Финансовые репрессии неизбежны: почему вы и ваши сбережения в опасности

Explores financial repression amid soaring national debt, its impact on savings, investments, and social stability, with strategies for investors.

Key Takeaways

Financial repression is a tool used by governments to manage unsustainable debt by channeling savings into government bonds.
Rising interest payments on national debt consume a growing share of government budgets, limiting spending on social programs.
Savers face diminished real returns, making it difficult to maintain living standards during retirement.
Social and political instability may increase due to austerity measures and pension reforms.
Investors need to diversify and consider inflation and interest rate risks in their portfolios.

What the video covers

National debt has surged to nearly 100% of global GDP, causing financial repression where states redirect citizens' savings to cover debts.
Rising interest rates increase government debt servicing costs, squeezing budgets and threatening social and economic stability.
Financial repression pressures savers to invest in low-yield government bonds, reducing real returns and living standards over time.
Pension reforms and social spending cuts are common responses to budget shortfalls, leading to social unrest and political polarization.
States may resort to printing money, further devaluing savings and fueling inflation.
Examples include Japan’s high debt and rising interest rates, which worsen budget deficits despite attempts to stimulate growth.
Financial repression affects asset classes differently: government bonds are favored, while stocks and other investments face challenges.
The video discusses the broader geopolitical and economic context, including defense spending and global tensions.
Investors and savers are advised to adapt strategies considering inflation, interest rates, and government policies.
The era of financial repression is cyclical, historically alternating with periods of liberal economic policies.

Chapters

What is financial repression and why is it happening now?

Financial repression refers to government measures that channel citizens' savings into state coffers, often through low-yield bonds, to manage high national debt. It is happening now due to soaring global debt levels nearing 100% of GDP and rising interest costs.

How does financial repression affect retirees and savers?

Retirees face low real returns on investments like government bonds, making it difficult to maintain their living standards. They may need to reinvest returns just to keep up with inflation, effectively reducing disposable income.

What are the social and political consequences of financial repression?

Financial repression often leads to pension reforms, social spending cuts, and increased taxes, which can cause social unrest, protests, and the rise of populist or right-wing political movements.

Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown

Speaker A

Why has the national debt suddenly spiked so sharply, growing to the size of the entire global economy? Financial repression is when the state wants to redirect citizens' savings into its own coffers. Since there isn't enough money for everyone, gold prices are sagging.

Speaker A

As long as their interest rates are rising, we will also be in pain. And there is a real trap here for those who think that the year 2027 will be calm.

Speaker A

Hello. Today we will talk about financial repression. How it affects various assets—stocks, real estate, gold, the dollar, bonds—and what we as investors, entrepreneurs, and savers should do. We will start with a simple fact recently voiced by IMF chief

Speaker A

Kristalina Georgieva. Global public debt is approaching, rapidly approaching, 100% of GDP. Yes, of course, that does not mean an immediate default, nor is it a super-duper risk on one hand. On the other hand, against the backdrop of rising interest rates,

Speaker A

states are collecting revenue, but it is not enough. Besides the classic tax and other revenues, they are forced to borrow more, but, well, to what end? To pay interest on old debts. And this is a snowball of public debt that has

Speaker A

already grown to the size of the global economy, or almost the global economy, and it threatens to blow up both social and economic stability. Let's start with an example. You are an entrepreneur, you spent many years building your business, and it is time

Speaker A

to retire. You are tired or it is no longer possible to continue the business. You sell the asset and the question arises: "What should I do now with the money that was saved or received from the sold business?" You

Speaker A

have a lot of money and a lot of time on your hands. And how does this relate to financial repression? Financial repression is when the state wants to redirect citizens' savings into its own coffers using various methods: tax,

Speaker A

repressive, prohibitive, and so on. The state has quite a lot of methods. By the way, I'll jump ahead: over the last century, we have lived through this about half the time. If we are talking globally, we have spent half the time

Speaker A

in conditions of financial repression and half in conditions of liberal leniency. And back to the example of the entrepreneur who has accumulated savings: the state is now pushing him, saying, "Go on, buy government bonds." But which ones? Should one buy these

Speaker A

government bonds? They don't offer much yield, after all. They are depreciating. You invested your money, for example, at five percent per annum, a whole five percent in dollars, and you realize that they will lose 3% of their value.

