하이퍼인플레이션: 정부 지출 정책의 결과

### 하이퍼인플레이션으로 가는 길 경제적 선택과 결과 이해하기
* 📉 하이퍼인플레이션으로의 가속화는 **2007년의 글로벌 금융위기(GFC)로 시작**되었으며, 이는 문제의 시작이라기보다는 경제 의사 결정의 중요한 시점이었습니다.
* 💵 "인플레이션을 통해 그 상황을 구하기 위한 선택이었고, 이제는 멈출 수 없습니다." **인플레이션 환경에서 부채 상환이 쉽다는 점**을 강조했습니다.
* 🏠 예를 들어, 초인플레이션으로 인해 물가가 **1,000% 상승**하면 반드시 같은 비율은 아니지만 소득이 증가할 수 있으므로 **30만 달러의 모기지**를 관리하는 것이 더 쉬워집니다.
* 📊 정치인들은 디플레이션을 막기 위해 **비용을 대폭 삭감할 가능성이 낮으며**, 이는 대부분의 자산을 소유한 우버 부자들의 재산에 피해를 줄 수 있기 때문에 이러한 과감한 조치에 저항할 것입니다.
* 👶 많은 Z세대는 부모 세대와 비교해 경제적 격차를 인식하고 있으며, **부실한 재정 정책으로 인해 자신들이 더 가난해진 것은 아닌지 의문**을 제기하고 있습니다.
* 💳 미국 정부가 부채를 계속 축적함에 따라 현재의 궤적은 **초인플레이션이 다가오고 있음을 시사**하며, **2040년 또는 그 이전에 초인플레이션이 발생할 것**으로 예상됩니다.
* 💰 "정부는 지출 문제가 있습니다." **예산 균형을 맞추기 위해 매년 약 2조 달러를 삭감**해야 하는데, 이는 정치적으로 실현 불가능한 일입니다.
* 📈 궁극적으로 **디플레이션보다 하이퍼인플레이션을 선호하는 것**은 부유층의 이익을 위해 부의 불평등을 악화시키고 대다수 미국인을 뒤처지게 합니다.

정치인들은 부채를 관리하고 정치적 생존을 해칠 수 있는 급격한 삭감을 피하기 위해 초인플레이션을 선호합니다.

In my previous video, I explained to you how the national debt crisis will cause the great melt-up. In today's video, I'm going to explain to why the Federal Reserve and the US government have chosen hyperinflation rather than deflation. So, the purpose of this video is not to scare anyone. So, could this be a scary topic for some people? Yes, but that's not my intent. I would say it's like if you know a hurricane is coming, then what's the best thing to do if you have the information? It's to warn people so that they can prepare as best as possible. So, this information is very important because the way you defend yourself from hyperinflation is completely different compared to deflation. Okay, so let me tell you why the governments and the Federal Reserve prefer hyperinflation compared to deflation. So, I'm going to keep this as simple as possible. Let's start with this. So, what is the underlying problem here? Simply put, the politicians in the federal government, they have a spending problem. I can't say any more easily than

that so the federal government spends more than they make. They've accumulated all this debt. Everybody knows that they can't pay this money back. So consequently, the US government, along with the Federal Reserve, and they're working in conjunction, they have to print trillions of dollars. And of course, that is inflationary. But right now, we're at a point where the rate of deficits, the rate of borrowing to the debt accumulation, and the rates of interest payments are accelerating hard. And along with that, the rate of inflation. And right now, if you believe that the rate of inflation has cooled down, that the problem is solved, I'm just telling you that this is the Calm before the storm. So now that you have a better understanding of the situation, let's run some scenarios. So scenario number one, you have a situation where the politicians and the government, they can choose to cut spending massively and deflate. And then scenario number two, you have a situation where the politicians and the government, they can keep on doing what they're doing and that's

going to lead to hyperinflation, but let me tell you why the politicians and the US government will not choose deflation. Now, let's start with this, let's start with the political aspect. So, did you know in order for the government to balance their budget, they would have to cut expenses by about $2 trillion a year? So, the largest expense item right now for the federal government are Social Security payments. That's about $1.5 trillion a year. If you're looking at National Defense, that's about $900 billion for the year. So, just think about that. What kind of a politician is going to come out and say, Well, in order to balance the budget, let's reduce Social Security benefits to zero? I mean, that doesn't make sense because there's 72 million Americans on Social Security payments, 72 million beneficiaries, and most of them votes. So, I don't know what kind of a political campaign that would be for any politician. That would be political suicide, not to mention that if you reduce Social Security benefits down to zero, that still doesn't

