2021 인플레이션이 시작되나요?

[김씨]

2021년 1월 과연 인플레이션이라는 단어를 쓸 수 있는지... 달러 index의 움직임은? 궁금하다.

나의 가장 깊은 고민, 달러화 시대에 기축통화의 미국이 과연 언제까지 양적완화를 통해 경기를 부양할 수 있을까?

트리핀 딜레마... 그동안 양털깍기로 잘 버틴것 같다. 기축통화라는 패권으로 약덜러를 이용해 자국 경기 부양, 그러나 달러의 해외 이전으로 자산의 버블, 양극화, 노동의 가치보다 자본의 가치가 아무 도덕적 관념없이 저질러지는 세계화... 자본소득이 과연 정당한가? 피케티의 2권의 책과, 우리가 꼭 한번 짚고 넘어가야할 배블런의 책은 결코 결말이 좋지 않을 것이다. 과연 1818 막스가 현실을 본다면? 멍청한 후쿠야마가 정말 멍청한것이었던가 ?

읽고 보니 내용이 무척 단순하네...

하지만 공급체인의 문제 아닐까? 생산성의 문제는 아닌듯 하다. 공장의 가동율의 문제이지 않은가?

과거보다 delivery chain이 covid로 인해 많이 망가졌다.. 캘리포니아 부두 노동자들이 없어 container가 아시아로 회귀하지 못해 2021년 춘절을 앞둔 중국이 그나마 있던 cont.를 싹쓸이하고 있어... 우리는 cont.하나 구하기 위해 1달 이상을 기다려야 한다.

분명 인플레이션은 올 수 있나?

과거 중국이 인플레이를 누른 것은 30%-40%인정하자..

이제 공급의 문제가 아닌듯 한데... 유효소비가 없지 않은가, 약달러 시대를 통과한 우리는 개인부채가 더욱 커져버렸다.

소비 심리가 과연 있는 것인가?

여기서 통화주의자들이 자꾸 싫어지네... 소비란? 잉여물을 더 취하는거?

이미 통화주의자들은 틀렸다. 그들이 생각했던 trickle down은 없지 않은가?

세상이 다시 가진자들이 만드는 엘리트 사회로 복귀하고 있는건 아닌지..

과거 한진과 같이 정부의 asia항공 판단의 오류는 우리나라의 미래에 커다라 영향을 미칠것 같은데..

미래 반도체 산업의 번영은 확고한것 같다. 삼성... 그들이 과연 미래 준비하는 산업이 반도체 생산에 그치지 않기를 바란다.

Louis Gave: «Inflation Will Come Back With a Vengeance»

Louis-Vincent Gave, CEO and co-founder of Gavekal Research, sees a dramatic paradigm shift playing out in the world economy. In this in-depth conversation, he explains how investors should position themselves for the future.

Mark Dittli31.12.2020, 03.20 Uhr

Merken

Drucken

Teilen

Deutsche Version

Louis-Vincent Gave is a master of the big picture. The co-founder of Hong Kong-based research boutique Gavekal is one of the most esteemed writers about geopolitical and macroeconomic developments and their impact on financial markets.

In this in-depth conversation with The Market NZZ, Mr. Gave shares his views on the Dollar, stock markets, oil and gold prices – and he explains why the United States are starting to act like a «sick emerging market».

Mr Gave, 2020 has been a catalyst for some big shifts in the global investment environment. Looking into the future, what are the biggest topics for you?

2020년은 투자환경에 있어 상승장을 촉발하는 해였다. 미래에 가장 큰 토픽은 무엇일까?

I’ve spent most of my career in Asia, so my lens is fundamentally biased towards Asia. With that disclaimer, I would say this: When the Covid crisis started, the view in the West was that this would be China’s Chernobyl Moment. That they completely screwed up, which would eventually weaken the regime. Fast forward to today, and China comes out of this looking much better than most Western countries. If there is one big divergence in the world, it is this: In most Western countries, the population is angry at how their government dealt with the pandemic, either because they think the government did too much or too little. But in China, there is a feeling that there were two big crises in the past 15 years, the Global Financial Crisis in 2008 and now Covid, and China in both cases came out ahead of the West. Most of Asia actually came out of this much better than the Western world.