Speaker A

And you need to live on this, so that your standard of living does not drop in 5, 10, 15, or 20 years. You need to reinvest most of those returns. Which means you are left not with five, but

Speaker A

with 2% to spend. But will you survive on that 2% from your capital or not? Not really. And, on one hand, we are pushed to invest all our savings there, but on the other hand, the yield is, well, mediocre. That is why many

Speaker A

entrepreneurs do what they do: they stay as long as possible, until retirement or death. Well, like Warren Buffett. He is almost 100 years old, and he only just retired. Munger actually died, essentially at his workplace. Many entrepreneurs live,

Speaker A

stay healthy, and work until their death, but those are top-tier entrepreneurs. And if a person is not an entrepreneur, but an ordinary person, retirement under financial repression — when your national debt is already almost 100%, like in the US, where they

Speaker A

currently pay, just for that, $22 out of every $100 of the state budget goes to interest. And since the debt amount is growing, interest grows, and these 22% are also rising. And so the state collects taxes. 22% must be paid in

Speaker A

interest, otherwise default, otherwise a total collapse, because if you default, no one will lend to you anymore. Begging? Well, they won't give it to you. Ukraine can turn to the IMF, but will the US go to the IMF for help?

Speaker A

No. What else can they do? They can print money. That's clear. They print dollars. They print dollars little by little, often just a trickle, even if they could print more, but that means savings are being devalued. They print

Speaker A

dollars, savings get devalued. It's like pressing two pedals at once. And you still need to pay for pensions, social benefits, hospitals, roads, defense, and so on. And suddenly it turns out that in these modern conditions, there isn't enough money

Speaker A

for everyone. Who should not get paid? Interest must be paid. Pensioners, well, they probably need to be paid too.

Speaker A

Although, various pension reforms are currently being discussed. Raising the age. Well, what is pension reform? When there isn't enough money in the budget for pensioners, it means you have to somehow cut their pensions, reduce them. Therefore, all pension reforms are

Speaker A

aimed at reducing pensions, not increasing them. And how do you reduce pensions? Raise the retirement age, decrease the payout ratio, and so on.

Speaker A

Some shifty business, each country invents its own ways at its own risk. Social programs, well, they try to cut them whenever possible. Defense spending. That's a matter of the defense lobby and the general level of current danger. It's scary, we are on

Speaker A

the verge of a third world war, or perhaps we are even already in a third world war. Therefore, cutting defense spending is also not really appropriate. So what happens then? Well, it turns out we are cutting hospitals, cutting

Speaker A

healthcare, and so on. And what do we see in response? We see social protests in France, we see the growth of Alternative for Germany. We see the rise of global populism on one hand, and on the other, the right wing.

Speaker A

Right-wingers are coming to power more and more because, well, everyone realizes that this is some kind of limit. Even the IMF is shouting: "A little more and the world will break." The IMF won't be able to save us here.

Speaker A

And so let's return to the US. They have nearly 5 trillion in federal budget revenue. And for the incomplete fiscal year 2026, expenses are nearly 7 trillion, a deficit of 2 trillion dollars, which is about 6% of GDP. And

Speaker A

of those 2 trillion, interest on the national debt accounts for half, over a trillion dollars. Well, that is, their entire 2 trillion deficit—this problematic deficit—is interest. And this amount grows every year. So, what are financial repressions aimed at?

Speaker A

Well, to avoid defaulting, to maintain social stability, to ensure people spend money where they should. Where the state tells them to. Recently, as I recall, von der Leyen also said that our savings are somehow lying around inefficiently as dead weight. We should

Speaker A

somehow... but what is this? This is preparation for directing savings somehow into the national debt, probably into government bonds, to help the dear state budget. And in general, we live in an era where there is confrontation. In Western democracies,

Speaker A

there is a confrontation between left and right, socialists against, say, Republicans, for example. And this confrontation. The policy of the left is to raise taxes; the policy of the right is to lower taxes and get revenue through economic growth. Right now, for

Speaker A

example, such an experiment is being conducted in Japan. They shifted away from a policy of low... well, such control. The thing is, they have a giant national debt, their debt is over 200% of GDP; they are champions among developed countries. And they decided:

Speaker A

we need to stimulate economic growth, we need to stimulate the economy. They immediately got a rise in inflation, immediately got a jump in interest rates. They were at zero, and became 4% on the national debt. 4%. And it turns

Speaker A

out they trapped themselves by stimulating the economy. By releasing this market mechanism of raising rates, they got a growing hole in the budget.

Speaker A

And how to close it? Raise taxes according to the Laffer curve, but actually you can't really raise them much anymore. We are already giving half of our income to state budgets. If you really calculate everything ho

Speaker A

earn. You could raise them more, but you could raise them more. Economic incentives to work just disappear because, for some reason, the unemployed end up receiving more than those who work. This is especially visible in Germany, which has an

Speaker A

absolutely nightmarish budget policy. Is that why Alternative for Germany is growing? And if we go back to Japan, raising taxes isn't working. Cut, cut spending. Well, they are trying to cut spending, but there is a risk. As soon

Speaker A

as you cut spending, you get an economic crisis, and there is even less money in the budget because the tax base shrinks, so that's also dangerous.