solve the deficit problem, but you know what? That's an extreme example because I'm just singling out one category, Social Security benefits. But the reason why I did that is because that is the largest expense item for the US government. Okay, so let's run another example, and let's just say that, you know, to be more rational, let's cut expenses all across the board to be more fair. Okay, so if you're going to do that, you have to take into consideration that there are certain expenses that you can't just choose to cut. You know, for example, you can't cut, you can't decide to cut interest payments on government debt. Like, you have to pay those. So with that in mind, to balance the budget, the government would have to cut expenses all across the board by 40%. And that's just, I mean, that's horrible as well. 40% less for social security benefits, 40% less for Medicare, 40% less for National Defense, 40% less for Health Care, education, everything. Now I want you to think about that, how

popular would this idea be politically? I imagine not so much. That's why the politicians, they're not going to cut expenses in a meaningful way. So, that's why the politicians, they're not going to run this scenario of cutting expenses massively and deflating. Now, let's talk about the self-interest of the Uber Rich. So, let's just say that the government chooses to massively cut spending, and the Federal Reserve decides to not print money. Okay, in that type of situation, what happens? We get deflation and an economic depression. So, when you have an economic depression and deflation, what happens? The price of everything goes down. Stocks go down, properties go down, private equity investments go down, asset values crash. And who owns the majority of all those assets? It's the Uber Rich. Now, I want you to think about that. Why would the Uber Rich want to create an economic depression and cause a self-inflicted wound? When there's an economic depression, there's a reset. And why would an Uber Rich person want to reset the

game when they're winning. So, yeah, there's going to be certain rich people that they're going to have liquidity. They're going to be able to buy assets for dirt cheap. But there's going to be a bunch of uber-rich people that are going to be reset to zero, and that is their worst nightmare. Now, let me offer you a better alternative for the Uber Rich. This is in their best interest. If there's hyperinflation, if there's a melt-up in that type of situation, what happens? The stock market soars, property values soar, private equity investments soar, assets soar in value, and who owns the majority of those assets? Again, the Uber Rich. Now, in a melt-up, who gets left behind? It's the people with no assets, which is the major majority of Americans, and that's the problem. The wealth inequality gap will widen, the middle class will shrink even further, and then we're going to be left with a society where you're either really rich or really poor. And for the Uber Rich, here's another benefit about

hyperinflation or I'd say an advantage. So, in a situation of hyperinflation, you have the Federal Reserve printing trillions of dollars. It would be fair if everybody, all Americans, got an equal portion of that newly printed money, right? But as you know, I mean, obviously, that is not the case. The rich and powerful get first access to that money, and they also get the bulk of that money when we're talking about per person. So, just think about it. We've already seen this play out. We get a $1,200 stimulus check; they get a $5 million ERC tax credit or $20 million in PPP money. The average person just gets the crumbs. And think of hyperinflation from a political standpoint. If a politician says, We're going to give you more money, that buys votes. They don't tell you that going to print that money. There's a cost to it. It's called inflation. But you know, as long as you get elected, who cares, right? Give the people what they want. Okay, now I want you to think about

hyperinflation from the standpoint of our national debt crisis. So, with inflation, inflation or hyperinflation, whatever inflation, it's easier to pay back your debts. So, I'm going to give you an example. So, let's just say that right now you have a mortgage on your home. Let's just say your mortgage is $300,000. In the event of hyperinflation, it's going to be so much easier to pay off your mortgage. So, let's just say that inflation goes up by 1,000%. Let's just say overnight, you know that type of situation. A Big Mac would cost what, 60 bucks? A Honda Civic would cost what, $250,000? But if inflation goes up by 1,000%, your pay will increase too. Your income's going to go up. If inflation goes up by 1,000%, your income probably won't keep up. Let's just say that it goes up by 700%. So, in that type of situation, if your pay goes up by 7x, then

It's going to be so much easier for you to pay off your $300,000 mortgage, and it's the same concept with the government's debt load. Their pre-existing debt becomes more easy to manage. Now, I want you to imagine the situation of deflation. So, let's just say that we're in a deflationary environment. Let's just say overnight, boom, 50% deflation. So, in that type of situation, a Big Mac goes back down in price to what? A brand new Honda Civic is $112,000. But let's just say that you have that situation. You have a $300,000 mortgage, right? But you have to remember that your pay is probably going to go down by 50% as well. So, imagine trying to pay off your $300,000 mortgage when your pay is sliced in half. It's the same concept with the US governments and their debt load. Their pre-existing debts become more difficult to manage in a deflationary environment. So, listen, it is crystal

clear that hyperinflation is a better bad option for the Uber rich, and they are the decision-makers. So listen, we've been kicking this can down the road just constantly. Unfortunately, there's not much road left; it's just a cliff. And I hear these comments so often. Oh Brian, they've been seeing this doomsday scenario for decades. And honestly, I would say that those people were bad at assessing the situation. I'll tell it to you like this. So let me give you an example. In this example, let's just say that you're an average income American and that you currently individually have $40,000 of credit card debt. If you're in that type of situation, obviously, that's a bad situation. But honestly, you can probably keep on going. I'm sure that some company is going to give you more credit. But if you're in $80,000 of credit card debt, I mean, obviously, that's a more horrific situation. But honestly, you could probably keep on going, keep up the charade for a little bit longer if