Covid가 시작되었을 때 서양사람들은 중국이 체르노빌과 같을 것으로 보았다.

하지만 중국은 서양과 달리 정치 체제를 이용해 이를 잘 극복해왔다. 만일 서양과 차이가 있다면 서양인들은 단지 정부에 화를 내는 반면, 중국은 과거 15년 가장 큰 위기인, covid를 2008년 금융위기와 같이 큰 위기로 받아들였다.

What else do you see?

When I look at markets, there are three key prices in the world economy: Ten year Treasury yields, oil, and the Dollar. One year ago, yields were going down, oil was going down, and the Dollar was going up. Today, Treasury yields are going up, oil is going up, and the Dollar is going down. This is a huge reversal. When I see a market where interest rates are rising and the currency is falling, alarm bells go off.

세계경제에는 3가지 key price가 있다. 10년물 국채수익률, 오일 그리고 달러.

1년전 오일 단가는 떨어지고 있었고, 달러는 오르고 있었다. 그러나 오늘, 채권 수익률과 오일 가격은 오르고 있으며, 달러는 떨어지고 있다. 매우 큰 변화이며

이제 이자율이 오르고 화폐가치가 떨어지는 시장을 볼 때, 경고등이 울리기 시작했다.

Why?

This is what you would see in a sick emerging market. If you’re invested in, say, Indonesia, rising interest rates and a falling currency is a signal that investors are getting out, because they don’t like the policy setting there. Today, the US is starting to act like a sick emerging market. We even have a question mark over whether they have the ability to run a fair election. Suffice to say that at least 30% of Americans believe their election system is rigged. This is mindblowing.

이제 미국이 정치환경으로 이자율이 높아지며, 화폐가치가 떨어지는 인도네시아와 같은 이머징시장과 같이 행동하고 있다

What’s the policy setting investors don’t like in the US?

Government debt in the US has increased by more than $4 trillion this year, which adds up to $12,800 per person. This is a world record, but actually most Western governments have gone on a massive spending spree during this crisis. In a way, they’re using the playbook that China followed after 2008, when they allowed a massive increase in fiscal spending and monetary aggregates. Today, Beijing sits on its hands in terms of fiscal and monetary policy, while the West knows no limits.

미국의 부체는 미국인 개인당 부채가 12천800달러에 이르는 4천조보다 높다.

서양 국가의 정부가 이런 위기에 대량의 한계 없는 지출을 해온 반면, 중국은 계획된 통화 재정정책을 실시했다.

They’re doing it to soften the blow of the pandemic. What’s wrong with that?

When China did this in 2008, they funded massive infrastructure projects: airports, railroads, roads, ports, you name it. Some of these projects turned out to be productive and some not, but I always thought they would be definitely more productive than social transfers. But this year, the debt buildup in the US has funded zero new productive investments. No new roads, no airports, railroads, nothing. They were basically just sending money to people to sit at home and watch TV. In the end, this buildup of unproductive debt can be reflected in one of two things: Either in the cost of funding for the government, i.e. in rising interest rates, or in a deval‎uation of the currency. This is what the French economist Jacques Rueff taught us years ago. Very soon, this is going to put the Fed in a quandary.

중국이 2008년 금융위기 시 대량의 인프라투자에 집중했는데. 물론 성공적이었다 또는 없다 할 수 있지만, 아무튼 생산적이었었다. 하지만 미국은 단순 지출로 비생산적인 빛을 쌓아 올렸는데, 이는 두가지를 양산했는데, 이자율 상승과 화폐가치의 하락이다. 이는 곧 FED가 난처한 상황에 놓일 것이라는 것이다.

In what way?

They will have to decide whether to let bond yields rise or not. If they let them normalize to pre-Covid levels, 10-year Treasury yields would have to rise to about 2.5%. But if they do that, the funding of the government becomes problematic. A 50 basis point increase in interest rates is equivalent to the annual budget for the U.S. Navy. Another 30 bp is the equivalent for the U.S. Marines, and so on. The U.S. is already borrowing money to pay its interest today. If rates go up, they’re getting into the cycle where they have to borrow more just to be able to pay interest, which is not a good position.