Speaker A

That is why they are trying to trim expenses very carefully. Very carefully . Plus there are lobbies, plus you can't touch everything. It turns out to be quite difficult. And so we are stuck in an era where this budget deficit

Speaker A

must be addressed. Well, let's try market methods first. And what are market methods? Only, well, if you have a big hole in your budget and you need money, no problem, we will lend it to you, but it will be expensive. So you

Speaker A

pay 4%in Japan, 4%in Europe, 5%in the States, and in some developing countries, it’s tens of percent. And all this increases the cost of mortgages and the cost of credit. Many people and businesses cannot withstand these interest rates, they start

Speaker A

closing down, and the tax base begins to shrink or simply cannot grow. And expenses grow because interest rates are rising. And at some point, the state will be forced to turn on the mechanism of financial repression at full power. This will mean lowering

Speaker A

interest rates through regulatory methods. The fact that savings will depreciate is the problem of those who save. Secondly, they will look for any way to tax everything that can be taxed without affecting social stability. Of course, these are taxes on the wealthy

Speaker A

and inheritance taxes. Well, that’s where so-called social justice will triumph. Third is the ban on purchasing certain assets that are socially recognized as, well, useless to the state. For example, in Ukraine, there is a ban on investing abroad. For us,

Speaker A

socially correct investments are real estate and government bonds, that’s all okay. But American stocks are not okay; they are socially incorrect.

Speaker A

Crypto is treated differently in different countries. Some say, "It's bad," others say, "It's good." An integral part of financial repression is, of course, crypto. Bitcoin was originally created precisely to avoid financial repression and stay hidden, but now the state has already laid its

Speaker A

hand on it, and crypto assets will become part of a global system of financial repression. In some countries , they will be supported, while countries like the USA, for example, they are, uh, stimulating the development of crypto assets. And

Speaker A

stablecoins, because this helps support the American national budget. The more USDT and USDC you hold in your pocket, the better it is for the state budget.

Speaker A

Tokenization is also something that benefits the USA. And they, I think, will actively use crypto assets for financial repression. Well, not in terms of killing off crypto assets, but primarily to support their national economy and national budget. And we

Speaker A

will have another seminar in Ukrainian dedicated to crypto assets. The link is in the description; I recommend you check it out. The cost is quite affordable, and the content is very useful. Three days of very detailed information, plus a permanent Telegram

Speaker A

chat for seminar participants. Therefore, the world is sliding into conditions of tightening financial repression. The motive is very simple.

Speaker A

For the authorities, it is essentially a question of survival. They need to survive. To do this, they need to curb the national debt. Yes, there is still hope for robots and that robots will become new taxpayers and the new

Speaker A

builders of the next phase of the global economic system. Well, perhaps that will start in the thirties, but we need to eat and survive today.

Speaker A

Therefore, first comes the mechanism of financial repression, and then robots will make our lives easier and happier.

Speaker A

So, the primary task is to direct citizens 'savings toward the national debt. What about Ukraine? In Ukraine, it is government bonds. Ukrainians are buying more and more government bonds.

Speaker A

There are no taxes. And this, by the way, is one of the elements of financial repression: when we exempt government loans from taxes while taxing everything else. In this way, we redirect cash flow from private business into government coffers. This

Speaker A

is a mechanism of financial repression. And what is this supposed to ensure later on? Yields on government debt below the inflation rate, or at least below a fair level. The level that would exist if the mechanism of financial repression had not been

Speaker A

triggered. So, we should prepare for the fact that it will be triggered at some point. The question of when the US will trigger it—most likely after the November elections. Democrats and Republicans understand all the social and budget problems, and they......will

Speaker A

perform a beautiful opera or vaudeville , whichever you prefer. How they fight over the budget, how they can't reach an agreement among themselves—this will lead to......US budget expenditures starting to be, well, not quite as heavily spent. That is a good

Speaker A

thing. On the other hand, they will invent ever-newer mechanisms to try and close the budget deficit. But the main thing, of course, we will wait until after 2028, after the US elections, when the government will either change again or it won't. Because, once again,

Speaker A

the Democrats, the socialists, they have only one way: raise taxes. As for the Republicans, they keep waiting for robots and artificial intelligence to save us. What does this mean for us?

