人民币正式突破7.0关口，重返6时代了，你手里的人民币，正在变得越来越值钱。 每当这种时候，就有专家机构出来指明方向了，有人说人民币被严重低估，按购买能力，汇率应该升到1比4才合理。 还有吃下王健林巨额资产的太盟创始人单伟建，他在英国金融时报上写了篇专栏，建议人民币直接升值50%。 美国大投行高盛的模型预测，人民币会升到5字头，就连世界银行也来凑热闹，在中国调研了一圈，回去以后也建议人民币升值。 一时间，人民币大幅升值利好中国，似乎已经成了共识。 这些专家和机构普遍认为，人民币升值对我们至少有3个好处。 一是促进消费，中国家庭存款高达23万亿美元，要是人民币升值50%，就会变成34.5万亿美元，我们的购买力将会大幅提升。 二是能吸引外资进来抄底，助力中国资产企稳反弹。 三是相当于咱们主动削弱出口竞争力，可以减少贸易摩擦。 但事实真的如此吗？我们只要回头看看日本当年的广场协议，就知道这个问题没有那么简单。 时钟拨回到上世纪80年代，当时的日本制造业横行全球，汽车、家电、半导体，美国都被日本按在地上摩擦，美国工人大量失业，对日贸易逆差一年比一年 夸张。 为了扭转局势，美国对日本发起了贸易战，强迫日元升值。 当时的 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the implications of the United States' massive national debt, which is approaching $35 trillion, and the potential strategies proposed by the Trump administration to address trade deficits and debt management, particularly in relation to China, the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt at approximately $750 billion [1][3][5]. Group 1: U.S. Debt and Economic Strategy - The U.S. economy appears strong on the surface but harbors significant vulnerabilities, including a record trade deficit with China projected to exceed $300 billion in 2024 [3][5]. - The Trump administration is considering a new version of the Plaza Accord to manipulate currency values and adjust trade balances, aiming to devalue the dollar to improve export competitiveness [3][5]. - A proposal suggests converting short-term U.S. debt into 100-year zero-coupon bonds, effectively deferring interest payments and potentially harming foreign holders of U.S. debt [5][7]. Group 2: China's Response and Strategy - China holds a substantial amount of U.S. debt, approximately $750 billion, and has been gradually reducing its holdings in favor of diversifying into gold and other assets [7][9]. - The proposed agreements could lead to a significant appreciation of the yuan against the dollar, reminiscent of Japan's experience post-Plaza Accord, which resulted in economic stagnation [7][9]. - Chinese officials have expressed strong opposition to any agreements that would involve debt restructuring or long-term bonds, citing historical precedents and the risks involved [9][10]. Group 3: Global Reactions and Implications - The international community has reacted with skepticism to the proposed strategies, with warnings from European and Japanese officials about potential market instability and the risks of a sell-off in U.S. debt [10][11]. - The article highlights the challenges of implementing a new Plaza Accord in the current geopolitical climate, where U.S.-China tensions complicate multilateral cooperation [10][13]. - The overall sentiment suggests that the U.S. strategy may backfire, leading to a loss of confidence in the dollar and further complicating the global economic landscape [10][13].

Group 1 - The article discusses the structural imbalances in global trade and the concept of the "twin deficits" in the U.S., providing a framework for analyzing potential solutions to these issues [2][8] - It highlights the paradox of Trump's economic policies, which have led to both internal and external imbalances, exacerbating the trade deficit [3][5] - The U.S. current account deficit accounts for 60-70% of the global total, indicating a significant reliance on foreign capital [4][24] Group 2 - The article outlines three potential solutions to the twin deficits: fiscal consolidation, currency depreciation, and adjustments in domestic savings and investment [6][34] - It emphasizes that the U.S. trade deficit is a reflection of domestic savings shortfalls and rising fiscal deficits, with a 1% increase in fiscal deficit correlating to a 0.3-0.5% increase in the current account deficit as a percentage of GDP [5][97] - The historical context of U.S. trade imbalances is provided, noting that the current account deficit has expanded significantly since the 1980s, particularly after the 2008 financial crisis [29][68] Group 3 - The article discusses the implications of the U.S. dollar's status as a reserve currency, which contributes to trade imbalances and the need for the U.S. to maintain a trade deficit to supply dollars globally [41][72] - It mentions that the U.S. trade deficit has not improved despite tariffs imposed during the Trump administration, with the goods trade deficit rising from $790 billion in 2017 to approximately $1.1 trillion in 2023 [37][61] - The article suggests that the structural issues in the U.S. economy, including low savings rates and high consumption, are fundamental causes of the persistent trade deficit [90][97]