미국은 곧 채권 수익률이 오르게 놔둘 건지, 아닌지 결정을 해야만 할 것이다.

채권 수익률을 covid이전 상황으로 정상화 시킨다면, 국체수익률이 2.5%는 올라야만 할 것이다. 하지만 만일 그들이 그렇게 한다면, 정부 지출이 문제가 될 것 이다. 이자율에 50bp는 미 해군 1년 예산과 맞먹는다. 30bp는 미 해병 예산과 맞먹는다. 이는 곧 미국의 이자율이 오르며, 정부 부채에 대한 이자에 커다란 문제이다.

Do you expect the Fed to move in and cap interest rates?

Fed가 이자율 변경 또는 올릴 것이라고 생각하는지요?

Yes, I do. And when they do, I’d say the Dollar will take a 20% hit.

네, 물론, 그렇게 되었을 때, 달러는 20%상승하게 될것이다.

Ten year Treasuries currently yield around 0.95%. At what level will the Fed step in?

I think they will have to cap interest rates at 2%, otherwise the drag on the government will become too big. That question will arise rather soon, because come this spring, the base effects for growth and for inflation will kick in. Growth will be very strong, and so will inflation, which means that yields will quickly try to get back up to 2%.

미국은 이자율을 2%까지 올려야 할 것이다. 그렇지 않다면 정부의 짐이 매우 클 것이다. 곧 이런 질문들이 많아질 것이다. 이유인즉, 곧 봄이 되면 경제성장 기저효과와 인플레이션이 시작된다. 경제성장은 매우 강하며 인플레이션 또한 그럴 것이다. 수익율이 빠르게 2%가까이 도달하려고 할 것이다.

You recently wrote a piece where you recommended buying gold and financials to prepare for this event. Why gold, and why financials?

이런 상황에서 왜 금과 금융에 투자 해야 하지요?

My base case is that Treasury yields will move up to around 2%, at which point the Fed will introduce some variant of yield curve control. In this case, the Dollar would tank, real interest rates would drop and gold would thrive. But maybe I’m wrong, maybe the Fed freaks out when they see inflation rising to 4%, and maybe they decide to let yields rise. If that’s the case, then financials will rip higher, driven by a steeper yield curve. So come this spring, if the Fed caps interest rates, gold will thrive, and if it doesn’t, financials will thrive.

국채 수익율이 2%가까이 접근할 것이라는 믿음이다. 달러 가치는 떨어지며, 실질 이자율이 떨어지고 금 가격은 상승할 것이다. 물론 틀릴 수 있다…. 하지만 봄이 되어 Fed가 이자율을 올리고 금 가격이 오르면… 만일 그렇지 안다면 금융 자산이 오르게 될 것이다.

But you’d lean towards gold?

Yes. It’s quite possible that in the coming weeks, the Dollar will rise while Treasury yields move up. This could provoke a sell-off in gold. If that were to happen, I’d take the other side of that trade, I would buy gold. But at the same time, you can buy out of the money call options on financials. That would be the hedge for the scenario of the Fed changing its mind and letting the yield curve steepen.

곧 국채 수익률이 오르는 동안 달러는 상승할 수 있다. 이런 현상은 금을 팔게 하는 자극제가 될 것이다. 이렇게 된다면 나는 금을 사 들일 것이다. 그러나 Fed가 계획을 변경할 수 있는 시나리오를 염두 해서 금융상품에 콜옵션을 투자해도 괜찮을 것이다.

The Dollar has been strong for the past ten years. Has it entered a new structural bear market?

Yes, there is no doubt in my mind. A year ago, the Dollar was the only major currency offering positive real rates. My view is that capital flows into positive real rates, just like water flows downhill. Today, the U.S. has one of the most negative real interest rates worldwide. Given the year-on-year rise we will see in inflation this spring, real interest rates in the U.S. will drop even further.