Speaker A

For us, financial repression means that our savings are losing their value. That is why in Ukraine, for example, the best way to preserve savings has always been real estate. True, now, due to demographics, real estate is a bit

Speaker A

questionable, and government bonds are actually looking not too bad. Deposits, deposits have been destroyed as a class by financial repression. They are simply no longer interesting. Gold.

Speaker A

Well, gold is potential, yes, and the only downside to gold is that it doesn't pay interest. You can at least rent out real estate, and you can earn interest on government bonds. The only thing that is also important to

Speaker A

understand when you receive interest on bonds is what you must do to maintain the purchasing power of your savings.

Speaker A

You have to calculate, for example, inflation; inflation last year was, say , 10%. This means you received, say, 15 %or 16%. You must reinvest 10%and live on those 5-6%. If that is enough for you, great. If it is not enough, well,

Speaker A

keep working, keep grinding, and save more. If you don't do this, it turns out that you seem to be saving and saving, but you eat up the interest and spend it. Well, it's income, after all.

Speaker A

Why can't I spend my income? It's like a salary. But it turns out that in 10 years, for instance, that 1,000 hryvnia you have will still be 1,000, but sorry , you'll probably only be able to buy about 500 hryvnia worth of goods in

Speaker A

today's prices. They will lose value due to inflation, so while your nominal amount might grow, your purchasing power will shrink. And in conditions of financial repression, this is the main drawback: the biggest blow falls on those who save. But the logical

Speaker A

conclusion from this seems to be that one should be an investor. However, the state's relationship with investors varies as well. In some countries, investors are loved and respected, while in others, they are seen as enemies of the people who are just

Speaker A

looking to grab more and steal someone else's money. Well, that's that post-Soviet mentality. What is the problem? Why did the national debt jump so sharply in the first place? On one hand, of course, because socialists ruled this planet for a very long time

Speaker A

and stoked up government spending. True , government spending grew under the right-wing as well, but the main problem is demographics. It used to be believed that as more people were born, they would be the ones to pay the taxes

Speaker A

. Well, people multiply and reproduce. So, the future generation will pay for us. But for the first time on the planet, we find ourselves in a situation where future generations will be smaller, and there will be more dependents. More retirees, fewer

Speaker A

workers. In the US in 1960, there were five workers for every one person receiving state budget funds. Now it's half that, 2.6. And this number is constantly shrinking. We are waiting for robots. We are missing 2.5 robots.

Speaker A

That is, essentially, we already need at least a billion more of these humanoid robots on the planet today to act as caregivers, laborers, loaders, soldiers, and so on. They are already needed, yet they don't even exist yet.

Speaker A

They’ve only just been invented. In Ukraine, as we recall, the situation is even worse. We have one worker for every pensioner. And if we subtract the public sector employees from that one worker, it’s just a catastrophe. I cited this figure in one of my recent

Speaker A

videos, where for every person working in the market economy, there are four dependents. I include children, pensioners, and public sector workers, including soldiers and law enforcement, in that count. And that is just how we live. Well, how could you avoid

Speaker A

financial repression here? Give them freedom. And what would start to happen ? Dependents would be cast aside. And who would be the first, of course, to go under the knife? Well, clearly not the children, probably not, although with pensioners, yes, it’s difficult

Speaker A

because businesses will say, "What does that have to do with us?""That's all your former socialist business." And the question regarding public sector workers will arise as well. So, what do public sector workers do? They protect themselves. And how do they protect

Speaker A

themselves? Financial repression. And the worst part is that the demographic base gives us no hope; it will only continue to shrink. Which means financial repression on a global scale is inevitable, just, well, simply inevitable. At least until working

Speaker A

robots arrive to replace the workers who have left. Then they’ll figure out how to tax the robots so that everything will be fine. Then robots will save us. They really will save us.

Speaker A

I believe in that. And I think this is an inevitable stage of human development. Regarding real estate, people aren't stupid. People realized that something was wrong with their savings, and, of course, they are buying real estate. Given the increase

Speaker A

in the number of pensioners and potential pensioners, they were buying more and more homes, while very little was being built. And it turned out that for young people today, the cost of buying real estate has become astronomical. It’s just impossible to

Speaker A

save up for a house. And mortgages are also expensive, so there is a growing nation of renters. Those who own nothing. But we have to live. And there is a trap here for those who think 2027 will be calm. 2027 might be extremely

Speaker A

volatile because the high cost of government debt hits the riskiest, weakest borrowers the hardest.

Speaker A

So-called speculative borrowers, speculative grade. And next year a huge amount, several trillion dollars in the US alone, will need to be repaid. The years 2026 to 2028. And 2026 has already almost passed. And this is just where the first troubles are beginning.

