內生產總值的比率約為 60%。

Germany has been very disciplined with its spending.

德國在支出方面一直很有節制。

It does not waste money on things that it doesn't mean.

它不會把錢浪費在沒有意義的事情上。

It doesn't start wars all across the globe.

它不會在全球範圍內引發戰爭。

And that's why investors are more confident to loan their money to the German government because they know that the German parliament, the German government is very responsible with that money.

這就是為什麼投資者更願意把錢借給德國政府，因為他們知道德國議會、德國政府對這些錢是非常負責任的。

They are not going to overspend and cause massive inflation in Germany that will devalue the euro.

他們不會超支，也不會在德國引發大規模通貨膨脹，導致歐元貶值。

And any kind of massive borrowing has the potential to hike the yields even further.

而任何形式的大規模借貸都有可能進一步提高收益率。

If these yields are going to go let's say to 6% or 7%, suddenly their interest payments on the debt will skyrocket to trillions of dollars.

如果這些收益率上升到 6% 或 7%，那麼他們的債務利息支出就會突然飆升到數萬億美元。

The kind of money that the US government cannot possibly afford.

這種錢是美國政府不可能負擔得起的。

And that's why the government is very cautious.

They know that they don't have the ability to borrow that kind of money right now.

他們知道自己現在沒有能力借到那麼多錢。

Yes, technically or theoretically it's possible.

是的，從技術或理論上講，這是可能的。

But if they are going to increase the yields on the entire bonds, then the interest payments will be so much that the worst-case scenario will happen.

但是，如果他們要提高整個債券的收益率，那麼利息支出就會非常多，最壞的情況就會發生。

That Elon Musk once warned, that the entire budget of the United States will be allocated into paying off the interest on the debt.

埃隆-馬斯克曾警告說，美國的全部預算都將用於償還債務利息。

That's why Ray Dalio, one of the most famous investors also warned the congress that if they continue with their undisciplined spending for another few years, it has the possibility or the chance to break down the bond market.

正因如此，最著名的投資者之一雷-達里奧（Ray Dalio）也警告國會說，如果他們在未來幾年繼續無節制地消費，就有可能或有機會破壞債券市場。

And if the bond market breaks up, then the entire US economy is going to collapse.

如果債券市場崩潰，那麼整個美國經濟都將崩潰。

And unlike the crisis of 2008 where the housing market collapsed, this crisis is going to be very different.

與 2008 年房地產市場崩潰的危機不同，這次危機將截然不同。

Because the bond market is the foundation of the housing market, of the stock market and the entire US economy.

因為債券市場是房地產市場、股票市場和整個美國經濟的基礎。

Which is why you have the CEO of BlackRock, multiple other billionaires.

這就是為什麼會有貝萊德的首席執行官和其他多位億萬富翁。

Even Warren Buffet warned multiple times that if this problem is not going to be fixed, it has the potential to crack down the entire US economy.

就連沃倫-巴菲特（Warren Buffet）也多次警告說，如果這個問題得不到解決，就有可能使整個美國經濟崩潰。

But the biggest problem is that the government has to refinance this debt consistently.

但最大的問題是，政府必須不斷為這些債務再融資。

You hear about this 37 trillion dollars all the time, but it's not like one giant debt.

你經常聽到 37 萬億美元的說法，但這並不是一筆鉅額債務。

That debt could be categorized into multiple types of debts.

The government has 3 month debt, 6 month bonds, 1 year, 2 years and up to 30 years.

政府有 3 個月債券、6 個月債券、1 年債券、2 年債券和長達 30 年的債券。

Short term debt which is up to 1 year represents almost 30% of the entire 37 trillion dollars. 2 year bonds represent 10% while the others 5 to 10 years represent almost a third of the entire debt and the rest is 30 year government bonds.

1 年以內的短期債務幾乎佔整個 37 萬億美元的 30%。2 年期債券佔 10%，其他 5 至 10 年期債券佔整個債務的近三分之一，其餘為 30 年期政府債券。

Another 6 to 7 trillion dollars of that is intra-governmental debt.

其中還有 6 到 7 萬億美元是政府內部債務。

And government still has to pay back that debt.

But it's like one government institution lending to another government institution.

但這就好比一個政府機構借貸給另一個政府機構。

So technically, it's impossible for the government to default on that debt.

是以，從技術上講，政府不可能拖欠債務。

When the government borrowed trillions of dollars back when interest rates were extremely low are now costing the government trillions of dollars.

在利率極低的時候，政府借貸了數萬億美元，而現在政府卻要為此付出數萬億美元的代價。

If the government borrowed 1 trillion dollars in 2020 at 1% interest rate because yields were extremely low.

如果政府在 2020 年以 1%的利率借款 1 萬億美元，因為收益率極低。

When the lockdown happened and countries started closing down their borders, investors got scared and they invested a big chunk of their portfolio into the US government bonds because these are risk-free investments.

當封鎖發生時，各國開始關閉邊境，投資者感到害怕，他們將投資組合的一大部分投資到美國政府債券上，因為這些是無風險投資。