그렇다 강달러 시대가 바뀌었다고 확신한다. 1년전 달러는 플러스 실질 금리의 주요 통화였다. 자본이 플러스 금리로 흐를 것이다. 하지만 오늘날 미국은 세계에서 가장 마이너스 실질 금리 국 중에 하나이다. 전년대비 상승을 볼 때, 이번 봄 인플레이션을 보게 될 것이며, 미국의 실질 금리는 더욱 떨어질 것이다.

Apart from negative real yields, what are the other reasons for the Dollar bear market?

마이너스 실질 수익률과 별개로 달러 약세장에 다른 이유가 있나요?

We first have to ask ourselves why we even had a Dollar bull market in the past decade. The answer is the shale oil revolution. As the United States moved towards energy independence after 2011, its trade deficit shrank. The shale oil revolution meant that all of a sudden, the U.S. was no longer exporting money.

먼저 우리는 우리들 자신에게 물어봐야 한다. 왜 과거 10년가 달러는 강세장 이었는지… 이유는 셰일 오일 혁명이다. 2011년 미국이 에너지 독립 선언 후 무역적자는 줄었다. 셰일오일 혁명 후 미국은 달러 수출을 하지 않았다.

And that tide has now turned? 그러면 이런 흐름이 봐뀌었나요?

Yes. Oil production in the U.S. is collapsing. The Texan wildcatters have lost out in the price war against the Saudis and the Russians. U.S. oil production has already gone down 2.5 million barrels per day and is slated to go down by another 2.5 million over the next twelve months, because every major oil company is cutting capital expenditures. Just look at Chevron and Exxon, their capital spending plans over the next five years are at half the level they were in 2014. And so, as the U.S. economy picks up after Covid, America will be importing oil on a massive scale again. The U.S. will be back to exporting $100 to $120 billion to the rest of the world, mostly to places that don’t like America, who will turn around and sell those Dollars for Euros. This is bearish for the Dollar.

네. 미국의 오일 제품이 붕괴하고 있다. 작년 미국의 셰일오일 채굴업자는 사우디와 러시아의 단가 경쟁에서 패배했다. 이유인즉 주요 오일 회사들이 오일 생산 설비 투자에 자금을 줄였기 때문이다. 투자 금액이 향후 5년가 2014년 도의 반밖에 안된다. 또한 Covid이후 미국 경제회복으로, 다시 많은 오일을 수출 하게 될 것이다. 하지만 미국은 미국을 좋아하지 않는 다른 나라들에 1 천 ~ 1,200 억 달러를 다시 수출 할 것이다. 이것은 달러의 약세이다

When we see the oil price heading above $50 again, wouldn’t that cause US production to rise?

You can’t turn up oil production like a tap. It will take at least a couple of years to come back. Plus, shale oil production in the U.S. was hugely capital destructive. More than $350 billion was lost in the shale oil patch over the past ten years. Look at the energy sector today, it’s at 2.5% of the S&P 500. When oil was at $10 per barrel, back in 1999, energy was 5.5% of the S&P 500. So I’m going to answer your question with another question: If oil prices go up, and the U.S. could produce more oil again, it would require hundreds of billions of Dollars in capex. Who will provide that kind of capital, with an incoming Democratic Administration that has been ambivalent about fracking? I don’t see it.

미국의 오일에 대한 자본투자는 이미 끝났다. 따라서 절대 그럴 일은 없다.

So we are moving back into a world where the U.S. is a structural oil importer and a Dollar exporter?

Yes. The seeds are planted. That’s a huge shift that I don’t think people are taking into account yet.

미국이 오일을 수입하는 국가로의 전환은 이미 시작 됐으나 사람들은 아직 받아들이지 않는 것 같다.

When the world economy normalizes after the pandemic, where will the oil price settle?

Covid이후 오일단가는 ?

Before Covid, it seemed that the oil market had found a balance between 60 and 80 $ per barrel.

Covid이전 오일단가-60-80불사이

Is that the range we’ll head back to? 다시 돌아갈 범위인가요?