Speaker A

In 2027, it will be right there, laid out on the table. Huge volumes need to be paid off. They took on new debt when rates were zero, and they took it at maybe 5%. But today they come, and they

Speaker A

are told: "10", and not every business can withstand 10%. So we expect defaults and bankruptcies to start rising. We start by watching the small borrowers. Let's imagine this as a domino effect. In this chain, the first small dominoes will start to fall.

Speaker A

First, a small domino will fall, like some small regional bank. A small insurance company, a small private credit player, then bigger ones, and then even bigger ones. Somewhere along the line, it will reach the big ones, and that's when the Fed will turn on

Speaker A

its famous printing press. When will they turn it on? Well, when they turn it on, the economy will already be feverish because investors will be reading about it all in the news.

Speaker A

Remember how the pandemic started in 2019, the end of 2019? One case here, two cases somewhere else. By February 2022, it was on every channel every day —how many died, how many got sick. It will be the same thing here. At first,

Speaker A

it will be isolated cases, and then it will be widespread, and that’s where it will break. That’s why I think 2027 will be a very sporty year, and you need to prepare for it, firstly, because it will be intense, and

Speaker A

secondly, to understand that it is also a year of opportunities. As for Ukraine , our options are very limited. Either you invest abroad, or in government bonds. Or you wait for real estate prices to crash and the war to end, and

Speaker A

then you can buy something on the cheap . If you find something like that and the war really does end, then sure. But if not, then government bonds remain.

Speaker A

And besides, how financial repression works in Ukraine, up to 60%of mandatory bank reserves are in government bonds.

Speaker A

You can also use government bonds for National Bank deposits. So when you put money into a bank deposit, where does the bank invest it? Loans, boosting the economy? No, it puts them into government bonds. This is what financial repression is. Send it here

Speaker A

and there. Everything is needed, everything goes to the state budget. And what about loans? Well, excuse me, you'll just have to get by without loans. Now back to pensioners again.

Speaker A

Only now, let's talk about American pensioners. In just 5 years, from 2020 to 2025, the number of Americans aged 65 and older has grown by 9 million. It was 56 million, now it's 65 million. 65 + 65 million. It's easy to remember:

Speaker A

65+ and 65 million pensioners. And every year there are more, more, more, and more of them. That doesn't mean they all retire at once, but many are dreaming of nothing else. How does this affect stocks? Usually, people of

Speaker A

retirement age have about 50%stocks in their portfolio, and 50%are bonds or some kind of annuities—well, something where you can more safely receive regular cash flow. As more pensioners retire, they will sell more stocks to buy bonds. Especially since

Speaker A

bonds are, well, yielding five percent per annum. Even government bonds yield five percent per annum. And then there are all sorts of municipal ones and others, where you can get 7%, or even 8 %in some places. Therefore, more and

Speaker A

more American pensioners will be selling stocks next year. That is not very good for the stock market.

Speaker A

Although I advocate that one should invest in stocks. Indeed, in the long term, it is the best asset class because savings are being killed by financial repression, and we are forced to save ourselves either through business—working there until we die

Speaker A

—or by buying stocks. But let's see how American pensioners will act this time. Will they sell, or will they not sell? Not everyone sells at once. Not everyone. But I think, and I read various American investment consultants , they are currently leaning more and

Speaker A

more toward the idea that one should buy a little bit of these American Treasury bonds and sell more stocks.

Speaker A

They are, uh, well, starting to become very cautious. Why is this a problem right now? Because previously, the outgoing generation of pensioners was smaller than the future generation of pensioners. And this ball just kept growing, and growing, and growing.

Speaker A

Accordingly, those who were saving for retirement today brought in more money than those who were retiring. And you, imagine this communicating vessel: more money enters it every year than leaves it. And the vessel grew. But now there are fewer children. For the children,

Speaker A

real estate is getting more expensive, and consequently, mortgages are getting more expensive. They are not thinking about retirement at all. They would just like to get by, pay for expensive rent, buy a costly home, and life, in general, has simply become more

Speaker A

expensive. And it turns out that fewer people are entering, while more are leaving. This is also a problem right now, as more and more reliance is being placed on pensioners today. By the way, one of the conditions of financial

Speaker A

repression could be the requirement to work—well, to keep working longer. Basically, as long as you're alive, you keep working. We’ll find you a job until we invent robots. And when the robots arrive, we’ll let you go. And how you'll survive is no longer our

Speaker A

problem. But we’ll hire you a robot caregiver and give you some virtual reality glasses. You’ll do your tourism virtually, because real tourism will be way too expensive. Well, that’s just one hypothesis. And by the way, in this new economy, you can

Speaker A

look at the following stocks. This includes everything related to automation and robotics. It’s medicine, elderly care—the so-called silver economy. In bonds and housing, there is pension demand with special needs. You have to understand that it’s hard for the elderly to climb

Speaker A

stairs to the fifth floor. Plus, they need care, and many of them need medical attention or special assistance . Therefore, the demand for such pension services will grow. There remains, of course, the fiscal risk.