you reach $11,000 of credit card debt. Then, I mean, you know that your end is drawing near. It's the same situation with the US government. It was premature to cry wolf back then, but right now, in this setup where we have accelerating rates of deficits, debt, and inflation, it's close to game over. But I'm going to be realistic with you. The situation of hyperinflation when we're in the thick of it, it's not going to happen overnight. It's not going to happen this decade. That's just too early. The most prestigious models, they're predicting by 2040, but I believe that it wouldn't be far-fetched to believe a few years earlier than that. Honestly, Social Security and solvency 2033, that's going to be an accelerator. But listen, this is very important. You can't say, Oh, this is going to happen next decade, then who cares? The reason why you should care is because we're not going to shift abruptly into a state of hyperinflation. No, inflation will progressively get

worse, leading up to the point of hyperinflation, and the standard of living during that trajectory will go down. And I want to point this out to you: a lot of Gen Z, they're seeing this, and they're realizing this. They're asking themselves, Wait a second, were my parents better off than me economically? They're looking at their parents, they're saying, Wait a second, my parents bought a house earlier than I did. My parents have more kids than I did. You know, kids are expensive. My parents are better off economically than I am. And if you have Gen Alpha children, you're probably concerned about a future with more challenging economic environments. Now, of course, there's going to be exceptions. If you're better off economically compared to your parents at the same age, then good for you. I mean, that is the American dream of any parents. But if you're worse off than your parents, then in my opinion, a lot of the blame has to go with bad monetary and fiscal policies. Now, I'm going to end

with this whole acceleration towards hyperinflation really started with the GFC, the great financial crisis of 2007. So, that is the acceleration, not the start, because I know that people are going to argue 1971 or 1944. But when the GFC happened, we really should have went through an economic depression. It's hard to find anybody that's going to argue with that. But the choice was made to rescue that situation. It was to inflate, and now there's no stopping it.

The Great Melt-Up: Why The USA is Choosing Hyperinflation (Episode 2)

ClearValue Tax

미국 정부는 빠른 속도로 부채를 축적하고 있으며, 이로 인해 수조 달러의 화폐를 찍어내야 하는 인플레이션이 발생하고 있습니다.

대규모 지출 삭감과 디플레이션, 또는 기존 부채를 더 쉽게 관리할 수 있는 현재의 관행을 지속하는 두 가지 잠재적 시나리오가 떠오르고 있습니다.

초인플레이션과 시장 붕괴는 초부유층에게 혜택을 주고 부의 불평등 격차를 확대하며 대다수 미국인은 자산이 없는 상태로 남게 될 것입니다.

디플레이션에 대한 정치적 저항

미국 정부는 예산 균형을 맞추기 위해 연간 2조 달러의 지출을 줄여야 하며, 그 중 사회보장 지급이 가장 큰 비중을 차지합니다.

사회보장 혜택을 0으로 줄이는 것은 유권자이기도 한 7,200만 명의 수혜자에게 영향을 미치기 때문에 정치적으로 실현 불가능합니다.

정부 부채에 대한 이자와 같은 특정 지불은 협상할 수 없기 때문에 모든 정부 지출을 40% 삭감하는 것도 비현실적입니다.

초인플레이션으로 인해 연방준비제도이사회는 수조 달러를 인쇄하지만, 부자와 권력층이 그 돈의 첫 번째와 가장 큰 부분을 가져갑니다.

이러한 불균형은 경기 부양책과 부유층을 위한 대규모 세금 공제 및 대출에서 분명하게 드러납니다.

정부가 디플레이션보다 하이퍼인플레이션을 선호하는 것은 지출 문제와 재정 지원을 통해 표를 사려는 욕구에서 비롯된 것입니다.

Z세대와 알파세대가 직면한 경제적 과제

Z세대는 부모 세대가 경제적으로 더 잘 살았다는 사실을 인식하면서 자신의 재정적 미래에 대해 우려하고 있습니다.

연사는 젊은 세대의 경제적 어려움을 잘못된 통화 및 재정 정책의 탓으로 돌립니다.

2040년경에는 초인플레이션이 발생할 것이라는 예측이 나오고 있으며, 현재의 재정적자, 부채, 인플레이션의 궤적을 보면 위기가 다가오고 있음을 알 수 있습니다.

대금융 위기가 초인플레이션에 미친 영향

2007년의 세계 금융 위기는 경기 침체 대신 경제를 부양하기로 결정하면서 초인플레이션으로의 전환을 가속화했습니다.

하이퍼인플레이션은 부채 상환을 더 쉽게 만들어 개인의 잠재적 소득 증가로 이어집니다.

부유층의 이기심은 디플레이션과 경기 침체를 초래할 수 있는 조치에 저항하는 데 중요한 역할을 하는데, 부유층은 이러한 시나리오에서 가치를 잃게 될 자산의 대부분을 소유하고 있기 때문입니다.