I think so, and for a pretty simple reason: Above 80 $, China basically stops buying. That’s a big difference relative to ten to fifteen years ago, when China hadn’t built any sizeable inventory and was a forced buyer of oil. This is no longer the case. In fact, you saw it during the Covid crisis: Between April and June, when the oil price collapsed, China imported about 13 million barrels per day, which was 40% more than normal. Clearly, they were building up inventory, taking advantage of the low price. China is the marginal buyer, and its behaviour is a key driver for the oil price: Above 80 $ they stop buying, and below 60 $ they buy in size. Incidentally, in that range, many oil companies make pretty decent money. Saudi Aramco makes a killing at this price level.

그렇게 생각하는 이유는 80불 이상이면 중국이 사지 않을 것이다.

You see the Dollar in a bear market. Meanwhile, the Renminbi has strengthened significantly. Is that also a structural shift?

달러가 약세장에 있을 동안 인민폐는 더욱 강해졌다. 이것도 구조적 이동이라 할 수 있나?

I think so. In the past, every time there was a crisis, the reaction of the People’s Bank of China was to freeze the exchange rate. During and after the global financial crisis, the RMB flatlined against the Dollar at 6.82 for two years. In 2015, when the Chinese equity bubble burst, the RMB was flat for several months. When things went bad, historically, they froze it. Not this year. This year, we saw the sharpest six month RMB rally in history. That is a clear change in policy.

그렇다. 과거 위험상황에서 중국 인민은행은 환율을 동결시켜왔다.

What’s behind that change? 이후의 변화는 ?

I don’t know, but the facts are clear. China today is the only major economy in the world that offers large positive real interest rates. Thus, capital flows into the Chinese bond market. The PBoC is the only major central bank publicly saying they won’t destroy their currency and they won’t proceed to the euthanasia of the rentier. The consequences of this are hugely important. A strong RMB is a fundamentally inflationary force for the world economy.

잘 모르겠다. 하지만 확실한 것은 오늘의 중국은 플러스 이자율을 공급하는 주요 경제국이다. 중국은 경제 위기시 최종 대부자 뿐만 아니라 확실히 자국 통화 가치를 지키겠다고 천명하고 있다. 매우 중요한 점은 강한 인민폐는 전세계에 인플레이션을 유발하는 원인이다.

How so? 어떻게?

Manufacturers around the world have to compete with Chinese producers. Therefore, a weak RMB drives prices down, whereas a strong RMB drives prices up. You can compare it to the role of the Yen forty years ago. A stronger RMB means stronger consumption in China and Asia, and it means that whatever we buy from China is going up in price. It’s not surprising that as the RMB rerates, the U.S. yield curve steepens and oil prices go up: It's all part of the same reflationary backdrop.

위안화 하락은 세계의 상품 가격의 상승을 일으킨다.

Given this backdrop: Do you see a return of structural inflation in Western economies? 이런 배경에서 서양의 구조적인 인플레이션이 돌아올까요?

Yes, I think inflation will come back with a vengeance. One of the key deflationary forces in the past three decades was China. I wrote a book about that in 2005; I was a deflationist then, as my belief was that every company in the world would focus on what they can do best and outsource everything else to China at lower costs. But now, we’re in a new world, a world that I outlined in my last book, Clash of Empires, where supply chains are broken up along the lines of separate empires. Let me give you a simple example: Over the past two years, the US has done everything it could to kill Huawei. It’s done so by cutting off the semiconductor supply chain to Huawei. The consequence is that every Chinese company today is worried about being the next Huawei, not just in the tech space, but in every industry. Until recently, price and quality was the most important consideration in any corporate supply chain. Now we have moved to a world where safety of delivery matters most, even if the cost is higher. This is a dramatic paradigm shift.

인플레이션은 다시 시작된다. 과거 디플레이션은 중국의 저가 상품으로 인해 발생했다. 화훼이 사태를 보듯이 앞으로 비용이 다소 높더라도 안전한 공급체인은 향후 대세이다.

And this paradigm shift will be a key driver for inflation?

이런 변화는 인플레이션을 유발하는 원인일까요?