Speaker A

Housing can be taxed because it’s easy to levy a tax on it. And in the States, for example, at the local level , the key tax is the property tax. In Ukraine, it’s still a weak tax base, but I think they will gradually build

Speaker A

it up. The dollar and gold vary here. We will discuss how this will have an effect later on. Japan is a separate story. Japan is our world champion in the old economy. They are record-holders for the number of

Speaker A

long-lived people there. On one hand, you should be happy about long-lived people, but on the other, it’s an increasing social burden on the economy . The more long-lived people you have, the more someone has to pay for it.

Speaker A

Either they saved up themselves, or the budget, or their children, or relatives . Well, someone has to pay for it. And what happened in the end? In Japan, they haven't managed to reach full robotization yet, but the number of

Speaker A

pensioners is growing. Therefore, Japan's budget expenditures for maintaining the social economy are increasing. This requires a larger budget deficit. This requires more expensive debt. Interest rates are rising. And a self-reinforcing process is starting there, from which the Japanese have so far escaped in a bad

Speaker A

way. In many ways, it is because of them that interest rates are rising globally today. Because when Japan hits 4%, and Japan used to—they accumulated several trillion dollars and placed it all over the world. They invested a trillion in Europe, a

Speaker A

trillion in the States. That’s how they placed it, because it was profitable there. But now interest rates in Japan are 4%. Why would they bother with all that? It’s already profitable for them to invest domestically. No need for currency

Speaker A

risks, like the Japanese yen against the dollar or the euro. Why bother? Today, their pension funds are starting to pull money out of the world. And those in the world who were used to sitting on Japanese money look at this

Speaker A

sadly and think: "But what about us? Where will we get liquidity, where will we get money?" And we see that liquidity is tightening today, there isn't enough money for everyone. Some are coming up short. Gold is sagging, real estate is acting so-so, top stocks

Speaker A

are rising, but actually, more than half of American stocks are already in a bear market. In short, there isn't enough liquidity for everyone because the Japanese need to take care of their own pensioners. Well, the Japanese are doing it not very abruptly, of course,

Speaker A

but methodically. And as long as their interest rates rise, we will also feel the pain. We are watching this, it's necessary to keep an eye on what's happening in Japan. And by the way, what's also interesting is that

Speaker A

Takaichi in Japan, the prime minister candidate, said that they will finance 60%of the budget deficit, or rather, the supplementary budget—60%of the supplementary budget will be financed through debt, not from the market, not from taxes. In other words, she says: "

Speaker A

We need to boost our economy." This whole restructuring and acceleration. We need to jump-start it so it starts working. We need investments. And we will take these investments as debt.

Speaker A

And by the way, hyperscalers are also running around with data centers and artificial intelligence, like SpaceX saying: "We need $ 40 billion," and the Microsofts, Amazons, Metas, and others saying: "We need a trillion dollars." In debt. And just imagine, you have the

Speaker A

state wanting trillions of dollars a year, then more trillions of dollars a year, and then there’s the social burden and pensioners. There is no money on the planet, there is not enough money. Debts are growing, interest rates are rising, which means

Speaker A

even more money is needed to pay the interest. We aren't even talking about paying off the principal anymore. Just paying the interest—interest on interest—would be enough. Small businesses are looking at all of this.

Speaker A

Regular people, whose mortgage rates are sky-high today, look and say: "Well , that's it." And it turns out that these big mastodons soak up the liquidity; they have big agendas—they need to build drones, data centers, fly into space—while ordinary people are

Speaker A

left with expensive housing, expensive food, expensive gas, and everything else. This is one of the elements of financial repression, when someone else determines how we will live. Now, about the dollar inside the US. What is happening with the dollar? Inflation.

Speaker A

Inflation. Devaluation of the dollar. Since the dollar is losing value, the American consumer is looking for where to invest. They invest in stocks, real estate, and anywhere else they can.

Speaker A

They are doing everything right. Their financial markets are developed, there are many options, and tax policy is well-established. They have no problems with the dollar. Their problem is that the dollar is expensive. Actually, today this plays into their hands,

Speaker A

because a strong dollar means lower inflation. Plus, an expensive dollar attracts investors. Oh, the dollar is expensive, so American assets must be great; I'll make even more because the dollar will rise. I think I'll sell my European assets. They are boring,

Speaker A

unprofitable, and the euro is falling too. I will go and buy dollar-denominated assets. That is why the dollar gets even more expensive.