Group 1: Economic Impact of U.S. Tariff Policies - The U.S. tariff policies have significantly impacted Japan's automotive industry, with exports of automobiles and parts accounting for approximately one-third of Japan's total exports to the U.S. [2] - In August, Japan's automobile exports to the U.S. fell by 28.4% year-on-year, contributing to a 13.8% decline in total exports to the U.S. [2] - Japan's overall exports have decreased for four consecutive months, indicating a persistent weakness in export performance [2] Group 2: Responses from Japanese Companies - Companies like Mitsubishi and Mazda are reducing exports of low-margin vehicles and are actively seeking markets outside the U.S. to mitigate the impact of tariffs [2] - Some Japanese automakers, such as Toyota, are increasing domestic production capacity in the U.S. and sourcing more parts locally to adapt to the tariff environment [2] Group 3: Concerns from Industry Experts - Experts express concerns that the trend of Japanese manufacturing, particularly in the automotive sector, may accelerate towards the U.S., potentially leading to a decline in domestic production and increased economic pressure [3] - The risk of "hollowing out" the Japanese economy is highlighted if tariffs and trade barriers become permanent [3] - The challenges faced by Japanese companies in the U.S. market are exemplified by Nippon Steel's difficulties with its acquisition of a U.S. steel company, which faced government intervention [4] Group 4: Broader Economic Implications - The ongoing U.S. tariff policies are expected to exert downward pressure on corporate profits in Japan, raising concerns about their impact on capital investment, employment, and consumer spending [5] - The uncertainty surrounding the future direction of U.S. trade policies and their effects on the global economy remains a significant concern for Japanese economic analysts [5]

Core Viewpoint - The relationship between the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury is once again a focal point of power struggle, reminiscent of historical tensions, particularly in light of recent political actions and economic pressures [1][5]. Historical Context - The Federal Reserve was under the control of the Treasury until the "Treasury-Fed Accord" in March 1951, which restored its independence and established the foundation for modern central banking in the U.S. [1][3]. - During World War II, the Fed agreed to keep short-term Treasury bill rates at 3.8% and long-term bond rates at 2.5% to assist in war financing, leading to increased money supply and loss of control over its balance sheet [2]. Recent Developments - Former President Trump announced the dismissal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, citing alleged mortgage fraud, which she has contested in court, potentially impacting the Fed's independence [1][4]. - Trump's nomination of Stephen Milan as a new Fed governor and the ongoing investigation by the Justice Department into Cook's allegations highlight the current political pressures on the Fed [1][4]. Proposed Economic Strategies - Milan's "Mar-a-Lago Agreement" suggests radical measures to enhance U.S. export competitiveness, including forcing foreign governments to convert U.S. debt into long-term bonds and implementing aggressive financial policies [4]. - Critics argue that these strategies could disrupt the global financial system and represent a regression to political manipulation of the Fed, contrasting sharply with the independence established in 1951 [4][5]. Future Implications - The current situation presents a crossroads for the U.S., weighing the importance of institutional independence and market trust against the pressures of managing national debt [4][5].

Group 1: U.S. Banking Sector Issues - In recent years, the U.S. banking sector has faced significant challenges, with multiple bank failures causing global financial instability [2][4] - Notable bank failures in 2023 include Silicon Valley Bank with $209 billion in assets, Signature Bank with $110 billion, and First Republic Bank with approximately $230 billion, primarily due to rising interest rates and subsequent asset devaluation [2][4] - The Federal Reserve's interest rate hikes, reaching 5.25%-5.5%, aimed to combat inflation but resulted in substantial unrealized losses for banks, totaling $413 billion in the first quarter of 2025 [4] Group 2: Japanese Economic Response - Japan's economic strategy under Governor Kazuo Ueda has focused on maintaining a negative interest rate of -0.1% and controlling the yield curve, despite global interest rate increases [9][11] - The depreciation of the yen from 130:1 to over 150:1 against the dollar has benefited Japanese exporters like Toyota and Sony, although it has increased import costs for consumers [11] - Japan's central bank has begun to gradually normalize monetary policy, with interest rate hikes in March and July 2024, reflecting a response to rising wages and stable inflation around 2% [11][13] Group 3: Future Outlook - The outlook for Japan's economy remains cautious, with high debt levels and demographic challenges, while the yen's depreciation has led to an expanded trade surplus in 2024 [13] - The U.S. banking sector is expected to see fewer failures in 2025 due to enhanced regulatory measures, although unrealized losses remain a concern [13] - Japan's potential to counter the dollar's dominance hinges on global economic conditions and the Federal Reserve's actions, with a gradual approach to policy changes being emphasized [13]