Yes. It adds up to a huge hit to productivity. Productivity is under attack from everywhere, from regulation, from ESG-investors, and now it’s also under attack from security considerations. This would only not be inflationary if on the other side central banks were acting with restraint. But of course we know that central banks are printing money like never before.

이에 더해 생산능력이다. 규제, ESG투자자 그리고 안전을 고려한 생산능력의 저하로 인플레이션 뿐만 아니라 중앙 은행이 이전과 같이 돈을 찍을 수 없다.

What will that mean for investors? 투자자에게는 어떤 의미일까요?

First, there will be two kinds of countries going forward: countries that massively monetized the Covid shock and those that did not. I’d compare the picture to the late 1970s, where countries like the U.S., the U.K. or France monetized the oil price shock, while Japan, Germany and Switzerland did not. This led to a huge reval‎uation of the Yen, the Deutschmark and the Swiss Franc. Today, the Fed and the ECB were among the central banks that massively monetized, while many central banks in Asia did not. So I expect a big reval‎uation of Asian currencies over the coming five years, which in itself is inflationary for the world. If you look at the U.S. today, inventories are at record lows. With the economy improving in 2021, companies will have to restock, and they will have to restock with a falling Dollar. The Dollar is down 20% to the Mexican Peso over the past six months, down 10% to the Korean Won, down 8% to the RMB, so whatever Americans buy from abroad will be more expensive. Countries with weak currencies, the U.S. first among them, will have higher inflation.

먼저 두 종류의 나라가 있다. covid극복을 위해 대규모 돈을 푼 나라와 그렇지 않은 나라이다. 1970년 오일쇼크시 미국, 영국, 프랑스는 돈을 풀어 경기를 부양했으나, 일본, 독일, 스위스는 그렇지 않아 자국 화폐의 가치가 높아지는 현상을 보았다. 현재 Fed와 ECB는 돈을 푼 경우이나, 아시아의 중앙 은행들은 그렇지 않았다.

Where will inflation rates settle? 어디서 인플레이션일 진행될까요?

I don’t know. There is the idea among central bankers that they can engineer inflation rates around 2.5% and keep them there. I doubt that this will be possible to control. But just for the sake of it, let’s assume they manage to do what they say, that they are the perfect engineers they think they are and get inflation at 2.5% for the next five years. Why on Earth would you want to own Treasuries at 0.9% or German Bunds at below zero? You don’t even have to get to a scenario where inflation accelerates to 4 or 5% to see that bonds are madness today. Even if central banks just manage to do what they say, you are guaranteed to lose money with bonds.

잘 모른다. 이상적인 인플레이션율 2.5% 지킬 수 있는 중앙 은행들 사이에 있다.

What should investors do to position themselves in this new world?

이런 새로운 시대에 투자자들의 포지션은 무엇일까요?

In the old world, where interest rates were falling, the Dollar was strong and oil was weak, you bought Treasuries and U.S. growth stocks and went to the beach. Now, the world has changed. This means you have to stay away from bonds and U.S. growth stocks. In a world of Dollar weakness, you buy emerging market equities and debt, and within emerging markets, I prefer Asia. In a world where either the yield curve will steepen or the Dollar will collapse, either financials or the commodities sector will be doing well. Everything seems to point towards commodities, including energy, but as mentioned, I’d still buy financials as a hedge against a steepening yield curve. So, in a nutshell: Buy value stocks, buy the commodities sector, and buy emerging markets. And for the antifragile part of your portfolio, buy RMB bonds and gold.

이자율이 떨어지던 시대에는 강달러와, 오일가격은 약했다. 그리고 채권과 성장주들을 구매했다. 하지만 바뀌었다. 채권과 성장주를 멀리해야 한다는 의미다. 약달러 시대에는 이머징 시장의 자산과 채무를 사야한다. 원자재 부분은 매우 좋을 것이다. 에너지를 포함하여 원자재 부분으로 집중될 것이다. 요약하자면 가치주, 원자재 부분, 이머징 마켓을 사라. 포트폴리오의 깨지지 않는 부분, 중국 인민폐 본드 와 금이다.

How about Japan?