Speaker A

Interest rates are high, attractiveness is high, predictability is high, reliability is high, and they are far from war—at least, from external war.

Speaker A

And while the dollar is truly, well, good, it remains strong. Therefore, if you look at the history, for example, of the price of gold in dollars, gold in dollars returned 67%in 2025, while in euros it was 48%. Also good, but

Speaker A

much less—there's a 20%difference. That is quite significant. And so, when you invest, if you live in Europe and invest in the US, you need to consider currency risk. And while there are weaknesses in Europe, yes, at some point this could flip completely in the

Speaker A

opposite direction. I think that when oil becomes cheaper, it will be very significant. If oil gets cheaper, it will be huge—not because there is a crisis on the planet, but simply because the war in the Middle East has

Speaker A

ended; then, I think, it will reverse. Then the euro will become more expensive. Meaning here, if a crisis starts, the dollar gets more expensive.

Speaker A

Well, oil might get cheaper, but the main thing is that the dollar usually gets more expensive here. If oil prices simply fall and this little war ends, then the dollar might weaken; conversely, the euro will get more expensive, gold will get more expensive

Speaker A

, because gold likes it when the dollar is cheap. And oil is just one of the factors. But if oil stays expensive for a long time—if it stays this expensive for another six months—I think it will lead to an economic

Speaker A

crisis. First a financial crisis, a banking crisis, then an economic crisis . Because the longer oil prices remain high, the worse it is for everyone. By the way, it’s bad for the Chinese too . It's time for the Chinese to tell

Speaker A

Iran: "Renounce nuclear weapons and the enrichment of uranium altogether." Because if a global crisis occurs, who will need Chinese cars, slippers, and the like? Regarding bonds. Bonds today, the most interesting bonds, are, of course, short-term ones. US government

Speaker A

bonds, two-year notes, yield five percent annually. A two-year term is excellent, a nice short period. Default risk is, well, close to zero. They can always print more dollars if something goes wrong. The main risk is inflation, but 5%per year is quite interesting. In

Speaker A

2 years, you get 10%, or 11%with compound interest. That’s pretty cool . And it’s liquid. You can just press a button and sell at any moment.

Speaker A

Long-term bonds could also be interesting. If financial repression begins, oddly enough, it will be good for long-term government bonds.

Speaker A

Financial repression will simply be a breath of fresh air for them. That is the first point. And the second is if oil prices crash. Or perhaps, if there is a crisis—a crisis not driven by inflation, but just a crisis—then

Speaker A

they will also appreciate significantly . So, there are three potential sources of joy for long-term bondholders. And you could potentially see double-digit annual returns over a short horizon if that happens soon. Real estate. Real estate must be chosen very carefully

Speaker A

because you need to consider demographics, business climate, investment climate, and any potential issues. Demographic problems, infrastructure problems near the property—these are real issues.

Speaker A

Problems with the business climate, for example, businesses closing, leaving people with nowhere to work. That’s it, they leave, there are no wages, no rent. Investment climate. And what are they doing with this real estate? In Turkey, for example, they are

Speaker A

constantly changing zoning laws. And, as a rule, it’s for the worse. They might say, "Oh, foreigners aren't allowed to own this anymore." And you already bought it, but now you aren't allowed to. Well, they won't force you to sell, but you can't sell it to

Speaker A

another foreigner, and your property value automatically drops by half. In some countries, they may introduce taxes on entry, exit, holding, maintenance, and so on. Therefore, not all real estate is created equal. You need to choose very carefully: who you

Speaker A

plan to rent to, what the potential for price appreciation is, and how cheap the entry point is. You really need to calculate this. This is if you're buying it for capital protection or for yield. What stands in the way? What is

Speaker A

the obstacle? There’s expensive credit, rising taxes, or insurance; for example, many properties in the US must be insured because the climate is simply terrible. Typhoons, hurricanes, tornadoes, or something else. And of course, keep in mind—once again, consider the demographics. Plus,

Speaker A

remember the aging population; retirees leave from wherever they can move. But that is still a developing story. Old people usually live out their lives where they are. But the youth—the youth might head elsewhere. And so, if this neighborhood turns into an area

Speaker A

for the elderly who have no income, well, is it worth buying real estate there? I doubt it. You can look at Japanese listings where they sell houses left behind by deceased people for pennies in some remote part of

Speaker A

Japan. And nobody wants these houses, even for free. Regarding stocks. In stocks, you need to keep an eye on two things. The first, of course, is the capital investment cycle. It is what pulls profits upward. When you look at

