- 가설 : Big Game
- (Topic) 왜 친구는 21년에 아파트 매수 계획을 철회했을까, 왜 22년 인플레이션 이슈의 홍수 속에서도 디플레 메커니즘에 계속 눈을 두고 있는가 : 중장기 대형 싸이클에 대한 가설 (Great reset)
This post has been translated by AI.
Post summarized by durumis AI
- The U.S. is pursuing a long-term plan to curb China's economic rise, using high-interest rate policies to weaken competitor economies.
- This is a risky strategy that could lead to a second Great Depression, a risk the U.S. is taking to maintain its hegemony.
- Analysis of long-term trends in the U.S. stock market shows that the upward trend stopped at its peak in early 2022, suggesting the possibility of a future global depression.
The U.S. is the hegemon for a reason.
The 2020s are a crucial period for the current hegemon, the United States.
Just before 2020, there was talk that if things continued as they were, China would surpass the U.S. in economic size in about ten years, and that this would lead to China taking over all aspects of hegemony, including military and financial power.
How the U.S. navigates this period in the 2020s will determine whether China or another competitor will hold the position of new hegemon in twenty or thirty years, or whether the U.S. will consolidate its hegemonic status and continue its dollar-based dominance.
Reflecting this situation, several years ago, Ray Dalio, a legendary figure on Wall Street, subtly hinted at the unfolding of such a situation in his documentary video, “Changing World Order.”
Knowing this situation, would the U.S., a hegemonic power, simply respond with a ‘let it be, things will work out if we try hard’ attitude?
I don’t believe the U.S. is that easygoing.
While I’m not sure if it will bring about a 100% certain result, given the nature of the U.S. as a hegemonic power, it is more plausible to assume that they have devised some kind of long-term plan.
Even if it causes ‘significant collateral damage,’ as long as there’s a way to prevent China, its most powerful competitor, from catching up economically for a while…
Let me clarify that the ‘significant collateral damage’ mentioned above refers to a ‘second global economic depression,’ and the potential geopolitical instability (war) that would likely accompany it.
Based on my observation of economic trends and market indicators such as the stock market, I have a faint suspicion that the U.S. plan against China started in the late 1990s or early 2000s. (This means there’s a consistent, large trend visible in the market indicators since then.)
And the serious preparations probably began in 2022…?
Finance (market)? Reality (the real world)? Which comes first?
What do you think comes first, the real economy or the financial market?
When listening to economic news, we often hear this:
‘The market is anticipating (pre-reflecting) how the economy will perform, and is moving accordingly.’
It sounds like the real economy is the main driver, with various unpredictable variables at play, and the financial market simply reacting to those predictions as a secondary factor.
What about the opposite?
Predicting how the real economy will perform in advance and controlling the market to guide it towards that predicted reality… is that possible?
I believe that this is largely possible, especially in the case of the current hegemon, the U.S., which possesses absolute financial power.
Suddenly raising interest rates to high levels and maintaining that situation will make the economies of countries vulnerable to high interest rates (especially those with large real estate bubbles) even more precarious.
If China experiences a significant economic downturn due to a real estate slump and tries to overcome it through export-led growth using a weak currency… then that workaround can be blocked.
A softer blockade would be ‘high tariffs,’ and a more drastic one would be ‘market separation.’
By mobilizing all available means, including financial and other policies, the U.S. could drive the situation in that direction… I believe it’s entirely possible.
From this perspective, the Fed’s prolonged high-interest-rate policy (H4L: higher for longer) that began in 2022 is seen not as a coincidental response to U.S. inflation changes, but as a ‘strategically intentional’ policy.
So, while the U.S. economy will undoubtedly suffer collateral damage, I believe that H4L will be maintained for as long as necessary, until the economies of other competing nations, especially China, are severely damaged.
In the meantime, the stock market could experience periods of both good performance and significant volatility, but that’s not of great concern. The key is maintaining a certain level of economic condition (at least outwardly) to avoid an official recession.
Maintaining this ambiguous state will be the most challenging aspect, and that’s precisely the U.S.’s strength.
When coincidences repeat, it’s necessary to question whether they truly are coincidences.
I used to have a simple suspicion.
‘Why do foreigners always win in the long run in the domestic stock market?’
Is this phenomenon simply due to the financial power of foreigners, their superior analytical skills, or is there ‘some kind of pre-designed, guided outcome’…?
Looking at economic events and market indicators such as stocks, bonds, and exchange rates over the past 100 years, events have often occurred at ‘technically curious points.’
Technical market situations that are difficult to attribute to chance, almost as if they had foreseen the real-world situation.
Therefore, one point to consider is whether ‘repeated coincidences are truly just coincidences,’ and the existence of ‘points that strongly arouse suspicion.’
Below is a monthly chart of the U.S. stock index that I created as a benchmark for understanding the long-term trend of the U.S. stock market. It’s an artificially created index, with the early 2022 peak set at 1000 points for my convenience.
Two trend lines are visible in the chart below.
One is the upward trend line (black) from the 2010s, and the other, shown in red, is the ultra-long-term trend line from the early 1900s.
The point where these two lines meet, around the end of 2021, seems like a very curious point, doesn’t it?
But that’s not the important point.
Apart from those two trend lines, even if we disregard them, I was expecting the upward trend of the U.S. stock market to stop around the 1000-point mark at that time, with only a vague thought of ‘what if?’ in my mind.
After retrospectively observing the halt in the upward trend at that point, around early 2023, I shared my thoughts on ‘why’ and related long-term scenarios with members of the Naver paid channel (Nepcon Channel).
The content that broadly included its general outline is the post below.
The question that should arise from the chart above is not ‘Why did it stop once when the two trend lines met,’ but rather ‘Why did it stop exactly around that index level (horizontal line)?’
And this leads to the ‘global depression’ scenario that I anticipate unfolding until the late 2020s.
When I saw the peak of the U.S. stock market in early 2022, I briefly wondered if it would pull back immediately. However, after passing the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023, I realized it wasn’t the case, and it was being drawn out. That’s when I posted the Nepcon article mentioned above.
Like an aircraft carrier, the direction change is slow, but once the direction changes, it dives down swiftly…
The preparatory phase (direction change) that began in 2022 is expected to continue until next year or the year after. After that preparation, the main phase will begin, and that’s when the situation will become seriously critical.
I’ve shown the chart below as an example before.
- Due to word count limitations, this will be continued in Part 2…