Core Insights - The discussion revolves around whether the Chinese economy might follow the path of Japan's economic bubble, with a focus on current economic conditions and policy responses [1] Group 1: Economic Analysis - The conversation features insights from renowned economist Tang Ya and Professor Xu Yuan from Peking University's National School of Development, analyzing the lessons from Japan's "Plaza Accord" and the resilience of the Chinese economy [1][4] - The analysis includes a review of China's efforts in monetary, fiscal, and real estate policies to avoid past mistakes made by Japan [1][3] Group 2: Program Details - The program "Two Says" will air on September 17 at 22:30 on Oriental TV and on September 20 at 22:00 on First Financial [1][6]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the potential risks of the Chinese economy repeating the mistakes of Japan's economic bubble, analyzing current economic conditions and policy measures taken by China to avoid such pitfalls [1]. Group 1: Economic Analysis - The discussion includes insights from renowned economist Tang Ya and Professor Xu Yuan from Peking University's National School of Development, focusing on the lessons learned from Japan's "Plaza Accord" [1]. - The analysis emphasizes the resilience of the Chinese economy amidst various challenges, including monetary and fiscal policies [1]. Group 2: Policy Measures - The article highlights the efforts made by China in areas such as exchange rates, interest rates, real estate, and fiscal policy to mitigate risks associated with economic bubbles [1].

Core Viewpoint - The article draws parallels between the current economic situation and historical events from 40 years ago, particularly focusing on the potential for a repeat of the "Black Monday" stock market crash due to the weakening of the US dollar and changes in Federal Reserve leadership [2][5][10]. Group 1: Economic Context - The US dollar has depreciated nearly 10% this year, reaching a three-year low against major currencies, coinciding with Trump's return to the White House [2]. - The S&P 500 and Nasdaq have reached new historical highs, driven by expectations of monetary easing and improved trade relations [4]. Group 2: Historical Comparison - The "Plaza Accord" of 1985 led to a significant depreciation of the dollar while the US stock market experienced a period of unusual prosperity, with the dollar falling 36.5% against the yen and 30.8% to 36.6% against other major currencies over 17 months [5][7]. - Despite the dollar's decline, US import prices did not rise significantly due to exporters, including Japan, compressing profit margins to maintain market share [7]. Group 3: Market Confidence and Leadership - Market confidence during the 1985 period was heavily reliant on the credibility of then-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who had successfully controlled inflation previously [8][12]. - The transition to Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman in 1987 saw a lack of decisive action when the dollar fell below critical levels, leading to a loss of market confidence and contributing to the "Black Monday" crash [10][11]. Group 4: Implications for Current Market - The article suggests that if Volcker had remained in charge, he would likely have taken action to stabilize the dollar, potentially preventing the market crash [11][12]. - The personal reputation of the Fed Chairman and the market's trust in their commitment to anti-inflation policies are critical in maintaining market stability [12].

Core Viewpoint - The article draws parallels between the current economic situation in the U.S. and historical events from 40 years ago, particularly focusing on the potential for a repeat of the "Black Monday" stock market crash due to factors such as a weakening dollar and changes in Federal Reserve leadership [1][2]. Group 1: Economic Context - The U.S. dollar has depreciated nearly 10% this year, reaching a three-year low against major currencies, coinciding with Trump's return to the White House [1]. - The S&P 500 and Nasdaq have reached multiple all-time highs, driven by expectations of monetary easing and improved trade relations [2]. Group 2: Historical Comparison - The article references the "Plaza Accord" of 1985, which led to a significant decline in the dollar and a simultaneous rise in U.S. stock markets, with the dollar falling 36.5% against the yen and 30.8% to 36.6% against other major currencies over 17 months [2][4]. - Despite the dollar's decline, U.S. import prices did not significantly rise, aided by falling global oil prices, which helped maintain low inflation [4]. Group 3: Federal Reserve Leadership Impact - The market's confidence during the "Plaza Accord" era was largely attributed to then-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker's reputation for controlling inflation, which reassured investors [5]. - The transition to Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman in 1987 marked a shift, as he failed to respond to critical market signals, leading to a loss of confidence and ultimately contributing to the "Black Monday" crash [6]. Group 4: Hypothetical Scenarios - The article posits that if Volcker had remained in charge, he likely would have acted to stabilize the dollar and control inflation, potentially preventing the market crash [7].