Speaker A

earnings per share, it is expected to grow by 29%year-over-year in the third quarter. An excellent result. But when you look closer, it turns out that almost all of this profit is paper profit or artificial intelligence. And in the real economy, they've already

Speaker A

calculated profit growth at something like 7–9%annually. That is growth, but it's thin, just mediocre. Meaning the lion's share of profit today is concentrated in a very small number of securities, and investors are pouring money into them. But if there’s a

Speaker A

problem with monetizing this artificial intelligence, or if they don't grant permits—as politicians are already doing now—well, they don't like AI; they understand the threat to themselves personally. They understand the threat to themselves personally, because they will be the first ones on

Speaker A

the chopping block, since artificial intelligence quickly exposes personal incompetence, because it possesses knowledge and, most importantly, it has no corrupt, self-serving interests. And so, we are looking here at the topic of artificial intelligence investment. Any , any stops or slowing down will be,

Speaker A

well, simply a catastrophe for the stock market. But it could also hit multiples at the same time. Meaning stocks could collapse for two reasons at once. And this could be next year; I’m not expecting a super-duper crash , but -30%is quite possible. -50%, well

Speaker A

, that's unlikely for now. That does happen. But not every crisis ends like that. I think that will happen a bit later, but who knows, who knows the future. And we have three scenarios. of a potential future. The first scenario:

Speaker A

inflation will slow down. Well, what do we have here, of course? Oil will get cheaper, inflation slows down, the dollar will then most likely weaken, and gold will rise in price. Bonds will get more expensive, interest rates will

Speaker A

fall, which will again help the growth of gold. Stocks, stocks will most likely be fine too. Real estate will also do well because mortgages will become cheaper. So, scenario one: inflation slows down mainly because oil is getting cheaper. This is, well, the

Speaker A

most joyful scenario that would make everyone happy. It hasn't materialized yet; oil remains expensive. There is a strategic clinch. Iran doesn't want to give up enriched uranium, doesn't want to abandon its nuclear program, and the US continues to block Iranian oil. And

Speaker A

that is a dead end. Someone, well, someone will fall first. Uh, nevertheless, it is most likely that the weaker one will fall first—that is Iran. But who knows. So far, it looks like there is a good chance that

Speaker A

after the elections, all this mess will end. Iran will eventually reach an agreement with the US. Well, it's time for them to stop clinging to uranium.

Speaker A

The second scenario involves financial repression at full capacity. That is, for example, oil prices remain high, they hold. This strategic clinch. The Americans realize that they are, well, at their limit, and it's either a crisis or we trigger financial

Speaker A

repression. Then they will trigger financial repression, start suppressing real yields, start crushing this, well, lowering interest rates directly, using everything they can to devalue savings.

Speaker A

Then gold will do well, bonds will be generally good, stocks probably not, or neutral. Uh, well, there are taxes, there will be a problem there, and one will need to look very carefully at which sectors will survive, in which

Speaker A

sectors state support will remain, and in which it won't. That is, real estate will behave differently here. Real estate will be a little better because interest rates will fall, and the mortgage market will liven up a bit there. And the third scenario, if

Speaker A

inflation and risk premiums rise. That is stagflation. Remember 2022, how it was a walk in the park. The dollar, the dollar might even weaken, because people will be afraid of dollar assets.

Speaker A

Inflating gold. Gold could get more expensive because of inflation, but if there is a liquidity crisis, it will get cheaper. So here we will have to look at how this rising inflation will occur. Will it proceed simply as

Speaker A

inflation or through stagflation? Back in 2022, gold became cheaper. It didn't go up in price back then because everyone needed liquidity, and they were looking for liquidity, including in gold. Bonds are bad then. Only short-term bonds will be good because

Speaker A

yields will continue to rise, while real estate will be, well, neutral, and stocks, stocks will vary. If it is stagflation, they will fall. If it is just inflation, they will grow. So here we will have to look at the context in

Speaker A

which this happens. That is how I generally described the financial repression regime. We took a little peek into the future. I hope you enjoyed today's video. Subscribe to our Telegram channel and YouTube channel to follow events, well, almost in real

Speaker A

time. We will talk about all the important news and events, everything that is happening. And thank you, goodbye.

Topics:financial repressionnational debtgovernment bondsinterest ratesinflationpension reforminvestment strategyeconomic stabilitysocial unrestglobal economy

Get More with the SozAI App

Transcribe recordings, audio files, and YouTube videos — with AI summaries and speaker detection. 30 minutes free.

App Store Google Play

Or transcribe another YouTube video here →

Free tools: TXT to SRT · SRT Validator · Merge SRT · Subtitle to Text · All tools