Absolutely, Japan is in a stealth bull market, it has been very strong, and nobody talks about it. We never get questions on Japan from clients. I’m a big bull on Japan, it’s not a crowded trade, so I feel comfortable in it. In a world that is reflating, Japan typically does well. And in this unfolding new Cold War between the U.S. and China, Japanese industrial companies are well positioned.

Aren’t you a bit early in writing off big U.S. tech? 미국 기술주들을 좀더 일찍 멀리 해야하지 않을 까요?

Growth stocks have had their run in the past ten years, with falling bond yields and a rising Dollar. In a reflationary world, they will underperform. Plus, tech is the main battleground in the war between the U.S. and China. I see the tech world breaking into three separate zones, one dominated by America, one dominated by China and India evolving into a zone by itself. You can own the champions in each zone, which means you can own Amazon or Google for the West, or Tencent in China. In danger are companies that straddle the two worlds. Huawei tried, and we saw it being killed. I see Apple at risk, too. I know I said this to you a year ago, and I turned out to be completely wrong, but I still think Apple is in danger, as it straddles the U.S. and Chinese tech spheres.

강달러와 채권수익률이 떨어지는동안 선장중(기술주)는 과거 10년동안 끝없이 달려왔다. 하지만, 미국,중국,인도의 기술주들은 미.중 패권속에서 불안한 행보를 이어갈것이다. 화훼이가 그렇고 애플이 위험한 상태이다.

In the middle of this tech war sits Taiwan. What are your thoughts about Taiwan and the semiconductor industry?

기술전쟁에 대만이 자리잡고 있다. 대만과 반도체 산업은 어떨 것 같은가요?

Taiwan today is what Alsace-Lorraine was 120 years ago. There were two hugely important events this year that most people have missed because of the Covid crisis. One, the market value of the global semiconductor industry has moved above the market value of the global energy sector. The market is telling us that semiconductors are more important than energy; they are the commodity of the future. We should think of Taiwan the way we used to think of Saudi Arabia.

오늘의 대만은 120년전 알자스-로렌지방(프랑스와 독일의 분쟁지역)이다. 매우 중요하다. 반도체는 향후 에너지산업을 넘을 것이다. 향후 대만은 사우디와 같이 생각하게 될 것이다.

What’s the second important event? 두번째 중요한 이벤트는 무엇일까요?

At the end of 2019, the market value of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing was $200 billion, while the market value of Intel was $350 billion. Today, TSMC is $450 billion, while Intel has dropped to $200 billion. Why? This summer, TSMC came out and said they can produce 7 nanometer chips and will be able to produce 3nm chips in 2023. A week later, Intel came out and said they won’t be able to produce 7nm chips by 2021. So in the summer of 2020, we witnessed the passing of the technological baton from Intel to TSMC. The leadership in the semiconductor industry now belongs to Taiwan.

2020년 여름 대만의 TSMC가 INTEL의 매출을 넘어섰다. 그리고 대만은 반도체 산업의 리더이다.

Why does this matter? 구체적으로 대만은 무슨의미일까요?

It matters because Washington has decided to make semiconductors the battleground in its war against China. And that means that Taiwan is the battleground in the great conflict of the 21st Century, an island that Beijing regards as a renegade province, sitting 60 miles from its shore. Taiwan has always been a sore point between China and the U.S., even when Taiwan produced plastic toys and bicycles. Imagine if Saudi Arabia was a political uncertainty between America and China, where the regime depended on Washington for survival, but the territory was claimed by China. We’d be very worried.

대만은 정치적으로 미국과 중국 사이의 사우디와 같다. 따라서 매우 우려스럽다.

How will that conflict play out? 향후 어떻게 충돌이 일어날까요?

I don’t know what will happen. But I’d just say that the fact that the Trump Administration decided to make semiconductors the battleground in its fight with China strikes me as extremely dangerous, given the fact that the U.S. has just lost the technology leadership baton to Taiwan. That, to me, will be the most important event in 2020, more important than Covid.

미국과 중국의 대만의 반도체 산업을 두고 패권 싸움을 하는 것이 COVID보다 중요하다.